Comment Re:Probably best (Score 1) 649
Anyway, there's probably studies and stuff that trumps my anecdotal evidence for crashes in a 70s car. I'm not trying to say they're wrong. :P I'm sure cars today are much safer. It's just the low-medium crashes with a 70s car might not require much body work to keep driving, where a new crumple friendly car might have serious work to do. Kinda like how they used to make helmets to be reused, but then they did disposable helmets designed to break when you wreck. The newer helmets are better, no need to risk your brain on a wreck, but the older ones might not be bad if they're all you can afford.
I always wonder why a motorcyclist can get away with passing safety regulations, when cars are so heavily regulated with safety. My theory is that the big auto manufactures just don't want little auto manufactures competing in the US market. If a motorcyclist will get hurt 29x more likely than a car driver, you'd think they'd be more generous on what passes safety in a car.
I'm all for safety, we should all drive safe, but people should have the right to buy super cheap foreign cars with less safety regulations. Even if you're twice as likely to get hurt in a car, you're still 15x better than driving a motorcycle.
I always wonder why a motorcyclist can get away with passing safety regulations, when cars are so heavily regulated with safety. My theory is that the big auto manufactures just don't want little auto manufactures competing in the US market. If a motorcyclist will get hurt 29x more likely than a car driver, you'd think they'd be more generous on what passes safety in a car.
I'm all for safety, we should all drive safe, but people should have the right to buy super cheap foreign cars with less safety regulations. Even if you're twice as likely to get hurt in a car, you're still 15x better than driving a motorcycle.