Date:         Fri, 20 Nov 1998 08:59:25 -0500
Reply-To:     Sam Scholten <scholten1@MARSHALL.EDU>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         Sam Scholten <scholten1@MARSHALL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Vanagon vs Volvo Crash Photos
Comments: To: "Robert A. Alexander" <satcong@VOL.COM>
Comments: cc: vanagon@VANAGON.COM
In-Reply-To:  <3654E5DE.8FC340B0@vol.com>
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Problem- some folks can only afford to buy, insure, and run an '83 Subaru.
I'm a grad student; I should know. So, if that's all you can afford, then
you're SOL as safety goes, right? That's f*cked up.

Sam

On Thu, 19 Nov 1998, Robert A. Alexander wrote:

> Kent - Some of the more radical "do-gooders", if you have watched the
> national news, lately, are upset that SUV's, being heavier than than the
> FWD tin-boxes, are becoming the "killers-on-the-highway", SO the
> "do-gooders" are advocating that that we all should have an, uh, "equal"
> chance to be killed in an automobile accident via requiring us to accept
> tin-can vehicles to drive around!!!
>
> After taking a look at the URL showing the result of a Vanagon & a Volvo
> head-on collision, I'm convinced that me five GORGEOUS daughters will be
> better off driving either Vanagons, MACK dump trucks OR backup vehicles
> such as my old '76 GMC long-bed pickup truck!!!  Personally, I would
> prefer to buy all five of me babes '38 Dodge dump-trucks to drive
> around, BUT they think they need BMW or SAAB convertibles!!!  I'm busy
> trying to convince them that '38 Dodge dump trucks will allow them to
> haul around MORE of their friends, in greater safety!
>
> I'm curious, though!  How many of you folks out there really agree with
> the traffic NUTS that SUV's present a "PROBLEM" because they "outweigh"
> smaller vehicles and give an "unfair" survival advantage to those in the
> SUV???  I think these ASSHOLES need to move to UGANDA!
>
> BOB - WA4RRN
> '85GL
> http://www.impeachment.org
>