John Adams is probably better described as an expert on risk than as a blogger, but we'll let that pass. A commenter has accused him of being complicit in the death of a driver in New Zealand. The driver was not wearing a seatbelt when killed, an offence he'd been convicted for many times previously, and the commenter reckons Adams is to blame because of his stated views on seatbelts. (OK, so the guy was also high on drugs too, but....)

I'm reading Adams' book "Risk" at the moment, and I find his arguments quite convincing. In essence he says that if you wear a seatbelt, you are probably going to driver more recklessly than if you aren't. So while a seatbelt reduces the risk of injury if you're in a crash, it also makes you more likely to have a crash in the first place.

This is perhaps all a bit subtle for the commenter in question who reckons that Prof Adams has been campaigning for people not to wear seatbelts. If he (the commenter) was consistent he would also be cheering Adams' "campaign" every time a pedestrian was knocked over and killed: if people weren't wearing seatbelts, they'd never drive so fast.