On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Mark Sirota wrote:
> Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.
>
> This was just an advisory that there is research that suggests that
> airbags and full-face helmets don't mix well.
>
> That's all there is at this time. Just an advisory.
>
> Mark
C'mon, Mark, that's disingenuous. It's not "just an advisory", it's an
advisory that makes it "highly recommended" that members not use full-face
helmets, and offers that "potentially more restrictive language is
currently being considered" for enforcement in the immediate future.
It's one thing when requirements are put in place due to insurance or
liability requirements (not saying this is necessarily the case here, but
it feels like it).
It's something else when the referenced genesis of those requirements is
clearly not applicable to Solo conditions. "This applies to vehicle (sic)
that may be used in Solo, RallyCross, High Performance Car Control
Clinics, etc." No, it doesn't, with the possible exception of some of the
formula cars, none of which are required to use airbags in Solo anyway.
And it's another thing again when the overall body of research, aligned
with common sense for once, suggests that the requirement could actually
*increase* the chance of injury. The whole point of full-face helmets is
to prevent damage from things hitting your face at high speed.
I strongly agree with the person who said that the SCCA enacting such a
requirement actually increases their liability if someone sustains
facial/head injuries while wearing an open-faced helmet after being
prohibited from using a full-face.
KeS
|