April 28th, 2003 05:54 PM
I don't think I understand you amanda... your analogy is kinda wierd. First off, there was an intial preventalbe occurence, whether it was the drivers fault or some drunk guy at the intersection. We have also never mentioned outside damage, we're talking about the owner the 'people in the car'. Changing your current analogy to reflect this would end up more like this:
The people in the car have a massive leak in their brake system and know it, but they decide it's not worth getting it fixed as the cost of a new master cylinder, a few hoses, and a rear brake thing (I'm not an auto mechanic) costs mutch more than a bumper and maybe a side panel (i.e. their underestimating the possible damage). They proceed with life as usuall and their brakes happen to go out right in front of a local mall while their traveling at about 35. Luckily they hit a store with few people and only two people suffer minor injuries.
Suddenly Wazz ( ) appears out of nowhere and says "You guys really should have gotten your brakes fixed"
Now, does anybody disagree with him? I don't... You are correct in pointing out the flaw in Wazz's initial views, it's pretty twisted, but you're argument is also flawed.