age for child trailers

Leo Lichtman said:

Not doubting your description of the cause, but I'm curious how you were
able to tell the child leaned and caused the accident.

To be honest, it was the only thing I could think of. There were no
bumps and I was moving pretty slowly. I asked my daughter if she was
leaning into the side of the trailer, but that's a leading question so
I don't really know if her answer was factual or not.

When my son was learning to ride on a trail-a-bike and, later, a
tandem with me, I would lean into the turn and he would fight me all
the way through it by leaning the opposite way. He did it because he
felt like he was falling over. That goes away with practice, but I'm
wondering if something similar might happen in the trailer.

Quoted message said:

I trust there were no injuries, or if there were, I hope there was nothing
serious.

The only injury was to her pride, which for a three-year-old can be
substantial.

She loves to ride her (training-wheel equipped[1]) bike now and knows
to lean into turns.

RFM
--
[1] Yeah, I know about training wheels. She doesn't have the
coordination to ride without, and she refuses to ride her tricycle
because she wants to be on a bike like her older brother.

"Fritz M" wrote: (clip) he would fight me all

Quoted message said:

the way through it by leaning the opposite way. He did it because he felt

like he was falling over. (clip) I'm
wondering if something similar might happen in the trailer.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Just trying to reason throuh this. If you were pulling a child in a
two-wheel trailer, it would not tip in the turns, and the passenger would
have no reason to lean. OTH, if it was a one-wheel trailer, it WOULD lean
in the turns, and the child might very well be doing as you say. However,
in order to turn over, the bike and trailer would have to tip together, and
it seems to me you would be very aware of the problem before it got to the
accident stage.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
The only injury was to her pride, which for a three-year-old can be
substantial.
^^^^^^^^^^^
Happy to hear that.

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 01:22:51 +0800, Michael J. Klein
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm sure it's in there somewhere. Mine tells me not to open the doors
or attempt tpo get out of the vehicle while the it's in motion. You
really think I needed to be told that?

Quoted message said:

Yes, and you know why too!

Well, I'm guessing it's there because someone once sued a car maker
because they got hurt getting out of the car while it was in motion.
For some reason the fact that something would only be done my a
blithering idiot with a deathwish doesn't seem to be a valid defence
in corporate lawsuits...

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

you know? said:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 01:22:51 +0800, Michael J. Klein
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm sure it's in there somewhere. Mine tells me not to open the doors
or attempt tpo get out of the vehicle while the it's in motion. You
really think I needed to be told that?

Quoted message said:

Yes, and you know why too!

Well, I'm guessing it's there because someone once sued a car maker
because they got hurt getting out of the car while it was in motion.
For some reason the fact that something would only be done my a
blithering idiot with a deathwish doesn't seem to be a valid defence
in corporate lawsuits...

"<DING!>

"Tthat is the correct answer!"

"Johhny, tell Guy what he's won!"

Michael J. Klein [email hidden]
Dasi Jen, Taoyuan Hsien, Taiwan, ROC
Please replace mousepotato with asiancastings
---------------------------------------------

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 13:40:32 +0800, Michael J. Klein
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Well, I'm guessing it's there because someone once sued a car maker
because they got hurt getting out of the car while it was in motion.
For some reason the fact that something would only be done my a
blithering idiot with a deathwish doesn't seem to be a valid defence
in corporate lawsuits...

Quoted message said:

"Tthat is the correct answer!"

Well, yes, I knew /that/. I am just constantly amazed that people
will sue - and win - based on behaviour which is, to the dispassionate
observer, indicative of near-lethal levels of stupidity.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

you know? said:

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 13:40:32 +0800, Michael J. Klein
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Well, I'm guessing it's there because someone once sued a car maker
because they got hurt getting out of the car while it was in motion.
For some reason the fact that something would only be done my a
blithering idiot with a deathwish doesn't seem to be a valid defence
in corporate lawsuits...

Quoted message said:

"Tthat is the correct answer!"

Well, yes, I knew /that/. I am just constantly amazed that people
will sue - and win - based on behaviour which is, to the dispassionate
observer, indicative of near-lethal levels of stupidity.

Stupid people aren't embarassed by their stupid behavior. The rest of
us wouldn't want our stupid deeds publicized to the world by a
lawsuit. The money is not worth being known as the person who is too
dumb to not know you can't leave a moving vehicle safely.

And, yes of course I knew you knew /that/, hehe.
Michael J. Klein [email hidden]
Dasi Jen, Taoyuan Hsien, Taiwan, ROC
Please replace mousepotato with asiancastings
---------------------------------------------