Hey, there! Log in / Register
Storrow Drive crash kills one, injures one
By adamg on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 8:24am
A 22-year-old Needham man died around 1:20 a.m. when he was ejected from an SUV on the westbound side of Storrow Drive near the Bowker Overpass, the Suffolk County District Attorney's office reports.
The driver of the GMC Sierra, also 22 and from Needham, was also ejected from the vehicle. He is in the ICU at Beth Israel Hospital with life-threatening injuries, the DA's office reports.
The cause of the crash remains under investigation.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Not like Hollywood, then
I have known people who do not wear seatbelts because in the event of an accident, they want to be "thrown clear" so as not to be caught in the inevitable fireball resulting from the average crash.
That is the dumbest thing
That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Most accidents don't result in a car bursting into flames.
Used to be more common
(fiery crashes, that is). I don't know if this is where it came from, but the attitude of "no belts, I'd prefer to be thrown clear of the vehicle" was prevalent among racing drivers. They were most afraid of being trapped in a fire, and thought that way until Jackie Stewart and others led the charge for better safety systems.
Now all world-class racecars employ passive & active safety systems and nobody thinks it's undesirable, so it's clearly the smart thing to do. Some folks are too old to get into the habit later in life, and some are too young to have time for it to be ingrained; hope the other occupant survives this crash.
A common fallacy still
Or they think they'll get decapitated by the seatbelt.
If a person works for Boston government too long, they might think that most people are mainly trying to get a piece of the action. But -- honestly -- scientists aren't taking payola so GM can sell you seatbelts that won't help you. Most scientists and engineers (notable exceptions on the Big Dig notwithstanding) actually care strongly about doing their jobs right.
Wear a seatbelt. Don't make EMTs and firefighters have to scrape and spray you off the pavement.
22 y.o. and no seatbelt? Is it still 1965?
I feel terrible for the families of these people.
However, it is a justifiable question as to how a 22 year old from a relatively affluent suburb (or anyone else for that matter, but I use that as an example because that is where the greatest number of people are given driver's ed) is driving around and not wearing a seatbelt. In 2011.
In my experience, all it takes to make almost every kid (and thereafter, adult) wear a seatbelt is for one state trooper to walk into every driver's ed class with an uncensored description and pictures of his/her first experience with a fatal highway accident in which the deceased is that way because he/she was not wearing a seatbelt. Unfortunately, this does not happen enough, because parents don't want their little darlings subjected to...wait for it...reality.
Sometimes I wonder how the country got to where it is right now. When stories like this come up, the wondering stops. People cannot be helped if they refuse to take reasonable measures to help themselves.
Seatbelts infringe upon my rights!
Gov't can't tell me what to do!
Insert liberterian folly here!
Especially as those same people
will immediately cry foul if you dare suggest allowing insurance companies to limit or deny claims for bodily injury if a person wasn't wearing a seat belt at the time of the crash.
Needham's like Marlboro
Lots of punk kids that think they're gangster cause "They're from Boston". Some grow out of it, some don't and wear it like a badge.
The same affliction happens between Marlboro/West Boylston and Worcester.
Sounds like speeding, probably a DUI, and general dumassery.
Shock treatment doesn't work.
Shock treatment doesn't work. When I was in driver's ed over 20 years ago, they trotted out all the 1970s movies with actual footage of the aftermath of drunk driving accidents and people not wearing seat belts. It didn't make a bit of difference: teenagers think they're immortal and invulnerable, and the more gruesome the film footage the less they think it applies to them.
Get an authority figure in there obviously trying to scare them, and it will do even less.
It's not that parents don't want their darlings subjected to reality. It's that subjecting them to reality in the form of anecdotes from someone who's obviously got an agenda won't make a damn bit of difference. If anything, current teenagers are even better at sniffing out propaganda than they were 20 years ago.
So I assume...
by your own argument that you drive drunk all the time and don't wear a seatbelt? Or I suppose you used to all the time when you were a teenager.
You're right. He's ignorant.
You're right. He's ignorant.
Good Point
Scare tactics are like abstinence-only education - they don't work for the same reason Massholes run red lights: the rules don't apply to ME.
The real problem is that our society infantilizes teenagers and doesn't train them in adult decisionmaking. They are treated as dumb children until some magic special time when they are suddenly "grown up". It doesn't work that way.
Seat belt use
I haven't seen any reference in media reports to seat belt use, or lack thereof, in this story. Given that both were ejected, it's a pretty good assumption. However, has there been confirmation that seat belts were not worn here?
How can you be ejected from
How can you be ejected from the vehicle if you're wearing a seat belt?
Seat belts can fail
You can be ejected from the vehicle if the seat belt latch or inertia reel fails, or if the 'B' pillar is severed.
For both?
If one were ejected and one wasn't, I might believe in a failure of the restraint(s).
If both driver and passenger are ejected? No restraints, or the top of the car was cut off (cutting their heads off along with the seatbelt mounts).
They weren't wearing seatbelts, there weren't any automatic seatbelts, and their car didn't beep like crazy* when any seat in front is occupied but not belted.
*My Toyota wants me to buckle in the produce.
One young agressive Driver +
One young agressive Driver + One over-powered vehicle with a high center of gravity + Quick lane change = Disaster.
Back in the day, these vehicles had large six cylinder engines, very slow acceleration, in other words they were work vehicles. I would never let a young person I cared about drive an old SUV.
Over-powered or slow
Over-powered or slow acceleration? which one is it?