Re: Smithey Ironware

On 2024-11-05, Bruce <Bruce@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 22:48:26 -0500, Ed P <esp@snet.n> wrote:
>

On 11/4/2024 8:11 PM, Bruce wrote:

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 20:09:00 -0500, jmcquown <j_mcquown@comcast.net>
wrote:
 

On 11/3/2024 9:19 PM, Ed P wrote:

On 11/3/2024 8:26 PM, Bruce wrote:

>
That's what I meant. That garage door could also have been a little
girl crossing the street.
>
Compulsory safety checks are a pain, but a necessity IMO.
>

>
I lived in states with mandatory inspection.  Waste of time and money. I
can tell you stories of how people that truly have problems get around
them.
>

(snippage)
>
Michael is driving around with children (including twins who are only a
few months old) in his car.  Required inspections or no, it's a safety
hazard to not be concerned about car brakes.

 
Exactly. It sounds obvious but isn't, apparently. And you haven't even
mentioned other people's children. Or their parents. Or grandparents.
Or people who don't even have any children.
 

>
We don't know if he is using it as a "family car" or if it it just a
collector car he is going to restore.  He has a few.  Why not ask before
making assumptions?  This happened on his property, not the public streets.

>
When you're run over by a car with faulty brakes, what does it matter
if it's a family car or not? Besides, this isn't about Michael but
about any state or country that doesn't check the safety of cars. I
only have to drive a bit north to get there.

Vehicle inspections don't necessarily result in fewer crashes or
injuries.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8296297

It would appear that the best predictor of safety is the age of
the car.  How this applies to Michael is left as an exercise for
the reader.

Really, given the pathetic enforcement of our drunk driving laws
(and the weakness of those laws) the condition of vehicles is in
the statistical noise.

--
Cindy Hamilton