GMC Terrain, Equinox, and SRX Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
I thought I read somewhere that the doors would unlock after you've been in a collision. OnStar would do this automatically with their automated crash response anyways. I think the old argument of "I don't want to be locked in" is past it's time. These are safety measures put in place for the good of the public. Have fun fighting your insurance company when a passenger is ejected or seriously hurt because the doors opened from having this safety measure disabled.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
A have a few law enforcement friends and they say from experience that the seatbelt issue is about 50/50. Half the time the seatbelt actually causes the injury than the actual collision. Mainly internal bleeding that cannot be immediately diagnosed. This has to do with the tension and force put on the body. But it all depends on the type of collision. I'm not saying people shouldn't wear one and they DO save lives, but they also cause almost as many injuries.

Redlight, in regards to your insurance comment, I agree that there are cars that don't have this feature and are still insured, but you are talking about DISABLING a safety feature that is factory standard. How would this be any different if you disabled your airbags and got into a front end collision? I would sue your a** off if I was injured due to a standard safety feature that you disabled to feed your ego. It's called negligence and you can be sure that I would win.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
redlight_005 said:
Have fun with trying to sue and proving that it was with malicious intent that the doors were unlocked (which could be unlocked manually anyway after put in gear) and that's why you were injured.
I never said malicious intent, I said negligent. You can have the best intentions in the world and still be held negligent because of a poor decision. If your decision to disable or even manually unlock the doors directly results to an injury to a person, you can be held negligent. And as NY_Joe said, the doors unlock once in an impact (which what i was referring to earlier) so why would you want to disable this besides being too lazy to push a button to allow someone in while in gear?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
scottyyyc said:
WTF? This is a self-defeating argument. Seat belts cause injuries in crashes - yes of course they do - but the injuries that would have otherwise been sustained if you weren't wearing seat belts would be exponentially greater. If you're in any kind of accident where the seat-belt is causing a major injury, you'd likely be dead otherwise. That's like saying skydiving is sometimes dangerous, therefore it's not worth having a parachute when jumping out of a plane... No matter what, it's the guaranteed lesser of evils...

I don't know any cop or paramedic anywhere who wouldn't ever argue that seat belts are a 100% win/win.
Yes, it is a lessor of evils. The point is that seat belts do cause injuries and even result in death, but we never know what the injury would be if they didn't wear their seat belt. It's an assumption and because of that the "facts" and conclusions are a ballpark guess.
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top