helmets in cars- a right that should be recognized

Magnulus wrote:
> If this were true (helmets snap your neck off), then there should be
> alot of dead people in auto racing. But as it is, auto racing, at
least
> anything outside of NASCAR, has fairly low rates of fatalities.
>
> I'm not talking about a full face helmet. I'm talking about a
lightweight
> helmet, something not much heavier than a bicycle helmet at most.
>
> According to research in Australia, something as simple as a visor
with an
> inch of closed cell foam padding around the forhead and temples would
also
> offer alot of protection, reducing non-fatal brain injuries in side
> collisions by perhaps as much as 3/4.
>
> It's just something I think that should be considered. The thought
of
> dying isn't half as scary as the thought of living with substantial
brain
> damage. The NHTSA in the US, being the corporate backed shills they
are,
> is giving the auto industry about 5 years before they really put down
the
> screws and make all cars safer, including economy and smaller cars,
not just
> the high end ones.

It's obvious you've already suffered a tremendous amount of brain
damage. What do you have against America?

"Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
.. .
> If you carefully examine the Earnhardt collision with the wall,you would
> see that the impact was not that big an impact,for 180 MPH.It was a
grazing
> impact,too.Other race car drivers have survived worse impacts.

I watched the replay of it. The car appeared to slow down a bit, but
then accelerated into the wall. It was just maybe 20 degrees short of a
full frontal impact. He didn't just graze the wall.

His seatbelt may have also failed in the accident. A HANS device might
have assisted the seatbelt in keeping him in place. We'll never know though
because there was no indepedent autopsy.

At any rate- a typical road vehicle collision is dealing with forces of
magnitudes less than the typical racecar collision. A helmet for a car
doesn't necessarily have to be as heavy as a motorcycle helmet, either.
Nobody will be driving around their cars at over 100 mph, at least nobody
remotely sane.

"Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
.. .
> If you carefully examine the Earnhardt collision with the wall,you would
> see that the impact was not that big an impact,for 180 MPH.It was a
grazing
> impact,too.Other race car drivers have survived worse impacts.

I watched the replay of it. The car appeared to slow down a bit, but
then accelerated into the wall. It was just maybe 20 degrees short of a
full frontal impact. He didn't just graze the wall.

His seatbelt may have also failed in the accident. A HANS device might
have assisted the seatbelt in keeping him in place. We'll never know though
because there was no indepedent autopsy.

At any rate- a typical road vehicle collision is dealing with forces of
magnitudes less than the typical racecar collision. A helmet for a car
doesn't necessarily have to be as heavy as a motorcycle helmet, either.
Nobody will be driving around their cars at over 100 mph, at least nobody
remotely sane.

Magnulus a écrit :
> If this were true (helmets snap your neck off), then there should be
> alot of dead people in auto racing. But as it is, auto racing, at least
> anything outside of NASCAR, has fairly low rates of fatalities.
>
> I'm not talking about a full face helmet. I'm talking about a lightweight
> helmet, something not much heavier than a bicycle helmet at most.
>
> According to research in Australia, something as simple as a visor with an
> inch of closed cell foam padding around the forhead and temples would also
> offer alot of protection, reducing non-fatal brain injuries in side
> collisions by perhaps as much as 3/4.
>
> It's just something I think that should be considered. The thought of
> dying isn't half as scary as the thought of living with substantial brain
> damage. The NHTSA in the US, being the corporate backed shills they are,
> is giving the auto industry about 5 years before they really put down the
> screws and make all cars safer, including economy and smaller cars, not just
> the high end ones.
>
>

Auto racing cars have no airbags. For good reason.

A bicycle-helmet type design would only be "good" if you were going up
hitting the roof...

--
----------------------
http://www.saab-900.tk
The Saab Tech Resource
----------------------

Magnulus a écrit :
> If this were true (helmets snap your neck off), then there should be
> alot of dead people in auto racing. But as it is, auto racing, at least
> anything outside of NASCAR, has fairly low rates of fatalities.
>
> I'm not talking about a full face helmet. I'm talking about a lightweight
> helmet, something not much heavier than a bicycle helmet at most.
>
> According to research in Australia, something as simple as a visor with an
> inch of closed cell foam padding around the forhead and temples would also
> offer alot of protection, reducing non-fatal brain injuries in side
> collisions by perhaps as much as 3/4.
>
> It's just something I think that should be considered. The thought of
> dying isn't half as scary as the thought of living with substantial brain
> damage. The NHTSA in the US, being the corporate backed shills they are,
> is giving the auto industry about 5 years before they really put down the
> screws and make all cars safer, including economy and smaller cars, not just
> the high end ones.
>
>

Auto racing cars have no airbags. For good reason.

A bicycle-helmet type design would only be "good" if you were going up
hitting the roof...

--
----------------------
http://www.saab-900.tk
The Saab Tech Resource
----------------------

Around 1/9/2005 11:15 AM, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> Personally, I think it would be great to wear a helmet while driving.
> Not only would it offer exceptional protection as noted previously, it
> could also be equipped with cool things like built-in hands-free
> phone, heads-up display, and maybe even a Firefox-like neural
> interface someday.

Wow, looks like I need to upgrade; the version of Firefox I'm using
doesn't have a neural interface!


> I think I'll start brushing up on my Russian...

Да. Ð*уÑ�Ñ�кий - очень интереÑ�ный Ñ�зык!


--
~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

Around 1/9/2005 11:15 AM, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> Personally, I think it would be great to wear a helmet while driving.
> Not only would it offer exceptional protection as noted previously, it
> could also be equipped with cool things like built-in hands-free
> phone, heads-up display, and maybe even a Firefox-like neural
> interface someday.

Wow, looks like I need to upgrade; the version of Firefox I'm using
doesn't have a neural interface!


> I think I'll start brushing up on my Russian...

Да. Ð*уÑ�Ñ�кий - очень интереÑ�ный Ñ�зык!


--
~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

"Furious George" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> It's obvious you've already suffered a tremendous amount of brain
> damage. What do you have against America?

I'm an American. But I'm not crass and intellectually lazy. Which
means I'm in a minority.

"Furious George" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> It's obvious you've already suffered a tremendous amount of brain
> damage. What do you have against America?

I'm an American. But I'm not crass and intellectually lazy. Which
means I'm in a minority.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> Same reason it's illegal to wear stereo headphones: it impairs your
> ability to hear horns, sirens, and bullhorn instructions.
>

Helmets don't all interfere with hearing.

> The silly part is, these same states who outlaw headphones for hearing
> people will gladly give driver's licenses to deaf people.

Yes, that is stupid. If they are going to allow deaf people to drive
(which, I believe they should, with some caveats), why not allow people to
use headphones while they drive?

Laws like this (no helmets, no headphones but allow people to drive) just
shows how stupidly beaurocratic the State can be.