Originally Posted By: Astro14
Ducked - you're confusing "legal minimum" with "good" and they're hardly ever the same.
Don't think I am. This is about balancing cost and risk.
Y'all seem to aspire to a more absolute standard of safety, but while you're spending the OP's money, you might bear in mind that you can't have it.
Counsels of perfection make for easy debating points, and, consistently implemented, will make your car as safe as is practical, but, however high the rental on your moral high ground, absolute safety, and the absolute moral superiority that could go with it, is only available if you don’t drive.
All cars, and all drivers, are unsafe.
In choosing to drive on old worn tyres its probably true that I’m accepting a degree of avoidable risk to myself and others. I also accept such avoidable risks by driving at all, and by driving an old car without, for example, ABS, airbags, exhaust catalyst, or current collision survival standards, as does anyone who drives an old car.
I might choose differently if I drove more, or closer to the edge. As it is, I did under 500 slow miles last year, and it’ll likely be less this year. If you did the UK average of 10.000 miles, (I'd guess the US average might be greater) my car has to be over 20 times more dangerous before I’m being less responsible than y'all, the Mothers of all Moral Motorists.
(Nothing like misquoting Saddam Hussein for winning hearts and minds)
I dunno. Perhaps it is over 20 times more dangerous. But I seem to have a bit of a margin to play with.