this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2024
809 points (97.4% liked)
Comic Strips
12525 readers
2759 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- [email protected]: "I use Arch btw"
- [email protected]: memes (you don't say!)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The fire stuff makes some degree of sense but the "padded seat" thing doesn't. 1) they aren't very padded in the back, and 2) by that logic people wouldn't need to wear seatbelts if they sat in a back seat in any car.
The other advantage of buses is that they have a lot of inertia due to their mass. The most likely thing for them to hit is a car and most likely because that car made a mistake. The bus can easily push a car out of the way without losing too much velocity. The same is not true of your average civilian vehicle.
That logic is the exact reason in some places it is(was? My info is a few years old.) legal for adults in the back seat to not wear a seat belt. Not saying I agree with the logic, but that actually is the case in some places.
They're not exactly well-padded, but other than the outer frame of the backs (which is 1" square steel tubing), the backs are made from stamped 30-gauge sheet steel which deforms quite readily on impact. Kids can get bruised in collisions by impacting the seat backs but they're usually not badly hurt.
F = ma
A car crash will affect an obsese 250lb bus driver much more than some 40lb little twerp.
Let's say the bus was traveling at a rate of 60mph🇺🇸 and hit a brick wall, and all passengers uniformly come to a complete stop at precisely 1 second. The 5 year old weighing 40lbs🇺🇸 would experience an impact of around 109 pounds of force (109.40 lbf🇺🇸) whereas the bus driver weighing 250lbs🇺🇸 would experience 683.67 lbf🇺🇸.
I absolutely did NOT run the calculations in 🤮 🇪🇺 🤮 before converting to 😎🇺🇸😎.
High schoolers ride busses too. They're a little bigger than 40lb twerps at that point.
But they're objectively the worst kind of child, so meh.
In fact, I think newborns shouldn't need any restraints at all.
Toss em in the back of the truck on the drive back home from the hospital. They'll be fine!
I mean, on the other hand, a 5 year old is generally more fragile than an adult man.
Nah. They're made ot of rubber. They'll be fine. Anyway, even if they aren't, it's not like society invested too much in them yet.
Have you never met a kid? Were you never a kid? The kids that scream and cry over small bumps do it because that's how they were taught to get attention and the adults feed that.
Kids are (biologically) way more resilient than adults. Their bones are more rubbery and slowly harden over time.
I’ve always thought that humans should just evolve to be smaller now that we’re so smart. We’d need less food, people would be safer in impacts, we could build smaller and more efficient homes, etc. Think of the efficiency of a space program where each astronaut was 1/3 the weight and half the size!
It’s not like we have any natural predators any more, so size isn’t a big deal.
Small bumps are not the same as a vehicle crash. There's a reason young children can't sit in the front seat, because air bags deploying can kill them. Kids are small and flexible enough to have an advantage with lower impact stuff, but for high impact stuff they're smaller and squishier and that extra flexibility doesn't help as much, and once they hit puberty they mostly lose that because of the reduced cartilage in their skeletons. Younger children are especially vulnerable to head and neck injuries because of their less developed muscles.
Please stop.
You're arguing about something I didn't say. I was responding directly to the point about kids being fragile. As you say kids have a major advantage in smaller crashes for similar reasons as to how/why the highly intoxicated can sometimes walk away seemingly without a scratch. If a crash is bad enough to kill a kid, good chance the driver isn't walking away from it either.
As for kids sitting in the front seat, yes, airbags kill but pre airbags the kid would also be more likely to go through the windshield and that's also why smaller kids are buckled in facing the back of the back seat, so they have extra protection from the seat they are in. There is also the whole seat belt nit fitting right in the front or back seat and that's why we have them in something up to a certain weight class. It's not about age, it's about height and weight.
Seriously, stop. I didn't say anything about kids not needing seat belts or other protective measures. I was simply countering something that was definitely not accurate.
Dude, fully grown men are objectively fragile.
Children are objectively small and squishy. Car accidents are one of the leading causes of death for children for a reason.