Haaaaa!!! So now I am "outmatched" by a guy whose bulb is so dim he can't even recognize sarcasm when he sees it. Would it have been easier for ya if I used an asteroid instead of an earthquake as my example?
Man, this thread gets funnier by the minute
If your response was sarcasm, then you must agree with the concept of large scale vehicles leading to death. So where's the issue here?
You're worried about the
possibility you might crash, you prepare for it to the nth degree because it scares you. Thus you claim a classic is unacceptable transportation because, "by the gods! you (could) DIE man!".
Yet when another possible event is beyond standard methods to prepare for, you claim it's a non issue and refer to it only through hyperbole?
But, we're to consider you something other than a troll?
When you get in a car, you roll the dice. Getting in a safer car just means that it's less likely you'll end up dead, still doesn't guarantee it. And again, that's only in the event that you end up on the wrong end of statistics.
To add some of that annoying thing called actual information, here's some:
Persons Killed or Injured and Fatality and Injury
Note that only 51,000 died driving in the "wild, irresponsibly unsafe" world of 1966, and yet there were 196,000,000 people living in the U.S.
Even then the chance that you'd actually die in a car accident in those, "asking to die" days was quite low. only .00026% of the population died in a car crash.
So while car crashes may be the most likely thing to die from, That doesn't mean that it's likely to occur.
In summation, stop whining and grab a pair.
Life ,and death, happens (though in cars, one of those occurs only rarely).
