ArchaeoEejit
19859
76
0
part 1
part 2
anti-terrorism ad part 1
part 2
part 3
joke. part 1
part 2
part 3
Jul 29, 2024 10:46 AM
ArchaeoEejit
19859
76
0
part 1
part 2
anti-terrorism ad part 1
part 2
part 3
joke. part 1
part 2
part 3
amoth
this is really uplifting
ChewyTheWookie
...then I heard the opening chords to "Cat's in the Cradle" and knyew I was right fooked
SophieClockwise
Meanwhile, in NZ:
HunglikeaHamster
epistlero
Statistically more people die in car accidents wearing seatbelts than not.
epistlero
I'd like to think imgurians were a bit more rational than your average person, but voting down my comment belies that fact, yes of course it's a misleading statistic but it is of course true, that's why it's interesting.
contextisimportant
... and then you put in the numbers "how many have been wearing a seatbelt and no car accident happened" and look who is represented "accordingly" in each chart...
Wookieoo7
Bloody hell and I thought some of our Aussie ads had no chill.
contextisimportant
#2 my friend doesn't get it - "three dead in this vehicle" while 3 of 4 people used seatbelts? And only one seatbelt user survived?
Hekatombe
Loose items (like a person not strapped in) in a car during a crash will fly around and hurt you
contextisimportant
k, thanks, told him. Finds it on the one hand overdramatic to point to the bystanders and then again necessary to point it out - as in many cases the "guilty one" has much less direct problems.
Hekatombe
Definitely overdramatic. But still it has a point
ArchaeoEejit
point to bystanders? hes talking on a radio.
contextisimportant
the ad itself is all about "people around the accident that did nothing to cause the accident yet their little mistakes (& unawareness) made it worse during the worst case: someone else effecting you directly with their actions"
Would "accident victim" describe it much better? I mean, _right before_ one becomes a victim?
(and no, I'm not talking about the paramedic, just the intention of the ad)
ArchaeoEejit
no sorry, youve totally lost me.