Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 17:19:46 EDT
Reply-To: JKrevnov@aol.com
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Rico Sapolich <JKrevnov@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Vanagon Lawsuit/Sue the Bastards!
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 4/29/01 2:58:10 PM, vanagon@volkswagen.org writes:
<< I agree - it seems that there are too many people out there who are not
willing to take responcibeity for their own actions and always look to
putting the blame on someone else for their own stupidity.>>
It seems that we always are so quick to make assumptions which reinforce our
prejudices. I am not privy to the transcripts of this legal action; perhaps
you are. I do feel that more than a few good people were empowered to seek
the truth regarding the matter before them and to come to a common decision.
These folks were acceptable to both sides of the argument before the
proceedings started. Since there was no mention of the case being thrown out
because of a rigged jury, I have to think that they arrived at their
conclusions in good faith.
I do not think a person can be characterized as stupid because he did not use
a type of seatbelt which was never installed or because, perhaps, he skidded
on a patch of black ice while he was taking his family out for a pizza one
bitter Winter's evening.
It was not mandated that VW install 3-point seatbelts when the van was built.
This is true, but before you absolve them of any responsibility for this
tragedy, consider this: the 3-point harness as we know it, was invented by a
Volvo engineer in, I believe, the early 60's. From what I have read, Volvo
felt that this design was of such a great benefit to mankind, that they
released the patent, gratis, to any manufacturer who wanted to use it. I
have driven Volvo's since 1977, my first being a '75 242. Every one I have
owned has had the 3-point belts on all outboard seats. To tell you the
truth, I never worried about the center rear seat because, I consider a Volvo
a 4 passenger car.
Volvo did not HAVE to install these superior restraints either, but, I would
like to think, their integrity would not allow them to do otherwise.
<<Good thing the legal system in Canada would throw a case like this out!>>
Good for whom? Anyway, Canadians cannot even decide which language to speak
so how would they ever come to the consensus of a jury verdict? .)
Rich
| 
