[ST] RE: Protective clothing

["Nowak, Nick" <n.nowak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

So, by this rationale, if you plow through an intersection in your car and
run over some pedestrians, is it partially their fault if they are only
wearing shorts and a T-shirt?  Or, if you run over some kids who skipped out
of school, since "they shouldn't have been there in the first place"?  If
you rear end a $200,000 Ferrari in rush hour traffic, should they pay for
part of the damages since they took the risk of driving an expensive car on
dangerous congested roads?  On the contrary, couldn't the motorcyclist you
ran over claim that if you had spent a couple thousand dollars on good
driving instruction, you might not have hit them in the first place?

Although I believe our legal system is out of control with ridiculous and
expensive lawsuits, If you do screw up, you should pay the consequences and
not try to pass the blame on someone else.  Plain and simple, "you break it,
you buy it".

In the Hurt report you cite, you should look up the effects of alcohol on
accident rates.  We could save a lot more lives by keeping drunk people off
of the roads than by making protective gear mandatory.  Also, keep in mind
that this study was from 1981, and traffic patterns, average vehicle size,
and cell phone usage have changed dramatically since then.

Nick "the dirtbag"
'00 Yellow RS 

- -----Original Message-----