The death rate back then had nothing to do with power, it is everything to do with lack of safety features.

 

it does when you're comparing those rates to cars of, and at the same time period. Other cars on the road at that time didn't have great safety features either.

 

your hostility toward chrysler is completely irrational in several ways, and very condescending and judgmental too.

first off, the SAME RESULT could happen with ANY car, with enough stupidity by the drivers. driving a car at high speed down a RUNWAY, which obviously has no signs for cars, and might not give any normal clue about when to slow down 'in time' means anyone driving any car could misjudge when to brake and end up with a first prize darwin award.

second about the car "lacking balance regarding horse power and ergonomics", have you driven one? reviewers give it high praise from what i've read but then those reviewers weren't clueless and racing it down a runway.

third, you imply the fact that it "can be had for a low $ per pony price" means it's more dangerous because i guess that means less sophisticated or intelligent people might buy and drive one? many other supposedly intelligent and rich people have died or suffered big injuries in ferraris, porsches, lamborghinis, etc.

i really think you need to examine your disdain for chrysler or any brand... i believe i read at some point you or your family has some bad experience with them, which is unfortunate, but things can and do change.

here's some idiotic driving, on a race track no less, by a lexus driver, impacting an acrua nsx
http://blackflag.jalopnik.com/angry-...-wh-1798477766

 

So please send me the specific death rate for those particular cars at the time vs other cars so we can compare.

That sort of broken out data doesn't exist.

 

Apparently it's called the Dram Shop Act. This has been in effect in CA for as long as I can remember. Not so sure about other states.

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=584

 

People haven't been taking personal responsibility for decades. Why would they start now? It is only getting worse. Every single owner of these ridiculously horsepowered cars DO NOT have the ability to control their right foot. These cars beg to be driven aggressively and to the limit, in the exact same way drugs cause endorphins in the brain to react. It is what they were designed to do and auto makers know exactly how to tap into this part of the brain and feed the addiction. We are all fooling ourselves if we think there's a chance people can learn to control themselves. ***IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.*** Like I mentioned earlier, I have worked with law enforcement for over twenty years with traffic and safety issues in my city. The bulk of offenders and accident victims are owners of Mustangs, Camaros, Challengers, and Chargers. I did not wake up one day and imagine this. It is a reality that is growing each year, as horsepower numbers increase.

 

Theres a reason why the half-mile events held on airstrips are measured for safe stopping distances. There was a Ferrari that crashed on an airstrip when the driver tried to pull the same stoopid stunt. Guess what? No one blamed Ferrari for not over-engineering a car to prevent dummies from being dummies.

 

Product liability (which is your basis in both scenarios) is not the culprit here. Responsibility stems from negligence, and there is no negligence here. Unless the plant produced a faulty unit that contributed to the accident, the maker cannot be held responsible. What you're insinuating is not only accusatory, it's also libelous.

Bartender is not responsible for his/her patrons unless the drinks served are poisonous to the patrons given the medical history and only IF such condition was known by the bartender. Otherwise, you have no legal or moral basis for planting the responsibility on the bartender.

 

If they didn't have the ability then they and most would not be allowed to drive without special permissions.

So automakers are the bad guys? Maybe Benz should stop making V12's? Tesla shouldn't make the P100D?

The two men had permission to use a 8,300-foot runway. The two men had a 707hp vehicle. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that at the end of the runway the car is not going to take off like an aircraft would. I feel bad for their families losses, but this could have easily been avoided by scouting the facility first, and secondly braking sooner.

 

Thats just part of the cost of living in a free society. If people choose to do stupid crap with things they own, then thats their choice and they have to live with the consequences. I understand that we all have to live in the same space and use the same roads, but I do not want to see this type of behavior used as a reason for to Government to further increase their ability to decide what we as citizens can and cannot do and can and cannot buy. Why stop there? Why not limit the ability to sell or buy any sporty car that is exciting to drive at the limit? What about Corvettes? What about M BMWs? Ferraris? Porsches? On and on. Why don't we all just drive safe, slow, easy to handle Government mandated Corollas? It would be safer, but not a world I would want to live in.

So no, it is not Chrysler's fault for designing a car with high horsepower. Its not a gun manufacturer's fault that someone uses a gun to murder someone. Its not a spirit distiller's fault that someone drinks too much and kills someone driving drunk. Blaming these people for what others choose to do with their products is a very disturbing and dangerous slope to be on, and its one I want no part of for America.

You say "every single owner cannot control themselves". If I owned one, I would. All we can each do is try and teach our children and people we have influence over how important it is that they take responsibility for themselves and own the consequences of their actions and let life unfold as it will.

This was on a private and controlled course, they themselves were killed and nobody else. What if this was people racing on a racetrack that died? Is it the fault of the people who built the car they were in? The fault of the racetrack? They assumed a risk when they set out to do exactly what they were doing, legally and with permission on that runway and they died doing it. Their deaths are THEIR fault.

 

Fizz has a point on one thing. As I have mentioned before, I myself have seen more kids and young adults hurt or killed (or just doing dumb things on the road right next to me) in V8-powered Mustangs than in any other single vehicle. I also see a lot of potentially dumb things by BMW 3-series jocks....though they usually don't crack their cars up at quite the same rate as Mustangs. I personally don't see quite as many Camaro, Challenger, and Charger doing those dumb things......but, given Fizz's experience with law-enforcement (and the fact that these are high-performance/ponycars similar to Mustangs), I have no reason to doubt his word that they also have a lot of less-than-totally-responsible drivers.

And, of course, there ARE drivers of these vehicles that DO drive responsibly...no one doubts that, or accuses them all of being overly-aggressive. But, obviously, the insurance rates on these cars aren't what they are for nothing.

 

Kids are going to do dumb things and get killed. They have since the beginning of time, and they always will. They will do it if you take away their cars, take away their booze, they will find something stupid to do that will get them killed. Just a part of life.

 

^^^ Kids and adults....
Super Sport bikes work well for this and other levels of bodily harm.... Always a good 1st vehicle choice! lol

HP to weight ratio is crazy these days. Traction control is saving a few tho.

 

Just look on YouTube, people put fireworks in their butts and set them off for fun. Its nature at work thinning the herd lol

"Well gee, we didn't know when we set explosives off in his rectum it might hurt the guy"

 

That's true to an extent, and kids can be killed in any vehicle, but a disproportionate number of them seem to choose Mustangs to get killed in. According to Fizzboy's experience (and I have no reason to doubt that experience, since he worked with those who actually had to respond to accidents), that also included similar pony and muscle-cars.