Why should that be an issue when they are talking about a 1999 report in the
first place? SCCA is no more liable than they were a year ago in that
respect.
--Rocky
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Murray" <mattm@optonline.net>
To: "Rocky Entriken" <rocky@tri.net>; "NER Solo postings" <nersolo@ner.org>;
"evolution-discussions" <evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: ".Team.Net" <autox@Autox.Team.Net>
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 5:16 AM
Subject: Re: Potential new helmet rule would affect autocrossers
> But if they "soften" the impact (pun intended?) of obsolescing
> our helmets, and an incident occurs, what happens then? The
> lawyers would have their way with us. I'm wagering it will happen
> sooner than later.
>
> Matt Murray
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rocky Entriken" <rocky@tri.net>
>> I really do not believe we can prevent this -- "safety" issues
> always
>> seem impervious to any objections -- but we might get it
> imposed in a more
>> user-friendly manner (if a new helmet you must buy, would you
> not rather be
>> able to get a Snell 2005 than a Snell 2000 that already has 4
> years of its
>> rulebook life gone?)
>>
>> --Rocky
|