Andrew: I am replying to this second-hand because of a messup with my email program.
>>1 death per 6546 in the USA >> Vs >>1 death per 11304 in Australia >> >>This means that you are nearly twice as likely to die on the roads in >>the US as you are in Australia. By one way of looking at things. Other ways are to look at the type of driving, or deaths per person-mile traveled, etc. >Why is this so? The answer can >>plainly be seen when you take into account the fact that Australia >>has compulsory seat-belt and motorcycle helmet laws and random >>breath testing with a limit, in most state of 0.05. So far as I'm aware the U.S. states generally have compulsory seat-belt and motorcycle helmet laws and various testing programs for alcohol including, for example, check-points set up during high-death holiday times. These have been in place for quite some time now. Compulsory seat-belt laws came into play when I was a kid, 20 or 30 years ago. There may of course be difference in the laws, but I think you've got a somewhat different view of the laws here. >> I am constantly amazed that some Americans claim that it >>"violates their constitutional rights" if legislation is brought in that >>enforces seat-belts/helmets and allows random breath testing. Using >>the above figures, it could be argued that nearly half of the people >>killed on US roads could be EASILY saved. I agree with the view that some Americans have sometimed had a somewhat warped view of their freedoms as they apply to driving enforcement laws. For example, I do not think anyone has the right to drive drunk, that it's a stunning act of bad faith and disrespect for one's fellow man, and that it has become clear that the police are within their rights to watch out for drunk drivers, including check-points, given the shocking number who still do. > >> To take it a step further, there is a large financial cost >>associated with a person dying in a vehicle crash, but there is a >>much larger cost associated with those people who survive the crash >>but suffer some form if incapacitation, or even a long rehabilitation >>period. If a person is permanently injured in a car crash and in turn >>needs life long care, then the costs are huge. I would guess that it >>would cost at least $50,000 per year to look after said injured person >>and if they happen to live for 40 years in this state, that's $2M >>straight away. Also it is worth remembering that for every death on >>the roads, there are a lot of accidents which are severe, resulting is >>no deaths but long term injury. Interesting points. One of the reasons I posted the article. I think these matters are swept under the rug by our system of sort of not discussing the negative aspects of driving. > >> So where does that leave us? Australia has a death rate on >>the roads that is constantly, except for a one year "blip". trending >>down whilst from my reading of the article, seems to be trending up. >>Isn't it time that the US took some action on these simple to >>introduce measures and stopped both the carnage and cost instead >>of waiting for "Robby the Robot" to drive them around ? >> >> Regards, >> Andrew The U.S. has taken most of the measures you suggest, if I'm not mistaken. Also, you have misrepresented and even perhaps grossly misrepresented my call for greater vehicle safety. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/cjB9SD/od7FAA/AG3JAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
