you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Read what I wrote.

More of a danger to themselves. Most people, even drunks, put on their seatbelts. That means if there's an accident, even at high speed, the driver is protected by restraints and airbags.

A kid on a bike doesn't have that.

If there's a collision between a bike and a car, which vehicle do you want to be in?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    I read what you wrote but was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Just to be clear, you're saying that you'd prefer drunk drivers in cars versus bikes because you're more concerned about the drunk driver's safety than people they might run into/over?

    My speculation is that lowering the drinking age should result in fewer deaths overall for this very reason. I don't want drunk drivers to die either but if I had to choose I'd prefer the drunk drivers to die over the person that they hit. I also reject your premise that crashing into something with your bike is more dangerous than crashing into something with a car, seatbelt or not. Speed is a pretty big factor and while drunk biking is surely dangerous it's a lot less likely to crash at higher speeds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    I'm not as concerned about the safety of the drunk as I am about anyone else who may be near them while operating their chosen vehicle.

    With that in mind a bike is better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments