" (UTC)

 Airbag Fatalities 

I removed this:

""In Europe the number of people not wearing their seatbelts is very small when compared to the US, and Europeans are less likely to be obese. As a direct result of these two points, European airbags are less powerful than their American counterparts and are therefore less likely to cause loss of life than those fitted to American cars.""

Give me a break.  If you want to reintroduce this, please provide citations for every claim made in the paragraph.  

Agreed.  I've heard the exact opposite regarding airbag deployment strength, in factthat American-market cars have less forceful airbags because the occupants are more likely not to be wearing their seat belt, whereas in Europe the airbags can deploy faster (more forcefully) because it's assume you're wearing a seatbelt.   KeplerNiko

With exception to the ""Europeans being less obese"" bit, I'd probably agree with that first statement - sounds about right to me.  

 Dates of Deployment

I take strong issue with the discussion of the dates of airbags first being used in vehicles, especially since it seems to me that it violates Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.  It seems to me that this article is American-car biased, a country whose automobile manufacturers are most assuredly not first when I think of those who were first-adopters of new safety technology.

Particularly, the line about Chrysler making airbags ""standard equipment across its entire line in 1990"" makes it sound like Chrysler was the first manufacturer to standardize airbag installation.  The next paragraph indicates, however, that US cars produced after 1 April 1989 must have either airbags or automatic seat belts (latter is news to me)it seems to me that the vast majority of manufacturers opted to install airbags over seat belt systems.  However, the way the article is written, it seems like Chrysler's actions were unique and, most of all, done out of its own initiative, rather than being federally mandated.

Quite simply, Chrysler was neither the only company to take this step, nor did it have a choice in the matter. I think the line implying Chrysler did something innovative should be stricken.   KeplerNiko

1970's Implication
The US experiment in the early 1970's ended pretty quickly as I recall. Does the article mean to imply that this was ongoing?   

Maine.gov Link
Regarding link Maine.gov  How do air bags work:
Link has gone bad. Found replacement link at  but
there is little useful information there. As the link adds nothing to the article, I removed the
link entirely.  

...airbags only reduce fatalities in those wearing seatbelts by 8% 
Following up on an old point by Tekfiler, the government does not want you to know this number, since that would be clear indication of a collossal waste in terms of cost benefit analysis. So - the stat is never called out. The [[NHTSA}} page has some interesting data on how U.S. highway deaths have been declining at a slower rate than in other industrialised nations. If airbags were really all they are cracked up to be, seems that would not be true.  

It is also advised that you dont sit too close to the steering wheel because when the airbag inflates it will crush you back in your seat, stopping you from inhaling cause your crest can't go out, therefore stopping you from breathing.

 Inventor altered?? 

On 22:19, 7 October 2007 User:Happyyarn changed inventor:
John W. Hetrick -> Patrick W. Hetrick
Is this correct?? (the only change this user made..)
 

 Deleted Link 

I deleted the external link that was said to show a clip of an airbag exploding.  This link was spam. 

 Regarding age 
The article said children under 12 should always be in the back seat. I changed it to 13 because a 12 year old could get killed by an airbag.  21:48, 9 November 2007"