Hmm... is it more accurate to do crash tests of older cars with passengers not wearing seatbelts? Seatbelts weren't mandatory until at least the 1980s. --- Post updated --- There is a technical term for your head going through the windshield in a crash. It's called being dead.
Possibly, although I'm pretty sure that seatbelts were around at the time. (Example: 3-point from Volvo in 1959.) OT: This will be the last image of the Traveler, although that doesn't mean I hate it, as much as it really was just testing out as it is.
Seatbelts were around, but they weren't required to be worn, at least in many parts of the United States. OT: Car goes squish.
Oh, although I thought they were required at the time that crash testing started. (50s-60s) OT: REPOST AGAIN!
Nope. Surprisingly enough, auto manufacturers in the USA actively fought any safety standards being imposed on them in the United States. Their solution to dangerous cars: be a safe driver. Though in reality, that doesn't always work, as sometimes, crashes aren't avoidable, and aren't your own fault. OT: Another car goes squish.
It's all about "muh individual liberties." Apparently being forced to wear a device which would save your life in an accident is a violation of one's individual freedoms. Even today, something like 10-15% of American drivers don't wear seatbelts. OT: Making s'mores.
I don't get why anyone would risk not using one, because it's easier to die not wearing an seat-belt. OT: It's an Stanced Sunburst! (Pokemon reference I guess)
I know, it is very stupid. I suppose the best explanation behind that is that people are stupid. Some people just don't want to listen. OT: Got bored of crashing things, decided to go for a drive.
Noice! I couldn't say that better enough. OT: The truth of stance: You can't stance, you will damage the car. Anybody (when I came into the roleplay) who's in Pure Roleplay already knows what this car is. Coupe to Coupe....