[DMCForum] Re: Child Car Seats In A Delorean

["wannadelorean" <mcquinlan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The Delorean may be safer than most cars but I'm sure at some speed, 
the passenger compartment could be compramised.  In that case the 
further towards the interior of the car a child is, the safer he 
would be.

I agree.  Everything we do has some level of danger associated with 
it.  If we really want our kids to be the safest possible, we would 
get rid of our automobiles, pools, toilets, sinks, knives, forks, 
spoons, guns, dogs, cats, parrots, mini-blinds, toys, garbage bags, 
washers, dryers, dish washers, clothing, windows, doors, trees, 
school, food. The list is endless...  oh don't forget the internet 
too.

--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Eric Itzel <eric@xxxx> wrote:
> <snip>
> >I'd argue though that the passenger seat is more >dangerous if the
> accident is a side Impact one.  There >is precious little space 
between
> the door and the 
> >child in this situation. The center of the vehicle on >the shelf 
would
> be safer. The NTSB states that a child >is 35% safer in the center 
of a
> vehicle than the >passenger side.  This is why I was looking for a
> >system. I could easily put my child in the passenger >seat but 
would
> prefer to put him in the center between >seats because it is a 
safer
> location.
> 
> I disagree on your statement about the side impacts citing an 
example I
> saw only yesterday of seeing a DeLorean that was hit directly on 
the
> passenger side at a reasonable collision speed and the relatively 
good
> condition the passenger seat/area was in after the fact (Thanks 
Greg) .
> The beauty of the gullwing cars are the higher side structure to 
serve
> as a wall, plus the heavier, stonger door to absord impact. 
>  
> In my opinion, it's hard to apply generalized government standards 
to an
> unconventional car like the DeLorean. Besides, driving down the 
road in
> any vehicle presents a certain risk for people of all ages.
>  
> Eric
> vin 4433
>  
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: wannadelorean <mailto:mcquinlan@xxxx>  
> To: DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  
> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 10:05 AM
> Subject: [DMCForum] Re: Child Car Seats In A Delorean
> 
> > As I said, dangerous and illegal.
> > 
> > > But your reply is so typical of people these days who believe 
> that 
> > > laws are passed to protect us.  
> > 
> > I don't believe that at all. Most laws are bullshit. I am the 
last
> > person to blindly follow laws. In fact I am known for shocking 
> people
> > with my ability to think for myself and flat out ignore laws I 
> think
> > are stupid. 
> > 
> 
> Good for you.  There needs to be more of us.
> 
> 
> > I do believe that, should you get into an accident, your child 
> could
> > die quite easily in that location. Have you done the engineering 
> work
> > to understand the impact forces a DeLorean would receive, and 
what
> > that could do to a 10 to 30 pound child sitting in that 
location? 
> How
> > are you going to tie the seat down securely, and more 
importantly, 
> do
> > you understand exactly what those mount points you select could 
do 
> in
> > an accident? Are they going to hold? Will they buckle, pull 
down, 
> and
> > break the mount points on the seat, thus sending it through the
> > windshield or anywhere else in the passenger compartment?
> 
> No I haven't done the engineering and that is why I posed the 
> question.  
> I was hoping there was a system for this and the engineering had 
> already been done.
> I'd argue though that the passenger seat is more dangerous if the 
> accident is a side
> Impact one.  There is precious little space between the door and 
the 
> child in this situation.
> The center of the vehicle on the shelf would be safer.  The NTSB 
> states that a child is 35% 
> safer in the center of a vehicle than the passenger side.  This is 
> why I was looking for a system.
> I could easily put my child in the passenger seat but would prefer 
> to put him in the center between
> seats because it is a safer location.
> 
> > 
> > I bet any random cop in the U.S. would issue a big fat ticket for
> > something like this. 
> 
> Not if the system was approved.  Cops are ignorant to many laws.  
If 
> the system was
> approved and you got a ticket, you'd have an open a shut case. 
> More 
> likely, if you showed
> the cop proof on the spot that it was an approved system you 
> wouldn't get a ticket in the first
> place.
> 
> > > How is it that you and I have to go to expense and trouble of 
> having 
> > > car seats when kids ride on a school bus (or any mass transit 
> for 
> > > that matter) every day with not even a seat belt.  
> > 
> > It's a matter of weight. Buses are huge. Big giant machines. Seat
> > belts aren't required in vehicles of this size for one major 
> reason -
> > the vast majority of accidents would scarcely affect the 
> passengers on
> > a bus. We're talking about a vehicle weighing half a dozen tons 
> plus,
> > colliding with a vehicle weighing a couple tons at most. Sure, 
the
> > passengers on the bus will get bumps and bruises and may be 
> dislodged
> > from their seats, but life threatening injuries while riding on 
a 
> bus
> > are fairly uncommon.
> > 
> > A car, on the other hand....
> 
> A taxi is a car and they aren't required to have a car seat.  I
> can 
> name a dozen other
> places where the law contradicts itself on the requirement of a 
car 
> seat.  It usually comes 
> down to economics not safety.  If an industry is going to be 
> economically impacted by a law
> then that industry becomes exempt because they lobby against it.  
> The laws usually only pertain to the individual.  
> Same is true with the pool laws.  Only resident pools are required 
> to have the fence or alarm.  Why? because big
> business lobbies to make themselves exempt. 
> 
> > 
> > > Car seats do save 
> > > lives but the reason they are required by law has more to do 
> with 
> > > political lobbying than rational thinking.  So the fact that 
> > > something is "illegal" doesn't immediately make it a bad 
idea.  
> > 
> > That's a load of BS and you know it. Most accidents would 
> positively
> > kill a loose child. No rational person would toss an infant in 
the
> > back seat and drive off. Requiring children to be properly 
secured 
> is
> > perfectly rational thinking.
> 
> I'm not saying that a loose child is as safe as one in a car
> seat.  
> I'm saying
> that car seats do in fact save lives but the reason we are 
required 
> to have them has
> more to do with political lobbying than safety.  If it was really 
> about safety, the
> auto manufacturers should have been required to design a restraint 
> system that
> is built into the car that can accommodate a child.  Why wasn't
> that 
> done?
> Lobbyist.  
> 
> Requiring the auto manufacturers to design a system would be much 
> safer.  This way, people who can't
> afford to shell out $100+ for a car seat wouldn't go without one.
> 
> Also this would
> solve the bigger problem of incorrectly installed seats.  It is 
> estimated that 80% of car
> seats are not fully effective because they are not properly 
> installed.   At a minimum, the auto makers should
> develop a system that makes a car seat idiot proof to install.  
The 
> LATCH system is a step toward this but
> it is still very difficult to get a LATCH seat installed properly.
> 
> > 
> > > A good example of stupid laws that are meant to protect us:  
> Safety 
> > > fences around swimming pools.  
> > 
> > We aren't talking about swimming pools. But since you bring it 
up, 
> I
> > mostly agree with you.
> 
> Good, glad we can agree on some point of this. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor      
> 
> ADVERTISEMENT
>  
> 
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129ru39lj/M=298938.5002737.6305531.48796
38/
> 
D=groups/S=1705126215:HM/EXP=1090937187/A=2254954/R=2/SIG=12cm7bolr/*
htt
> 
p://clk.atdmt.com/TIR/go/yhxxx00103000006tir/direct/01/10908507875789
35>
> 
>  
> <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?
M=298938.5002737.6305531.4879638/D=group
> s/S=:HM/A=2254954/rand=635050311>       
> 
> 
>   _____  
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> *      To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCForum/
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCForum/> 
>   
> 
> *      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=Unsubscribe> 
>   
> 
> *      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

---

Yahoo! Groups Links

• To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCForum/
   
• To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   
• Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.