Originally Posted by Klikitarik
Originally Posted by sherp

I have ridden on a bus and I suspect you haven't ridden in any passenger vehicles made after about 1980 because there is a lot more space between bus seats than there is the back and front seat in a passenger car.

Can you point us to any passenger car wrecks where the seats got snapped off and anyone survived? Interesting that a harder bus seat back is better to hit than a passenger car seat back.

Didn't know there were any parachutes involved in school bus trips. So what you are saying is the increased odds of getting in a wreck due to increased stopping distance if preferable over shorter stopping distances and not getting in to the accident in the first place.

Not that big of a deal to pass a bus which is where the headlight comparison would seem to come in to play for most of us, but since that was your first idea how often do you follow someone driving in reverse so that you are looking directly in to their headlights mile after mile?


I�m not sure why you insist on avoiding what I am saying. Either you have no grasp whatsoever of physics so you need to twist what I have said to avoid what I am saying, or you simply can�t understand what I�ve written - for whatever reason. (You can take an out there.)

Perhaps you just want to be combative?


Originally Posted by The_Real_Hawkeye
The point being that driving a car without seat belts is X amount unsafe, and is fined, but riding a motorcycle is X+ amount unsafe, but no fines. If safety were the factor determining fines, then riding a motorcycle should result in a higher fine than driving a car without a seat belt. It's logically inconsistent, illustrating the absurdity of the law.


By the same token, insurance should also be higher for automobiles than for larger vehicles, and smaller autos should pay more than larger and/or better built autos. I get the safer/less-safe part. I also don�t have a problem with whatever vehicle being operated in the �safest-for-it� condition possible. The real question from a �logical� standpoint is why some vehicles are even legal on the highways. As I alluded to earlier, it logically seems ludicrous to built skinny two-lane highways where vehicles approach and pass each other by a few dozen inches at closing speeds of over 100 miles per hour. I�m not suggesting that should be outlawed, just that it isn�t a very logically sensible concept.



I am reading what you are saying. Trouble is:

1) I have seen school bus seats and they are no closer together than the back to front seat distance in a passenger car and in most cases are much farther.

2) Understand the more solid line which would have some merit if passenger car seats got sheared off very often in wrecks, but not seeing that as the case. Think I would rather have a bit of flex than not....kind of like landing on a foam mat or asphalt. I would choose the former, you would choose the latter.

3) Understand you find it preferable to have a longer stopping distance so an object gets hit by the bus instead of stopping sooner and not hitting the object.

4) You have an eccentric neighbor with high entensity headlamps who likes to drive in reverse and you have followed them home creating the same issue that occurs when mortal people follow a bus with strobe light doing what it does best.

"My message to my troops is if you see anybody carrying a gun on the streets of Milwaukee, we'll put them on the ground, take the gun away and then decide whether you have a right to carry it." - Milwaukee Police Chief Ed Flynn