-
Yes
"I wonder if the seat belt/harness or helmet requirement debate looked like this?"
Yes it did. I remember when Nomex was first required (yes, I am that old). One quote I remember was "I can buy a new set of tires for the cost of a Nomex suit".
When Army surplus Nomex gloves were banned, a similar outcry.
When new Snell requirements appeared for the first time, more of the same.
Once drivers were reminded that a harness might help them drive the d**n car, they dropped those arguments.
Boys will be boys.
My stance is that if a head and neck restraint becomes required, ALL proven effective devices should be allowed. I don't like the possibility of hidden agendas/conflict of interests. I also don't know what the word proven means but some standard should be available.
I agree that a device that provides lateral as well as fore and aft protection would be the most effective.
I sometimes think we've made racing TOO safe and too many "wankers" survive to procreate at a later date, producing more "wankers",,
I think most of us will do whatever is finally decided, as we have in the past, 'cause addicts don't have choices.
Mike
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks