Garcon, be my guest.
Okay, one major problem with occupant safety is that Ford and GM both made the roofs of their SUVs paper-thin for several years in order to increase fuel economy. Hence all the broken necks in rollovers.
You can't always get what you want, Garcon. You can't keep a tiger tied to a tree on the lawn. You can't run red lights. You can't use your street as a runway for a surplus MiG-21 you bought off eBay.
Why? Because those actions would put other people in imminent danger. Mill proposes a limit on personal freedom at the point where a third party will be harmed. Even a majority of the American Libertarian party subscribe to this theory. The alternative to such a limit is anarchy.
Under current regs, I cannot buy a car which has not passed tests to demonstrate that it "sufficiently" protects it's occupants in a crash. Yet I _can_ buy a vehicle which has been _proven_ to be an increased threat to pedestrians and other motorists. I can even put "bull bars" on it to make _sure_ I kill any pedestrians I strike!
To me, this is the Harm Theory turned on it's head. I cannot take my own life in my hands, but I _can_ take steps to put all around me in increased danger.