Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxf.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!whuxle!pyuxll!abnjh!u1100a!pyuxn!pyuxww!mhuxm!mhuxl!ihnp4!ihuxf!larry From: larry@ihuxf.UUCP Newsgroups: net.followup Subject: Re: mandatory seatbelt laws Message-ID: <1975@ihuxf.UUCP> Date: Sat, 28-Jan-84 11:11:22 EST Article-I.D.: ihuxf.1975 Posted: Sat Jan 28 11:11:22 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 31-Jan-84 03:11:02 EST References: <340@sequent.UUCP> <898@druxu.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 20 Speaking of letting the "insurance company's adjust payments based on if the occupants were wearing their seat belts"... There was a story on a local news show yesterday that a Chicago mother & daughter got their adjustment in court. Seems that they had been ``innocent victoms'' in an accident and had sued for X-millions of dollars - while the jury found them in the right, their compensation was reduced to a *mere* $10,000. Why? The just deceided that the injuries wouldn't have been as severe IF they would have had their seatbelts on! ---PLEASE NOTE--- Do NOT flame back to me about the merits of seatbelts and the circumstances of this incident!! I am just reporting what happened. [I happen to be very PRO-seatbelts, and very ANTI-passive restraint device - but I admit not knowing HOW to get people to wear them] -- Larry Marek ihnp4!ihuxf!larry