It's easy to convince EDC people to buy EDC things. But how do you convince non-EDC folks to buy your product? Simple: Fear. The global "car escape tool market," according to market research firm Data Insights Market, is valued at $500 this year, projected to grow 7% a year and
This article feels weirdly opposed to these things on principle, purely because it’s unlikely that they’ll be useful, but why the fuck does that matter ?
It’s not like they’re expensive, and there’s literally zero downside to having them in your car. Literal worst case scenario is that they simply do nothing. And in the event that they DO become useful, as incredibly unlikely as that might be, they can be a literal life saver.
Also, you don’t just have to use them if YOU get into a crash. You can use them to render aid if someone else gets in a crash, and is stuck in their vehicle and they’re in acute danger (otherwise, never move crash victims, wait for the paramedics to stabilise their spine)
By their some idiotic logic they use to rail against these devices, you might as well remove lightning rods from buildings or life vests from aircraft.
there’s literally zero downside to having them in your car. Literal worst case scenario is that they simply do nothing.
That IS a major downside. Relying on something that won’t work in a life-or-death situation wastes precious time. Knowing they don’t work is important so better alternatives can be prepared and planned for.
The alternative they’re advocating for is not having one at all, so no. It not working is litearlly no different from the alternative the article suggests.
This article feels weirdly opposed to these things on principle, purely because it’s unlikely that they’ll be useful, but why the fuck does that matter ?
It’s not like they’re expensive, and there’s literally zero downside to having them in your car. Literal worst case scenario is that they simply do nothing. And in the event that they DO become useful, as incredibly unlikely as that might be, they can be a literal life saver.
Also, you don’t just have to use them if YOU get into a crash. You can use them to render aid if someone else gets in a crash, and is stuck in their vehicle and they’re in acute danger (otherwise, never move crash victims, wait for the paramedics to stabilise their spine)
By their some idiotic logic they use to rail against these devices, you might as well remove lightning rods from buildings or life vests from aircraft.
That IS a major downside. Relying on something that won’t work in a life-or-death situation wastes precious time. Knowing they don’t work is important so better alternatives can be prepared and planned for.
Counting on a tool that isn’t going to work is a major downside. Especially in the life and death situations that cause you to need one.
The alternative they’re advocating for is not having one at all, so no. It not working is litearlly no different from the alternative the article suggests.
Except now you have spent money on something that doesn’t work. It’s not “no different”, it’s a waste of resources.
It’s probably AI generated click bait
Every day I grow to hate the internet just a little more for the lack of care that goes into the content
I feel this way about humanity in general and their lack of caring… In general. I welcome the apocalypse
Reject the shareholder Internet, that’s never what we enjoyed about the Internet anyways.
You’re not wrong