Originally Posted by dhuey
Having just completed such searches, SptCA, I came up with a 1 in 10,000,000 chance that a child under 2 on a lap faces death or serious injury that he/she would have avoided had he/she been restrained. Do you disagree? If so, on what source do you base your disagreement? (My sources are linked in the other thread).
I assume that the injury/fatality rate for unrestrained pax over the age of two would be similar (can't think of any reasons why it would not).
So why is the FAA so hellbent on forcing pax (over the age of two) to wear seatbelts?
Of course the odds of death or injury are slight.
And it is true that kids face much worse odds in an auto.
But I don't understand why people are unwilling to take reasonable safety measures in each type of transport.
Especially since humans 24 months of age and older are required to be seated and belted in their own seats.