There’s always that one guy

itza ferd

 

"Small boy" H-60 driver here. Met a few of the 160th SOAR boys...pretty darn impressive group.

 

[EDITED]

AGREED! Presenting facts based on positional authority = King Nozzle of the Douche Club - yes. Not what I did (or was trying to say). This is just discussion man, it's not court - at the end of the day, we all log out and go about our merry ways. Agree, disagree, or laugh too hard to give a rat's ass. Nothing personal.

My point was you should know, as a current or former LEO, that 1)not all accidents are categorized or reported to the NHTSA, or the NTSB. If I'm not mistaken - reporting certain types of incidents is completely voluntary - we're missing quite a bit of data. So specific details such as bumper height, tire size, frame and suspension modification won't be found. The question "How many lifted trucks are in accidents" is almost impossible to answer. 2)By far, the vast majority of accidents are caused by stupidity - way too many examples to list, just excessive speed and driving too fast for road/weather conditions for example. Excessive speed is a cause categorized by the NHTSA/ NTSB... BUT... there is no column or data collection for "Junior added 350 HP to his hand-me-down Honda Civic and thought chopping the springs would make it ok for him to do 110 on a 2-lane highway." We'll get a checked box that ES was a contributing factor, but not what modifications were done to the car that facilitated the excessive speed. Much like lifting your truck so the bumper is 42" off the ground and misses the door on 80% of the vehicles on the road contribute to the likelihood of serious injury/ death to the person you hit. Car A vs Car B = death, but not if certain contributing factors (other than weather, DUI, etc) are present.

Does modifying a vehicle in this particular manner have an impact over your control of the vehicle? Yes - absolutely, like you said. It makes you more likely to get into an otherwise avoidable accident. Does modifying a vehicle so that parts that are supposed to minimize impact effects are taken out of the equation (such as bumpers, crumple zones, etc.) have a greater risk of causing undue harm to another person? Absolutely - yes. My bumper is designed to absorb X amount of force in an impact. An added benefit, is that it also spreads the force of the impact to your car, and mine (depending on the angle the two collide at). Now, I have modified my vehicle so that the bumper doesn't impact your door, body, or crumple zones...it impacts your cheek, and the only thing between your cheek and my bumper is your window, if you're lucky, the A or B pillar and the windshield. Only a complete retard would think there's not an increased chance of more serious injury or death in that case. Likewise - if a person hits the modified vehicle - as in this example...the collision isn't with the crumple zones, bumper, thin sheetmetal/ plastic...it's with the frame, or an axle. Who could argue that there's no greater risk there either? That's laughable. Drop a hammer wrapped in a pillow on your pinky toe. Then, drop the same hammer on your toe with nothing between it and your toe - that should make it crystal clear.

The nexus was not specifically to vehicles that are lifted/modified. The list was to point out how absurd it is to say you have just as much of a chance of being hit by a meteor/ falling airplane/ runaway tire/ etc. etc. etc. The fact remains valid - there were 17K incidents of those types (that the other guy listed) around the world. Compared to 6 MILLION car accidents in the U.S. alone, 36K deaths, so NO - the odds are nowhere near the same. Anyone who thinks they are, should really try jumping in the shark tank with a "modified" bathing suit made out of bacon - let us know how it works out. LoL.

 

I might know a thing or 2 about that... NSDQ!

 

Exactly. The data is not there, so you can't draw any conclusions about the deadliness of lifts in MVC's compared to anything, anywhere, because it is unknown. That's all. Everything else you have said is attempting to shore up anecdotes or relate to other anecdotes.

 

Can you conclude that X=3 here: 2X=6? I mean - 1/3 of that equation is missing. Not trying to prove the data, even though you could with missing information. Anecdotal evidence is still what? Oh yeah - evidence, categorized or not. Conclusions can - and are regularly drawn in abstract given missing information. You don't need to have empirical data to draw a conclusion. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that a side impact, where the bumper of a vehicle hits you in the head is not as deadly or more likely to cause injury than if that same bumper hit your door - because it hasn't been listed somewhere? That's the entire discussion right there. You seriously believe that?

 

I don't think you are willing to see the problems with your logic or approach to your assertion. Later.

 

Nice dodge on the question. Later

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that a side impact, where the bumper of a vehicle hits you in the head is not as deadly or more likely to cause injury than if that same bumper hit your door - because it hasn't been listed somewhere?