Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Your theory doesn't hold water | |
|
Author: Oropan |
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 05:53:13 04/18/07 Wed In reply to: jw 's message, "You obviously did not read the post!" on 19:51:47 04/17/07 Tue While I agree that an SUV will roll over easier than a low to the ground small car, the rest of your statement is bogus. All SUVs have sideguard door beams and many have side airbags because they are highend(high priced) vehicles. I did get a good laugh from this statement of yours about Corzimes SUV going 90+ Mph: "it was justified as a security measure to avoit being boxed in". Try telling that to the judge!!!! We will see if he gets a ticket. They need to take some pictures of him and make him a poster boy for why you should be wearing your seatbelt. BTW, we are not talking about roadside bombs here...just foolish driving too fast without wearing seatbelts. > I clearly stated that in side impact collisions, >suv's are the worst, because they have the least >protection for the weight of the vehicle, you are >talking about straight collisions, which is the only >case the detriot auto makers want us to think about. >I would much rather be in a small car when hitting a >tree or a concrete wall than an suv, as the suv's much >greater weight will force the front or side of the car >further into me than would the wieght of a small car. > > In senator corzine's accident, the suv did not hit >any car, it tried to swerve to avoid hitting a vehicle >that just pulled onto the road, it lost control, and >crashed into a guard rail, a smaller car would have >probably had more control, and a better chance at >preventing or reducing bodily damage in this accident. > Corzine's car was way over the speed limit, at 90mph, >it was justified as a security measure to avoit being >boxed in, but certainly he should have been wearing >his seat belt. > > Suv's are much less meneuverable than small cars, >and much more likely to tip, that is a fact, and even >bush's highway safety adminstrator said he would not >drive most suv's because the risk of tipping is so >high. > > Suv's are great if you want to run someone over, >they are otherwise extremely dangerous to drive. Btw, >it's interesting that the humvees are the worst >vehicles in iraq for protecting against the various >explosive devices that are used against our troops, >the best protection comes from a south african armored >vehicle that is shaped like a "v" so it deflects >explosions from the road away from the vehicle. > >>Obviously you flunked physics 101! >>An object moving at a set speed has the same impact >>force no matter what it hits. And the less protection >>the worse the result to the impacted object. Example: >>Tie a brass ball on a string and set an egg in it's >>path as it swings at it. The egg is crushed. Now >>repeat replacing the egg with a large cement ball with >>steel reenforcing. Not much happens to the cement >>ball. >> >> >> >> >>> Sen. Corzine was injured in a side impact, when >the >>>suv smashed into the guard rail, it is quite possible >>>that a lighter car would not have been penetrated as >>>much because it has less force per area on the door. >>>Also, in a small car, people do not have the false >>>illusion of security that they have in suv's when in >>>fact suv's are overall as dangerous as small cars in >>>the average accident, not just one class of >accidents. >>> >>> >>> This points out the need for the seat belt law, >and >>>it highlights how many lives have been saved and >>>damage avoided by government regulation. Even those >>>who make the laws should not consider themeselves >>>immune to laws that are for their protection, no one >>>is immune to the laws of physics. >>> >>>>riding arond the NJ freeway without your seatbelts >on >>>>takes the cake of stupidity. >>>>PSSST...he was in a large SUV!!!!! If he was in the >>>>kidde cars that these same Dem politicians want us >to >>>>drive, he would be dead now! [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| Subject | Author | Date |
| Re: Your theory doesn't hold water | jw | 19:00:35 04/18/07 Wed |
|
||