[chris_1001]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

I think it is fine to have the choice if you are prepared to have a sticker in the car that reads......

"I do not wear a seatbelt, so in the case of an accident do not call the emergency services and waste an ambulance on me."

That then gives the emergency services a choice whether they send an ambulance to you or to someone else first. Fair?

I knew I would get some crap over what I wrote. But unlike the UK (which you are from it seems) this is a free country and we should make out own choices. Look at why we left England to form this country. We wanted to make our own choices and not have to be forced by our goverment or other people with their own oppinions to do things we do not wish too or dont believe in.

Since motorcycles don't have seatbelts, would you let somone die on the side of the road who was hit by a car driver on the cell phone while putting on makeup since they were wearing their seatbelt?

Serioulsy, we should have the right to choose, period.

If you think I should be left to die on the side of the road because I did not wear my seatbelt thats an oppinion you have the right to have/voice. But I think it's wrong to let me die simply because I did not wear one But you think it's right... Isn't freedom of speech great?

[SpecC]

^isn't it illegal to not wear one? Everywhere you go around here, you're told to wear one or you get fined. My mom even got pulled over once for my brother in the backseat not wearing one. Good eye on that cop!

[chris_1001]

Originally Posted by SpecC

^isn't it illegal to not wear one? Everywhere you go around here, you're told to wear one or you get fined. My mom even got pulled over once for my brother in the backseat not wearing one. Good eye on that cop!

Correct, it's illegal not to wear one in most if not all states.

Thats what pi$$es me off most... the Goverment is always deciding whats best for us... AND making money off it.

So sick of being told what to do now that I'm over 18...

Years ago the State of Ma required the use of seatbelts for one year, then had a vote to see if it should stay or go. The MA residents voted to get rid of it after the vote and the state said tough and kept it...

So we said no, and the goverment vetoed our vote... So much for the voice of the people...

[NPDAN]

Yea, I feel naked even sitting in the car in my garage without a seatbelt on...

[danimal]

Originally Posted by chris_1001

Correct, it's illegal not to wear one in most if not all states.

Thats what pi$$es me off most... the Goverment is always deciding whats best for us... AND making money off it.

Would you find it acceptable if the government spent taxpayer money to educate people about seatbelt use instead of making it a law? Just curious.

I've always thought mandatory seatbelt enforcement was a good thing because it means less people needlessly dying or becoming severely injured/crippled (and greatly reduces health care costs, burden on hospitals/paramedics, injury lawsuits, etc.), but I do understand why libertarians hate laws like that.

Someone also brought up an interesting point: any unbelted person in a vehicle can become a projectile in an accident. This means unbelted people could actually injure belted people (think what it would feel like if 200 pounds of flesh and bones came flying toward you at 50 mph). If there's no law requiring people to wear their seatbelts, this mean responsible belted people could still get injured and have no legal recourse if they do. Just a thought.

-Dan

[gIzzE]

Originally Posted by chris_1001

I knew I would get some crap over what I wrote. But unlike the UK (which you are from it seems) this is a free country and we should make out own choices. Look at why we left England to form this country. We wanted to make our own choices and not have to be forced by our goverment or other people with their own oppinions to do things we do not wish too or dont believe in.

Since motorcycles don't have seatbelts, would you let somone die on the side of the road who was hit by a car driver on the cell phone while putting on makeup since they were wearing their seatbelt?

Serioulsy, we should have the right to choose, period.

If you think I should be left to die on the side of the road because I did not wear my seatbelt thats an oppinion you have the right to have/voice. But I think it's wrong to let me die simply because I did not wear one But you think it's right... Isn't freedom of speech great?

From what I can gather the States is no more free than the UK, and in some ways less so, but I don't get what that has to do with this really.

Look, I agree with you but we also have a wonderful thing over here called The Natioanl Health Service, which means we don't have to pay for A&E, operations, doctors etc. etc. so I guess I look at it a little differently.
The way I see it is this, if a Paramedic gets called to an RTA and there are two people lying there, one with a belt on and one in another car without which one do you think deserves to get the treatment first?? The one who did everything they could to help themselves or the one who chose to no bother??

I just think we have to take some responsability for ourselves. I know 2 people who have died from not wearing a belt, do you think if they were given another chance they may consider putting one on this time round?

That land of the free crap is exactly that, crap, more like land of the selfish!!

However I do still agree with you.

[mjh93sa]

Originally Posted by chris_1001

I knew I would get some crap over what I wrote. But unlike the UK (which you are from it seems) this is a free country and we should make out own choices. Look at why we left England to form this country. We wanted to make our own choices and not have to be forced by our goverment or other people with their own oppinions to do things we do not wish too or dont believe in.

Yes people should be free to make their own decisions in such cases that the effects of these do not adversely effect the majority of the population. In this case the wearing of a seatbelt does not fall into this category and so the legal enforcement of such wearing is merely common sense.

When a non seatbelt wearing individual is involved in an accident it is more normally a more serious event, requiring more medical attention and vehicle repair. The increased costs are bourne by the rest of the population through increased taxation and/or insurance costs. Not to mention loss of tax revenue from those removed from the workplace. Though there is a darwinian argument regarding those removed from the gene pool.

Why should normal decent people who adhere to the commonsense wearing of a seatbelt subsidise those that don't?

Originally Posted by chris_1001

Since motorcycles don't have seatbelts, would you let somone die on the side of the road who was hit by a car driver on the cell phone while putting on makeup since they were wearing their seatbelt?

Motorcycles don't have seatbelts, but riders do have the option of wearing a helmet, leathers, body armour and appropriate boots. These can be likened to a seatbelt in terms of common sense accident protection. In the same way that someone who doesn't wear a seatbelt is daft, so is a rider without a helmet in jeans, a t-shirt and trainers.

Originally Posted by chris_1001

Serioulsy, we should have the right to choose, period.

Where do you draw the line? You want the right to choose whether or not to stop at a red light?

Originally Posted by chris_1001

If you think I should be left to die on the side of the road because I did not wear my seatbelt thats an oppinion you have the right to have/voice. But I think it's wrong to let me die simply because I did not wear one But you think it's right... Isn't freedom of speech great?

I think all that gIzzE was getting at is that as you have placed yourself at greater risk of injury through not wearing a seatbelt, you should therefore be awarded a lower priority for care than somebody who has done everything to mitigate the danger that they have placed themselves in. To which I whole heartedly concurr.

Originally Posted by chris_1001

...when I thought I might be getting pulled over Id put it on quick...

We have had the law here in MA for years (I started driving before the law), but I just hated wearing one. Plus I did not like that it was a law. This is a free country and it should be a choice, period.

You get used to it quickly and the attitude of not wearing it just because you didn't like the law.. but put it on if they showed up? To me that's just asinine.

In the final analysis, the seatbelt take a couple of seconds to put on and could save your life, or those of your friends if you are a passenger. What reasoned logical argument can anyone give not to wear one?

[chris_1001]

Originally Posted by danimal

Would you find it acceptable if the government spent taxpayer money to educate people about seatbelt use instead of making it a law? Just curious.

I've always thought mandatory seatbelt enforcement was a good thing because it means less people needlessly dying or becoming severely injured/crippled (and greatly reduces health care costs, burden on hospitals/paramedics, injury lawsuits, etc.), but I do understand why libertarians hate laws like that.

-Dan

Like most things, the government should stay out of people’s lives at this level. Let some pro seatbelt group pay for ad's and education.

I don't smoke (OK, the occasional cigar, but I never inhaled...) and I think it causes a lot of deaths. But it's should be your decision to smoke or not. By the time you are 18 and of legal smoking age you have been told its bad, dangerous etc. so now its your choice... Smoke if you want, you were warned... IT'S YOUR BODY/LIFE make your own choices and suffer the consequences of your decision.

Now back to seatbelts, they ARE a good thing and you should wear one. But it simply should be a personal choice.

I would rather NOT wear one. But I know its good for me to wear one. I do now because of my choice in cars, not because I was breaking the law (I’m now a criminal for failing to buckle up?) and breaking the law is wrong… Should I have always worn one, yeah… but I wanted to decide to…

I ride a motorcycle both street and dirt so I’m at risk there too. Should we ban them as it’s dangerous and bad for us? It’s a choice and I know the risks.

Face it, the seatbelt law is about revenue and the insurance companies trying to save money on claims. The fact that it saves lives is secondary… Sadly…

[SpecC]

^I don't think it is secondary. It's one of those things that you don't need, but if anything was to ever happen, you would be damn glad you had it on. With the number of dumb drivers around on the roads of the US, I'm glad the seat belt law is there!

[chris_1001]

Remember I’m not saying it’s OK to not wear one…

Originally Posted by gIzzE

From what I can gather the States is no more free than the UK, and in some ways less so, but I don't get what that has to do with this really.

No country is free anymore… But that is another thread , but my point was freedom of choice.

Originally Posted by gIzzE

I just think we have to take some responsability for ourselves. I know 2 people who have died from not wearing a belt, do you think if they were given another chance they may consider putting one on this time round?

Right, take responsibility for ourselves. That’s my point, it’s up to us. Sure they would!!!!

Originally Posted by mjh93sa

Yes people should be free to make their own decisions in such cases that the effects of these do not adversely effect the majority of the population. In this case the wearing of a seatbelt does not fall into this category and so the legal enforcement of such wearing is merely common sense.

When a non seatbelt wearing individual is involved in an accident it is more normally a more serious event, requiring more medical attention and vehicle repair. The increased costs are bourne by the rest of the population through increased taxation and/or insurance costs. Not to mention loss of tax revenue from those removed from the workplace. Though there is a darwinian argument regarding those removed from the gene pool.

Why should normal decent people who adhere to the commonsense wearing of a seatbelt subsidise those that don't?

I have insurance. If “I” get hurt how do I burden you?

If you’re looking for my loss of tax revenue for the time I’m out of work to help welfare people or so that government can spend it another war? Frankly that sounds a bit socialist… Ever stand in line behind someone with food stamps in a grocery store? I wish I ate that well… As for Wars, I make money off wars (due to my job/biz)…

Originally Posted by mjh93sa

Where do you draw the line? You want the right to choose whether or not to stop at a red light?

You know that’s not part of this discussion and irrelevant. THAT can cause the death of someone else. Thereby no longer fitting this discussion.

Originally Posted by mjh93sa

You get used to it quickly and the attitude of not wearing it just because you didn't like the law.. but put it on if they showed up? To me that's just asinine.

I would put it on to save me from getting a ticket because even though I don’t agree with the law, the cop is not going to care and write me up. I’d have to pay so the town/state can fund something that is unrelated to the use (or non use) of seatbelts. It would be nice if all that seatbelt money was put into a pool for driver education, driver safety, etc. But it’s not.

The government is more focused on this seatbelt issue than on cell phones, lack of driver ed, people eat, drink, shave, put on makeup, read etc while driving… THESE THINGS KILL OTHER PEOPLE. Seatbelts only kill ourselves… Hell, how many of us complained about the lack of cup holders on BMW’s for years…?

As for triage priority… I think who is ever in the worst shape seatbelt gets first priority OR if the worst one is so bad off that they are not worth helping and the other would die to neglect.

I don’t think EMT's should have the right to choose who is worth saving or attending to period. What if a mother of three did not wear a seat belt and the drug dealer that got hit by her did? By your logic the wrong person would have been saved (in my opinion). So that cannot be a good criteria for that decision…

ANYWAY… Just saying it should be a choice and not a law… And now that my BMW “makes me” now I do it… Someday I’ll be used to it… Just not today…

PS: I have ridden many times with no helmet

[chris_1001]

Originally Posted by SpecC

^I don't think it is secondary. It's one of those things that you don't need, but if anything was to ever happen, you would be damn glad you had it on. With the number of dumb drivers around on the roads of the US, I'm glad the seat belt law is there!

To clarify, I meant the reason for the "law" was for monetary reasons first and saving lives was seconday to that. Sure it's (saving lives) a great by product.

But think how less congested traffic would be if more people did not wear one? KIDDING!!!!!!!!!!!!

[danimal]

Originally Posted by chris_1001

Like most things, the government should stay out of people’s lives at this level. Let some pro seatbelt group pay for ad's and education.

What if there were no pro-seatbelt group? Or there were one, but they didn't have enough of a budget to handle the responsibility of educating the entire populace? Government is far from ideal (wasteful, inefficient, bureaucratic, etc.), but it is equipped to handle projects that would simply be too large for a small non-profit organization.

Originally Posted by chris_1001

Face it, the seatbelt law is about revenue and the insurance companies trying to save money on claims. The fact that it saves lives is secondary… Sadly…

Wouldn't surprise me if you're right. Insurance co. lobby works on legislators until they pass the law. But the fact is, saving lives is saving lives, whether the lawmakers intentions were noble or not.

It's very hard for "rational" types to understand why "intuitive" types do the things they do Seatbelt = good ==> I don't want to wear it. BZZZ. ERROR. Does not compute

-Dan

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by Moderato

When I first started driving, many moons ago, it still was common for people not to wear seatbelts. Especially with me and my teenage friends it wasn't "cool" to wear the seatbelt. At the time I had a good friend who's father was a detective and I guess because of what his father told him about accidents everyday he always wore his seatbelt, and that rubbed off on me. I'm so used to wearing the seatbelt now that It just feels wrong if I don't have it on. In fact I'd say that I don't feel safe if I don't have it on, so I always wear it and I tell everyone that gets in the car to buckle up too, whether they like it or not.

I don't feel safe without a belt either.

When I started driving in the late 1970s I began wearing seatbelts. I have always worn them since then.

When I am driving, children must buckle up. Adults usually do buckle up when they see me do the same (in my bimmer a front passenger certainly does because of the chime).

From reading this thread, it's apparent that I had better make it policy that everyone in my car must buckle up, or we don't roll.

EDIT: In Idaho where I live, wearing seatbelts is required by law, but you cannot be stopped for it. It is an add-on ticket for those who don't comply with the law.

In Idaho helmets are not required for motorcyclists. They should be. A lot of motorcycle clubs ride through Idaho, in part because they can go helmetless.

Cutting off insurance for beltless/helmetless might help to change people's actions, but it will not reduce the cost of taking care of invalids. It will just fall on the taxpayer if not insurance.

[chris_1001]

Originally Posted by danimal

What if there were no pro-seatbelt group? Or there were one, but they didn't have enough of a budget to handle the responsibility of educating the entire populace? Government is far from ideal (wasteful, inefficient, bureaucratic, etc.), but it is equipped to handle projects that would simply be too large for a small non-profit organization.

Once a few kids get killed from lack of seatbelts there is be a pro-seatbelt group…

Look how the safety seats for kids is more of a run by the people project… I see click it or ticket bill boards and signs, but never do I see the government putting up signs to remind parents about using safety seats, not using cell phones, eating drinking etc... Better yet how about all this road rage stuff…?

Originally Posted by danimal

Wouldn't surprise me if you're right. Insurance co. lobby works on legislators until they pass the law. But the fact is, saving lives is saving lives, whether the lawmakers intentions were noble or not.

Sadly I am pretty sure that I’m right… did you know back in the 80’s or 90’s Geico insurance gave free radar guns to police departments? They said it was to help slow people down and increase safety etc. but all it did was make them more money by the people who were caught. That’s what it’s allllllll about… Your life and that of your families are not truly the motivation behind all of this…

Originally Posted by danimal

It's very hard for "rational" types to understand why "intuitive" types do the things they do Seatbelt = good ==> I don't want to wear it. BZZZ. ERROR. Does not compute

Are you suggesting people are rational or intuitive?!??!?!?!

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by chris_1001

Correct, it's illegal not to wear one in most if not all states.

Thats what pi$$es me off most... the Goverment is always deciding whats best for us... AND making money off it.

So sick of being told what to do now that I'm over 18...

Years ago the State of Ma required the use of seatbelts for one year, then had a vote to see if it should stay or go. The MA residents voted to get rid of it after the vote and the state said tough and kept it...

So we said no, and the goverment vetoed our vote... So much for the voice of the people...

I tend to go along with freedom, but on this I tend to disagree.

Driving a car is a priviledge, not a right. This is why you must be licensed to drive.

Like it or not, we all pay for people who don't comply with this law (whether that is insurance rates or government hand-outs). Since I am helping to pay for your ignorance when you suffer from it, I have some degree of say about the legality of what you do. (This can extend to much more than seatbelts.)

If you don't want legal intervention to force your hand to belt-up, then change how the cost is spread around so that others don't have to pay for your poor choices.

[danimal]

Originally Posted by chris_1001

Are you suggesting people are rational or intuitive?!??!?!?!

I would NEVER do such a thing

-Dan

[ChadE]

two words... pre-determined destiny i very rarely ware mine for that very reason. I think that if your gonna die you will die if your gonna live you will live, if you have your seat belt on and you live then it was supposed to happen like that if you dont have it on and you die it was supposed to happen like that, and vice versa. You get my drift...the same reason stone wall jackson would ride his horse on the front lines right in the middle of a gun fight because he believed in pre-determined destiny.

[danimal]

Originally Posted by chade7320

two words... pre-determined destiny i very rarely ware mine for that very reason. I think that if your gonna die you will die if your gonna live you will live, if you have your seat belt on and you live then it was supposed to happen like that if you dont have it on and you die it was supposed to happen like that, and vice versa. You get my drift...the same reason stone wall jackson would ride his horse on the front lines right in the middle of a gun fight because he believed in pre-determined destiny.

Very nicely explained. Not sure if it was in answer to my question, but I like it. I don't agree with it--but I like it

-Dan

[gIzzE]

Originally Posted by chade7320

two words... pre-determined destiny i very rarely ware mine for that very reason. I think that if your gonna die you will die if your gonna live you will live, if you have your seat belt on and you live then it was supposed to happen like that if you dont have it on and you die it was supposed to happen like that, and vice versa. You get my drift...the same reason stone wall jackson would ride his horse on the front lines right in the middle of a gun fight because he believed in pre-determined destiny.

haha - excellent!

Let me tell you a story. When my father was in Delhi in the 80's, he sat in a hotel bar with an Indian guy, he owned a shoe factory that my father used to deal with, they sat there after drinking 2 bottles of Red and knocked back 10 maybe 15 Scotches. The factory owner asked somone to bring his car round to the front of the hotel so he could drive home. My father said that there was no way he should be driving, he could hardly walk!!
But he explained that in his religion they believed in 'pre-determined desinity' and it was not his time to die, and if it is not your time then it doesn't matter that he is totalled.
He made it less than a mile before he hit the truck head on and killed him instantly.

Pre-determined desinity my ass!!!!

[ChadE]

then obviously it was his time to die, you cant believe in pre-determined destiny and think you know where your gonna die? Thats just dumb, i believe that regardless of what i do weather it be jump off a building or not ware my seat belt im doing that action for a reason and if I am supposed to live through that action i will if not i wont, its very simple. If i get in the car and decide to put my seat belt on in the morning (which sometimes i do) its because i get a feeling i should if i dont get that feeling that i should put it on then i dont, its all happening to me for a reason whatever i do.

(mabey the jump off the building thing was a little extream but you get the idea)

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by chade7320

two words... pre-determined destiny i very rarely ware mine for that very reason. I think that if your gonna die you will die if your gonna live you will live, if you have your seat belt on and you live then it was supposed to happen like that if you dont have it on and you die it was supposed to happen like that, and vice versa. You get my drift...the same reason stone wall jackson would ride his horse on the front lines right in the middle of a gun fight because he believed in pre-determined destiny.

That is about the goofiest thing I have heard.

[mjh93sa]

Originally Posted by chris_1001

I have insurance. If “I” get hurt how do I burden you?

Because insurers will balance the cost across all of their policies. More cost through greater injury means greater rises for everybody, not just those who cause the higher cost. Though they will of course see higher than average premiums themselves in the future.

Originally Posted by chris_1001

You know that’s not part of this discussion and irrelevant. THAT can cause the death of someone else. Thereby no longer fitting this discussion.

So can not wearing a seatbelt. Either as a rear seat passenger crushing a front seat occupant, or becoming a projectile in an accident when in the front seat.

Originally Posted by chris_1001

The government is more focused on this seatbelt issue than on cell phones, lack of driver ed, people eat, drink, shave, put on makeup, read etc while driving… THESE THINGS KILL OTHER PEOPLE.

I agree whole heartedly. I think that all of the above should be baned. In the UK the catch all of "driving without due care and attention" can be applied to all of these and there is also specific legislation for using any hand held communication device. Personally I think that smoking should be added to the list. If the above are dangerous then having a small fire in the car is as well.

Originally Posted by chris_1001

Seatbelts only kill ourselves… Hell, how many of us complained about the lack of cup holders on BMW’s for years…?

I like the fact my car has no cupholders. Food and drink is stored in the boot, certainly not eaten in my car.

Originally Posted by chade7320

two words... pre-determined destiny i very rarely ware mine for that very reason. I think that if your gonna die you will die if your gonna live you will live, if you have your seat belt on and you live then it was supposed to happen like that if you dont have it on and you die it was supposed to happen like that, and vice versa. You get my drift...the same reason stone wall jackson would ride his horse on the front lines right in the middle of a gun fight because he believed in pre-determined destiny.

Or was it pre-determined that you have a car with seatbelts and all the other gizmo's and you rewrite your desitiny by not wearing them?