“It is clear that Detroit today is designing automobiles for style, cost, performance and calculated obsolescence, but not for safety. A sudden deceleration turns a steering wheel or a sharp-edged dashboard into a bone-and chest-crushing agent. Penetration of the shatterproof windshield can chisel one’s head into fractions. The apparently harmless glove-compartment door has been known to unlatch under impact and guillotine a child. Automobiles are so designed as to be dangerous at any speed.

Our preoccupation has been with the cause of accidents seen in terms of the driver and not with the instruments that produce the injuries. Erratic driving will always be characteristic of the traffic scene; exhortation and stricter law enforcement have at best a limited effect. Much more significant for saving life is the application of engineering remedies to minimize the lethal effects of human error by designing the automobile so as to afford maximum protection to occupants in the event of a collision. In a word, the job is to make accidents safe.

The task of publicizing the relation between automotive design and highway casualties is fraught with difficulties. The press, radio and television are not likely to undertake this task in terms of industry responsibility when millions in advertising dollars are being poured into their coffers. Private researchers are reluctant to stray from their scholarly and experimental pursuits, especially when cordial relations with the industry are necessary for the continuation of their projects. The industry’s policy is bearing fruit; most investigators keep their private disgust with the industry’s immobility from seeping into the public limelight. This adherence to a rigid division of labor provides a convenient rationalization for the widespread amorality among our scholarly elite, who appear insensitive to the increased responsibility as citizens which their superior knowledge should require them to shoulder.

Ralph-Nader-1975
Ralph Nader

Even if all the facts, laid before the public, did not increase consumer demand for safety design (which is unlikely), the manufacturers should not be relieved of their responsibility. Innumerable precedents show that the consumer must be protected from his own indiscretion and vanity. Dangerous drugs cannot be dispensed without a licensed physician’s prescription; meat must pass federal inspection before distribution; railroads and other interstate carriers are required to meet safety standards regarding their equipment.

Perhaps the best summation lies in a physician’s comment on the car manufacturer’s design policy: “Translated into medicine, it would be comparable to withholding known methods of life-saving value.””

Excerpt from Nader, Ralph. 1959. “The Safe Car You Can’t Buy.” The Nation, April 11, pp. 310-313.

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s