User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 5:48:58 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't wear one and your insurance or the other guy's insurance company will reduce the payout by the % to which you can be determined to be contributorily negligent for your injuries. Chew on that. And that's the free market solution. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 5:54:17 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If we're all paying for our own medical costs, anti-gunners are fine with no guns. Unfortunately, we're moving more and more towards sharing each other's medical costs. If everyone is picking up the tab, anti-gunners are taking your guns. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 5:55:02 PM EDT
[#3]
Seat belt laws, helmet laws, large soda and sugary snack laws, etc., etc. Should you? Yes. Should there be a law? No. It's just nanny state bullshit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 5:56:49 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's my take on it and always has been. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. Yep. If I'm too stupid to wear it oh fucking well. I don't need protection from myself. That's my take on it and always has been. Seems like an odd dividing line, the seat belt doesn't offer much protection at all. Somehow to not wear a seat belt is "fucking stupid" but to not wear a helmet and/or neck protection is 100% rational. The government made up a law, used a bunch or propaganda and brainwashed a bunch of people into agreeing with the propaganda. Yep I get it, seat belts help keep people inside the car, why not use the safety protection available, but why call people "fucking stupid" for not wearing a seat belt meanwhile people riding around on motorcycles(helmet or not)are not "fucking stupid"? I use a cycle for daily transportation and ATGATT head to toe but even still I am way more vulnerable than the guy not wearing his seat belt in a car. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 5:56:51 PM EDT
[#5]
Don't want to wear your seatbelt?
Fine, don't expect the taxpayers to patch your stupid ass up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 5:58:14 PM EDT
[#6]
Looks like brainiac got his head crushed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:00:56 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Seems like an odd dividing line, the seat belt doesn't offer much protection at all. Somehow to not wear a seat belt is "fucking stupid" but to not wear a helmet and/or neck protection is 100% rational. The government made up a law, used a bunch or propaganda and brainwashed a bunch of people into agreeing with the propaganda. Yep I get it, seat belts help keep people inside the car, why not use the safety protection available, but why call people "fucking stupid" for not wearing a seat belt meanwhile people riding around on motorcycles(helmet or not)are not "fucking stupid"? I use a cycle for daily transportation and ATGATT head to toe but even still I am way more vulnerable than the guy not wearing his seat belt in a car. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. Yep. If I'm too stupid to wear it oh fucking well. I don't need protection from myself. That's my take on it and always has been. Seems like an odd dividing line, the seat belt doesn't offer much protection at all. Somehow to not wear a seat belt is "fucking stupid" but to not wear a helmet and/or neck protection is 100% rational. The government made up a law, used a bunch or propaganda and brainwashed a bunch of people into agreeing with the propaganda. Yep I get it, seat belts help keep people inside the car, why not use the safety protection available, but why call people "fucking stupid" for not wearing a seat belt meanwhile people riding around on motorcycles(helmet or not)are not "fucking stupid"? I use a cycle for daily transportation and ATGATT head to toe but even still I am way more vulnerable than the guy not wearing his seat belt in a car. Re: motorcycles, we need the donor organs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:03:05 PM EDT
[#8]
The real question is why doesnt the government mandate a helmet and nomex suit while riding in a car?
The children need to be safe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:03:16 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Re: motorcycles, we need the donor organs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. Yep. If I'm too stupid to wear it oh fucking well. I don't need protection from myself. That's my take on it and always has been. Seems like an odd dividing line, the seat belt doesn't offer much protection at all. Somehow to not wear a seat belt is "fucking stupid" but to not wear a helmet and/or neck protection is 100% rational. The government made up a law, used a bunch or propaganda and brainwashed a bunch of people into agreeing with the propaganda. Yep I get it, seat belts help keep people inside the car, why not use the safety protection available, but why call people "fucking stupid" for not wearing a seat belt meanwhile people riding around on motorcycles(helmet or not)are not "fucking stupid"? I use a cycle for daily transportation and ATGATT head to toe but even still I am way more vulnerable than the guy not wearing his seat belt in a car. Re: motorcycles, we need the donor organs. I am a donor and keep them protected the best I can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:03:38 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/21/4-kids-killed-in-pennsylvania-crash-werent-restrained-authorities-say/?intcmp=latestnews Not only just that but if I have mine on, you are in the car with me and you don't use your seat belt you can fly into me. video of someone flying inside the car You have the choice to ride or not ride with people who wear their belt, or choose not to. That you don't exercise this freedom, and instead expect the state to tell people how to take care of themselves (by ridiculous monetary punishment) tells me your views on society aren't one bit different than Nanny Bloomberg. I detest people who think like you do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:04:45 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The real question is why doesnt the government mandate a helmet and nomex suit while riding in a car? The children need to be safe. I have asked it a few times but nobody seems to have an answer, the canvas strap is plenty I guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:05:35 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How the fuck do you drive that I am going to be flying into you from the passenger seat? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/21/4-kids-killed-in-pennsylvania-crash-werent-restrained-authorities-say/?intcmp=latestnews Not only just that but if I have mine on, you are in the car with me and you don't use your seat belt you can fly into me. video of someone flying inside the car How the fuck do you drive that I am going to be flying into you from the passenger seat? lol ever hear of a roll over? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:05:46 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. People involved in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to sustain serious, life changing or fatal injuries than someone who is wearing a seatbelt. In addiiton, a person not wearing a seatbelt is far more likely to inflict injury on or kill other passengers in a vehicle in which they are travelling. I don't know what the cost is in the US, but in the UK the cost of deaths on our roads is approx £1.9 million PER FATALITY, much of which is picked up by the taxpayer - including emergency services, investigations, road closures, medical care, post-mortem, inquest, and a multitude of other costs including costs to local business and trade, interrupted services, lost working hours, traffic jams etc. The cost of an accident involving serious injury is approx £220,000. By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. Unfortunately, there a small group of people who are morons, and they think that it in some away places a imposition on them to reduce their own chances of being killed, turned into a cabbage, or otherwise maimed. There is therefore a reason why seatbelt laws were implemented in our countries. It is because some people are too dumb to recognise the consequences and wider effects of not wearing one, and the fact that everybody else ends up paying for it when things go tits up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:07:46 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can be convinced for children and then they can make the decision at 18. New Hampshire does not require seat belts or motorcycle helmets for adults. Seems to work out just fine here. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile In ND for someone under 18 not wearing a seat belt is a primary offense, in which they can be pulled over just for the seat belt. For anyone over 18 it is a secondary offense, in which it can only be enforced if you are pulled over for something else. IIRC adults aren't required to wear seat belts in the back seat. Besides that, a seat belt ticket here (like almost any traffic ticket) is little more than a slap on the wrist. Seat belt laws are bullshit. There are times that I will choose when or when not to wear one, and it's my decision. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:08:59 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Seat belt saved my life one day. Piled up my Mustang GT, and the belt did its job. Edit: I wear a seat belt because they work.....not because it is the law. What proof do you have that shows you would have been killed without a seatbelt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:11:07 PM EDT
[#16]
If you think we need seat belt laws, then you probably think we need laws mandating everything we do. What about helmets in the shower? For God's sack man!!!! we the people don't need the government taking care of us period!!!!!!!!
BTW, I wear one because I believe it's a smart thing to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:11:20 PM EDT
[#17]
We delude ourselves if we believe we are a free people when the only "right" we have is the right to obey, which is pretty much where we find ourselves these days. And that's not just about seat belts. Who’s the bigger threat to your safety, a murderer or someone who attempts suicide? The answer is obvious, Yet something strange happens when death comes to the highway, Suddenly, the murder-suicide distinction vanishes, and it’s perfectly acceptable to reduce deaths by punishing those who put only themselves at risk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:13:36 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can be convinced for children and then they can make the decision at 18. Raging libertarian or not (and I am), you're simply not going to convince me that requiring a seatbelt on a public roadway is some sort of terrible burden. That argument is fucking retarded. I'm less concerned with idiots getting injured than I am with getting injured by flying idiots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:17:11 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Motorcycles don't have seatbelts. We should ban all motorcycles, especially since you're so likely to become a projectile in a collision. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:20:50 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you also agree with being forced to lock up guns while at home in a locked safe behind a locked door? If not, then you're a twat who has no idea what he agrees with. If yes, then you're a twat period. So which is it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/21/4-kids-killed-in-pennsylvania-crash-werent-restrained-authorities-say/?intcmp=latestnews Not only just that but if I have mine on, you are in the car with me and you don't use your seat belt you can fly into me. video of someone flying inside the car Do you also agree with being forced to lock up guns while at home in a locked safe behind a locked door? If not, then you're a twat who has no idea what he agrees with. If yes, then you're a twat period. So which is it? I agree with Tyman.... Someone check to see if Hell has frozen over |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:27:41 PM EDT
[#21]
Here's a thought, when you have small children in the vehicle, don't drive like a maniac.
People are killed even with seat belts too you know, passing at high speed and losing control if her vehicle would seem to be a bigger issue in this case. Did like the guy trying to regain control without getting out of his comfy, one hand on the wheel position. If he had pulled it off it would have been awesome but he failed, looked drunk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:28:36 PM EDT
[#22]
I don't agree with seat belt laws but anyone who doesn't wear one while in a moving vehicle so equipped is a moron.
I also think that if you are so against seat belt usage, you should have to sign a waiver for medical care. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:28:46 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People involved in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to sustain serious, life changing or fatal injuries than someone who is wearing a seatbelt. In addiiton, a person not wearing a seatbelt is far more likely to inflict injury on or kill other passengers in a vehicle in which they are travelling. I don't know what the cost is in the US, but in the UK the cost of deaths on our roads is approx £1.9 million PER FATALITY, much of which is picked up by the taxpayer - including emergency services, investigations, road closures, medical care, post-mortem, inquest, and a multitude of other costs including costs to local business and trade, interrupted services, lost working hours, traffic jams etc. The cost of an accident involving serious injury is approx £220,000. By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. Unfortunately, there a small group of people who are morons, and they think that it in some away places a imposition on them to reduce their own chances of being killed, turned into a cabbage, or otherwise maimed. There is therefore a reason why seatbelt laws were implemented in our countries. It is because some people are too dumb to recognise the consequences and wider effects of not wearing one, and the fact that everybody else ends up paying for it when things go tits up. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. People involved in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to sustain serious, life changing or fatal injuries than someone who is wearing a seatbelt. In addiiton, a person not wearing a seatbelt is far more likely to inflict injury on or kill other passengers in a vehicle in which they are travelling. I don't know what the cost is in the US, but in the UK the cost of deaths on our roads is approx £1.9 million PER FATALITY, much of which is picked up by the taxpayer - including emergency services, investigations, road closures, medical care, post-mortem, inquest, and a multitude of other costs including costs to local business and trade, interrupted services, lost working hours, traffic jams etc. The cost of an accident involving serious injury is approx £220,000. By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. Unfortunately, there a small group of people who are morons, and they think that it in some away places a imposition on them to reduce their own chances of being killed, turned into a cabbage, or otherwise maimed. There is therefore a reason why seatbelt laws were implemented in our countries. It is because some people are too dumb to recognise the consequences and wider effects of not wearing one, and the fact that everybody else ends up paying for it when things go tits up. Why not helmets then? How many head injuries do seat belts prevent as compared to the protection offered by a helmet? Are there any motor racing events that don't require helmets? Why is that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:29:38 PM EDT
[#24]
This is why I support gun control laws and every other type of restrictive law.
It's for the chilluns! ETA: I see this has already been said |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:30:55 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol ever hear of a roll over? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/21/4-kids-killed-in-pennsylvania-crash-werent-restrained-authorities-say/?intcmp=latestnews Not only just that but if I have mine on, you are in the car with me and you don't use your seat belt you can fly into me. video of someone flying inside the car How the fuck do you drive that I am going to be flying into you from the passenger seat? lol ever hear of a roll over? lol it isn't that hard to keep a 4 wheeler on all for wheels millions of people do it everyday, again how the fuck are you driving that the vehicle is rolling over? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:32:16 PM EDT
[#26]
Seatbelt laws are idiocy purchased by the insurance lobby.
Having said that, I'm wearing mine, and if you're in my car you're wearing yours. My car, my rules. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:32:26 PM EDT
[#27]
Don't care for seatbelt or helmet laws, but only an idiot would not use one. The second you lose control in a car above certain speeds your not going to stay in the seat. Fall off a bike without a helmet and hit the ground or an object just right, say hello to head/brain injuries, lost teeth, broken jaw, etc...
Seatbelts and helmets have saved more lives than have not wearing them. Other wise pilots, race car drivers and racers wouldn't wear them in addition to all the other safety equip.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:34:18 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why not helmets then? How many head injuries do seat belts prevent as compared to the protection offered by a helmet? Are there any motor racing events that don't require helmets? Why is that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. People involved in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to sustain serious, life changing or fatal injuries than someone who is wearing a seatbelt. In addiiton, a person not wearing a seatbelt is far more likely to inflict injury on or kill other passengers in a vehicle in which they are travelling. I don't know what the cost is in the US, but in the UK the cost of deaths on our roads is approx £1.9 million PER FATALITY, much of which is picked up by the taxpayer - including emergency services, investigations, road closures, medical care, post-mortem, inquest, and a multitude of other costs including costs to local business and trade, interrupted services, lost working hours, traffic jams etc. The cost of an accident involving serious injury is approx £220,000. By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. Unfortunately, there a small group of people who are morons, and they think that it in some away places a imposition on them to reduce their own chances of being killed, turned into a cabbage, or otherwise maimed. There is therefore a reason why seatbelt laws were implemented in our countries. It is because some people are too dumb to recognise the consequences and wider effects of not wearing one, and the fact that everybody else ends up paying for it when things go tits up. Why not helmets then? How many head injuries do seat belts prevent as compared to the protection offered by a helmet? Are there any motor racing events that don't require helmets? Why is that? Cost vs benefit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:36:22 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. "Morally"? Did you just say "Morally"?  Financially I might see, but "Morally"? Since when is it your business to run my life?  Hey, man, that mohawk might cause someone to think you're some kind of toughguy & assault you, therefore you are not allowed to have that haircut. See how that works?
And I'm sure it's also illegal there to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and not eat balanced meals and work out, right? After all, only morons do those things...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:38:52 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shit, might as well just go full nascar set up. Chest harness, neck brace, full roll cage. If it's for the children then goddamnit let no stone go unturned! If we actually cared about safety, but it's just safety theatre... One of the cars I drive to work has a full cage and 5 point harnesses in it. :-) Can't wear my helmet in it though, it's illegal in my state. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:43:40 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People involved in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to sustain serious, life changing or fatal injuries than someone who is wearing a seatbelt. In addiiton, a person not wearing a seatbelt is far more likely to inflict injury on or kill other passengers in a vehicle in which they are travelling. I don't know what the cost is in the US, but in the UK the cost of deaths on our roads is approx £1.9 million PER FATALITY, much of which is picked up by the taxpayer - including emergency services, investigations, road closures, medical care, post-mortem, inquest, and a multitude of other costs including costs to local business and trade, interrupted services, lost working hours, traffic jams etc. The cost of an accident involving serious injury is approx £220,000. By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. Unfortunately, there a small group of people who are morons, and they think that it in some away places a imposition on them to reduce their own chances of being killed, turned into a cabbage, or otherwise maimed. There is therefore a reason why seatbelt laws were implemented in our countries. It is because some people are too dumb to recognise the consequences and wider effects of not wearing one, and the fact that everybody else ends up paying for it when things go tits up. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. People involved in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to sustain serious, life changing or fatal injuries than someone who is wearing a seatbelt. In addiiton, a person not wearing a seatbelt is far more likely to inflict injury on or kill other passengers in a vehicle in which they are travelling. I don't know what the cost is in the US, but in the UK the cost of deaths on our roads is approx £1.9 million PER FATALITY, much of which is picked up by the taxpayer - including emergency services, investigations, road closures, medical care, post-mortem, inquest, and a multitude of other costs including costs to local business and trade, interrupted services, lost working hours, traffic jams etc. The cost of an accident involving serious injury is approx £220,000. By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. Unfortunately, there a small group of people who are morons, and they think that it in some away places a imposition on them to reduce their own chances of being killed, turned into a cabbage, or otherwise maimed. There is therefore a reason why seatbelt laws were implemented in our countries. It is because some people are too dumb to recognise the consequences and wider effects of not wearing one, and the fact that everybody else ends up paying for it when things go tits up. You worry about your own country and quit trying to push your statist bullshit on me
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:43:56 PM EDT
[#32]
I'm an adult.
I don't need my Government making personal decisions for me. Saint Peter |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 6:45:26 PM EDT
[#33]
Why don't school buses have seat belts?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:00:12 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Seems like an odd dividing line, the seat belt doesn't offer much protection at all. Somehow to not wear a seat belt is "fucking stupid" but to not wear a helmet and/or neck protection is 100% rational. The government made up a law, used a bunch or propaganda and brainwashed a bunch of people into agreeing with the propaganda. Yep I get it, seat belts help keep people inside the car, why not use the safety protection available, but why call people "fucking stupid" for not wearing a seat belt meanwhile people riding around on motorcycles(helmet or not)are not "fucking stupid"? I use a cycle for daily transportation and ATGATT head to toe but even still I am way more vulnerable than the guy not wearing his seat belt in a car. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. Yep. If I'm too stupid to wear it oh fucking well. I don't need protection from myself. That's my take on it and always has been. Seems like an odd dividing line, the seat belt doesn't offer much protection at all. Somehow to not wear a seat belt is "fucking stupid" but to not wear a helmet and/or neck protection is 100% rational. The government made up a law, used a bunch or propaganda and brainwashed a bunch of people into agreeing with the propaganda. Yep I get it, seat belts help keep people inside the car, why not use the safety protection available, but why call people "fucking stupid" for not wearing a seat belt meanwhile people riding around on motorcycles(helmet or not)are not "fucking stupid"? I use a cycle for daily transportation and ATGATT head to toe but even still I am way more vulnerable than the guy not wearing his seat belt in a car. It's simple. Last Friday night I was almost hit by a driver who ran a red light, I was alert and applied the brakes early when I saw they weren't stopping but it wasn't enough. Having ridden a two wheeler for years I know what I would have done on a bike and it was the complete opposite of what I did in a vehicle that weighed that much. There was no way I was going left to avoid something coming from left because if she saw me and hit her brakes I was screwed. I yanked the wheel to the right and skidded into a double drive and luckily had the room to get it back without losing it, also didn't give her something to hit (unless she pulled left). She was going straight and accelerating so I had no option other than the one I took. If I had been on a bike I could have braked hard and simply went around her instead of reacting and getting wound up. I didn't get to sleep until 04:30 or so I was so wound up. Her actions could have changed any of this I guess and I was still lucky. A motorcyclist worse nightmare is someone stopping, then going, leaving no options, no space, no time, nowhere to go. I always felt safer on a bike because my style of riding assumes everyone else is on the road is trying to kill you. Four wheelers make you complacent and lull you to sleep then they don't give you the braking power, maneuverability, or power (often) to avoid an impact. Have I rode without a helmet? YES, and it was a calculated risk. Have I driven without a seatbelt? YES. Again, a calculated risk. Both provide more than not much. My contention has always been that motorcyclists aren't more vulnerable because they are on a motorcycle. They're more vulnerable when they act like they're in a lazy boy, arms in the air, feet sticking out like they're at a gynecologist being examined in the stirrups, and usually on a bike with a crappy rake. You drive, you decide. It's always been my take. We all must calculate our own risks, and how much is acceptable to us. I have no problem calling someone stupid then in a fit of my own stupidity doing the same after I calculate the risk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:03:45 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Morally"? Did you just say "Morally"? Financially I might see, but "Morally"? Since when is it your business to run my life? Hey, man, that mohawk might cause someone to think you're some kind of toughguy & assault you, therefore you are not allowed to have that haircut. See how that works?
And I'm sure it's also illegal there to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and not eat balanced meals and work out, right? After all, only morons do those things... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. "Morally"? Did you just say "Morally"? Financially I might see, but "Morally"? Since when is it your business to run my life? Hey, man, that mohawk might cause someone to think you're some kind of toughguy & assault you, therefore you are not allowed to have that haircut. See how that works?
And I'm sure it's also illegal there to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and not eat balanced meals and work out, right? After all, only morons do those things... Yes, morally. Morally because when you are that person who face -plants into his dashboard at 50mph before flying through the windscreen, stoving his head in and becoming nothing more than road pizza, your problems are over. However every other bugger ends up paying dealing with the aftermathl because you refused to take a sensible precaution that would see you stay alive, make sure others do not have to face the aftermath of your demise, and see the rest of us a few quid better off. We tried the whole voluntary thing. There were a bunch of people who insisted on not wearing a seatbelt. When the stats were reviewed after a few years and the costs evaluated it was clear that those refusing to wear a seatbelt were far more likely to become a fatality or incapacitated, and cost the rest of us a bloody fortune. Nobody is asking you to do something epic, nor are they asking you to do something that costs any money or any time. It's a small act that may save your life, save heartache to a lot of people and save the rest of us a lot of money. So yes, you have a moral obligation to your family, your fellow citizen and to the smooth running of business not to be "that guy" who ends up as a blood spattered mess, with 15 mile tailbacks and a road closed as a whole bunch of emergency services undertake an investigation to find out how you got deaded, those who have to clean up the mess, and those who undertake the horrible task of informing your family when you have been killed......instead of walking away with a few cuts and bruises, a bit of concussion and maybe a few broken bones. I'm not a fan of laws for laws sake. I do not believe in them. However this one has a tangible and pretty worthwhile cost/benefit associated with it. On the plus side you are also more likely to survive any accident and sustain less serious injuries if you wear seatbelt. As laws go, I than think of many other that need to be ditched first. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:07:47 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Then again if you're the driver, you don't have to give lifts to anyone who refuses to buckle up. Tell them to walk if they bitch about it. 
I don't know if the Navy really did this or not but we were always warned ... "Medical won't cover your injuries if you weren't wearing a seatbelt / helmet / etc. You'll have to pay for your own treatment." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/21/4-kids-killed-in-pennsylvania-crash-werent-restrained-authorities-say/?intcmp=latestnews Not only just that but if I have mine on, you are in the car with me and you don't use your seat belt you can fly into me. video of someone flying inside the car Then again if you're the driver, you don't have to give lifts to anyone who refuses to buckle up. Tell them to walk if they bitch about it.
Quoted:
insurance shouldn't cover if you're not wearing a seat-belt. fuck jacking up my rates to make up for idiots. I don't know if the Navy really did this or not but we were always warned ... "Medical won't cover your injuries if you weren't wearing a seatbelt / helmet / etc. You'll have to pay for your own treatment." Yes, they have what's called a line of duty investigation to determine if your behavior was negligent or in violation of a lawful order. If you get in a bar fight because you were a drunk shithead that instigated the incident, it's the same thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:09:07 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You worry about your own country and quit trying to push your statist bullshit on me Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. People involved in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to sustain serious, life changing or fatal injuries than someone who is wearing a seatbelt. In addiiton, a person not wearing a seatbelt is far more likely to inflict injury on or kill other passengers in a vehicle in which they are travelling. I don't know what the cost is in the US, but in the UK the cost of deaths on our roads is approx £1.9 million PER FATALITY, much of which is picked up by the taxpayer - including emergency services, investigations, road closures, medical care, post-mortem, inquest, and a multitude of other costs including costs to local business and trade, interrupted services, lost working hours, traffic jams etc. The cost of an accident involving serious injury is approx £220,000. By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. Unfortunately, there a small group of people who are morons, and they think that it in some away places a imposition on them to reduce their own chances of being killed, turned into a cabbage, or otherwise maimed. There is therefore a reason why seatbelt laws were implemented in our countries. It is because some people are too dumb to recognise the consequences and wider effects of not wearing one, and the fact that everybody else ends up paying for it when things go tits up. You worry about your own country and quit trying to push your statist bullshit on me Your failure to address the points in favour of an ad hominem comment belies your ignorance. You already have these laws. I merely provided some context to help inform you as to why. If you choose not to wear your seatbelt and decide to spray yourself across the road in the event of an accident, then so be it. At least you will have stuck it to "the man" right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:13:46 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol it isn't that hard to keep a 4 wheeler on all for wheels millions of people do it everyday, again how the fuck are you driving that the vehicle is rolling over? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/21/4-kids-killed-in-pennsylvania-crash-werent-restrained-authorities-say/?intcmp=latestnews Not only just that but if I have mine on, you are in the car with me and you don't use your seat belt you can fly into me. video of someone flying inside the car How the fuck do you drive that I am going to be flying into you from the passenger seat? lol ever hear of a roll over? lol it isn't that hard to keep a 4 wheeler on all for wheels millions of people do it everyday, again how the fuck are you driving that the vehicle is rolling over? Really strange things happen in vehicular accidents, shit just happens in front of you and then you react. Suspension loading and breaking traction makes things happen you wouldn't believe are even possible. It doesn't make it your fault because millions weren't put in that position that day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:14:41 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Your failure to address the points in favour of an ad hominem comment belies your ignorance. You already have these laws. I merely provided some context to help inform you as to why. If you choose not to wear your seatbelt and decide to spray yourself across the road in the event of an accident, then so be it. At least you will have stuck it to "the man" right? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Seat belt laws are bullshit. People involved in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to sustain serious, life changing or fatal injuries than someone who is wearing a seatbelt. In addiiton, a person not wearing a seatbelt is far more likely to inflict injury on or kill other passengers in a vehicle in which they are travelling. I don't know what the cost is in the US, but in the UK the cost of deaths on our roads is approx £1.9 million PER FATALITY, much of which is picked up by the taxpayer - including emergency services, investigations, road closures, medical care, post-mortem, inquest, and a multitude of other costs including costs to local business and trade, interrupted services, lost working hours, traffic jams etc. The cost of an accident involving serious injury is approx £220,000. By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. Unfortunately, there a small group of people who are morons, and they think that it in some away places a imposition on them to reduce their own chances of being killed, turned into a cabbage, or otherwise maimed. There is therefore a reason why seatbelt laws were implemented in our countries. It is because some people are too dumb to recognise the consequences and wider effects of not wearing one, and the fact that everybody else ends up paying for it when things go tits up. You worry about your own country and quit trying to push your statist bullshit on me Your failure to address the points in favour of an ad hominem comment belies your ignorance. You already have these laws. I merely provided some context to help inform you as to why. If you choose not to wear your seatbelt and decide to spray yourself across the road in the event of an accident, then so be it. At least you will have stuck it to "the man" right? We all agree it's smart and safe to wear them. However it's none of the fucking government's business (yours or mine) how we take care of ourselves. The same costs, risks and injuries can be applied to over-eating, risky sex, sports, but we're not banning those. So that shit is weak sauce. The reason we've mandated their use is feel-good nonsense so costly ticket revenue can flow like Mt. Dew through the public coffers. Period. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:23:39 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, morally. Morally because when you are that person who face -plants into his dashboard at 50mph before flying through the windscreen, stoving his head in and becoming nothing more than road pizza, your problems are over. However every other bugger ends up paying dealing with the aftermathl because you refused to take a sensible precaution that would see you stay alive, make sure others do not have to face the aftermath of your demise, and see the rest of us a few quid better off. And again I ask you: is it illegal there to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and not eat balanced meals and work out? Surely, since you're so ready to throw away individual freedoms for the "greater good", then all of those things should be illegal as well.
Honestly, I think this is gonna be one of those "agree to disagree" things, b/c we are never gonna see eye-to-eye. Maybe it's that England-vs.-'Murka thing: so far as I'm concerned, there should be about 20-30 laws on the books, tops, mostly just to protect children. Once you hit 18, if you get ground up due to your own stupidity, just your tough shit: you pay for it, bitch. I wear a seatbelt b/c I think it's common sense, not b/c mommy government wipes my nose & tells me to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:36:23 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We all agree it's smart and safe to wear them. However it's none of the fucking government's business (yours or mine) how we take care of ourselves. The same costs, risks and injuries can be applied to over-eating, risky sex, sports, but we're not banning those. So that shit is weak sauce. The reason we've mandated their use is feel-good nonsense so costly ticket revenue can flow like Mt. Dew through the public coffers. Period. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws are bullshit. People involved in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to sustain serious, life changing or fatal injuries than someone who is wearing a seatbelt. In addiiton, a person not wearing a seatbelt is far more likely to inflict injury on or kill other passengers in a vehicle in which they are travelling. I don't know what the cost is in the US, but in the UK the cost of deaths on our roads is approx £1.9 million PER FATALITY, much of which is picked up by the taxpayer - including emergency services, investigations, road closures, medical care, post-mortem, inquest, and a multitude of other costs including costs to local business and trade, interrupted services, lost working hours, traffic jams etc. The cost of an accident involving serious injury is approx £220,000. By wearing a seatbelt, it is proven that the risk of sustaining serious, life changing or fatal injuries is significantly reduced, to the extent that it makes it both financially and morally worthwhile implementing laws compelling people to wear a seat-belt. Unfortunately, there a small group of people who are morons, and they think that it in some away places a imposition on them to reduce their own chances of being killed, turned into a cabbage, or otherwise maimed. There is therefore a reason why seatbelt laws were implemented in our countries. It is because some people are too dumb to recognise the consequences and wider effects of not wearing one, and the fact that everybody else ends up paying for it when things go tits up. You worry about your own country and quit trying to push your statist bullshit on me Your failure to address the points in favour of an ad hominem comment belies your ignorance. You already have these laws. I merely provided some context to help inform you as to why. If you choose not to wear your seatbelt and decide to spray yourself across the road in the event of an accident, then so be it. At least you will have stuck it to "the man" right? We all agree it's smart and safe to wear them. However it's none of the fucking government's business (yours or mine) how we take care of ourselves. The same costs, risks and injuries can be applied to over-eating, risky sex, sports, but we're not banning those. So that shit is weak sauce. The reason we've mandated their use is feel-good nonsense so costly ticket revenue can flow like Mt. Dew through the public coffers. Period. You are seeing one effect and assuming it the root cause of the laws being implemented. This often happens when the reasons for laws being implemented are badly communicated or ignored. You are therefore seeing it as the Government dictating how you should live your life instead of seeing the real reasons behind it. The seatbelt laws are all about costs to the public purse. Same with speeding laws. There are a million ways to kill yourself and if it doesn't cost anyone anything then they wouldn't give a shit. Fatal RTCs cost everybody except the dead person a LOT of money, and commit resources that may impact on other incident.. If they can prevent you and others near you from dying to save the shitstorm that follows and the huge cost associated with it, then the law will be implemented to cater for that. If you decide to butt heads with the law and refuse to comply, then you end up facing the sanction - in this case a fine. The choice is yours at the end of the day. You do not have to comply and are free to do as you see fit, but there is a sanction attached to wilfully ignoring steps that you can take to reduce the risks, costs and pain that may result in the event of a serious accident. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:45:44 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your failure to address the points in favour of an ad hominem comment belies your ignorance. You already have these laws. I merely provided some context to help inform you as to why. If you choose not to wear your seatbelt and decide to spray yourself across the road in the event of an accident, then so be it. At least you will have stuck it to "the man" right? I don't really care for the man either, he gets a little out of control. They sold it as a if we stop you, AND THEN if you or someone in the vehicle isn't wearing one, THEN we write a ticket... TO... We'll put up cameras and officers standing at intersections writing tickets as many as we can. Meanwhile, on the interstate it's do what you want, we ain't enforcing anything today type deal... The whole thing in typical fashion was sold dishonestly. That's bad by the way, good intentions aside. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:48:23 PM EDT
[#43]
Just because it may be a good idea, doesn't mean we need a law to make it mandatory.
And screw the cop that nearly ran me off of the road while checking to see if I had my seatbelt on just to give me a $25 ticket. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:51:19 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just because it may be a good idea, doesn't mean we need a law to make it mandatory. This guy gets it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:52:15 PM EDT
[#45]
I have mine covered in spikes and wrap it around my neck.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 7:58:12 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seat belt laws, helmet laws, large soda and sugary snack laws, etc., etc. Should you? Yes. Should there be a law? No. It's just nanny state bullshit. Maybe the acid test for initiating a new law should be the question, "Are we willing to kill someone to enforce this law?" You should wear a seat belt, and if you don't I'm willing to kill you to make you wear a seat belt. You shouldn't drink sugary snacks, and if you do I'm willing to kill you to make you stop eating sugary snacks. You shouldn't do intoxicants, and if you do I'm willing to kill you to make you stop getting intoxicated. You should wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle, and I'm willing to kill you to make you wear a helmet. Let's try some other behaviors.... You shouldn't rape people, and I'm willing to kill you to stop you from raping people. You shouldn't steal other people's stuff, and I'm willing to kill you to stop you from stealing other people's stuff You shouldn't murder people, and I'm willing to kill you to stop you from killing other people. ...See how that works. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 8:02:36 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's just it. We have to get away from this idea that we're going pass laws for everything. Every law is potentially a gun pointed at you. That's all laws are. We create laws when we as a society believe it's worth pointing guns at people to make them behave a certain way. Some behaviors are worth pointing guns at people. Seatbelt laws, large soda laws, helmet laws, "private" intoxication laws, and all the other progressive laws we have like them, aren't. If you use the dumbass excuse that we're all paying for each other's medical care, then the problem is we're paying for each other's medical care, we need to stop that. Collectivist and "progressive ideologies can be used to kill all individual liberty. "...hey it takes a village." Oh, and before you say "it's not a gun pointed at you...it's just a ticket". ALL laws can culminate in violence. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws, helmet laws, large soda and sugary snack laws, etc., etc. Should you? Yes. Should there be a law? No. It's just nanny state bullshit. That's just it. We have to get away from this idea that we're going pass laws for everything. Every law is potentially a gun pointed at you. That's all laws are. We create laws when we as a society believe it's worth pointing guns at people to make them behave a certain way. Some behaviors are worth pointing guns at people. Seatbelt laws, large soda laws, helmet laws, "private" intoxication laws, and all the other progressive laws we have like them, aren't. If you use the dumbass excuse that we're all paying for each other's medical care, then the problem is we're paying for each other's medical care, we need to stop that. Collectivist and "progressive ideologies can be used to kill all individual liberty. "...hey it takes a village." Oh, and before you say "it's not a gun pointed at you...it's just a ticket". ALL laws can culminate in violence. Holy crap that is brilliant.  Cuts right to the core of it. I keep trying to get libtards to see that, usually on tax issues: if I don't cough up the tax money, they will send men with guns to forcibly take it from me, so how is this one bit different than theft? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 8:02:58 PM EDT
[#48]
Seat belt laws were the start of the nanny state. Mandating personal choice is the downfall of freedom.
Seatbelts Cigarettes Helmets Food choice Before too long it will be guns, storage of guns, etc Slippery slope Shame that many here love the nanny state |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 8:03:40 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe the acid test for initiating a new law should be the question, "Are we willing to kill someone to enforce this law?" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Seat belt laws, helmet laws, large soda and sugary snack laws, etc., etc. Should you? Yes. Should there be a law? No. It's just nanny state bullshit. Maybe the acid test for initiating a new law should be the question, "Are we willing to kill someone to enforce this law?" And this, too.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2014 8:07:34 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And again I ask you: is it illegal there to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and not eat balanced meals and work out? Surely, since you're so ready to throw away individual freedoms for the "greater good", then all of those things should be illegal as well.
Honestly, I think this is gonna be one of those "agree to disagree" things, b/c we are never gonna see eye-to-eye. Maybe it's that England-vs.-'Murka thing: so far as I'm concerned, there should be about 20-30 laws on the books, tops, mostly just to protect children. Once you hit 18, if you get ground up due to your own stupidity, just your tough shit: you pay for it, bitch. I wear a seatbelt b/c I think it's common sense, not b/c mommy government wipes my nose & tells me to. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Yes, morally. Morally because when you are that person who face -plants into his dashboard at 50mph before flying through the windscreen, stoving his head in and becoming nothing more than road pizza, your problems are over. However every other bugger ends up paying dealing with the aftermathl because you refused to take a sensible precaution that would see you stay alive, make sure others do not have to face the aftermath of your demise, and see the rest of us a few quid better off. And again I ask you: is it illegal there to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and not eat balanced meals and work out? Surely, since you're so ready to throw away individual freedoms for the "greater good", then all of those things should be illegal as well.
Honestly, I think this is gonna be one of those "agree to disagree" things, b/c we are never gonna see eye-to-eye. Maybe it's that England-vs.-'Murka thing: so far as I'm concerned, there should be about 20-30 laws on the books, tops, mostly just to protect children. Once you hit 18, if you get ground up due to your own stupidity, just your tough shit: you pay for it, bitch. I wear a seatbelt b/c I think it's common sense, not b/c mommy government wipes my nose & tells me to. Only you don't pay for it.....because you are dead. Everybody else has to pay for it. That's the point.
The cigarettes and alcohol argument is a poor one. They don't really compare to the seatbelt question. For a start ciggies and booze are taxed heavily which immediately changes the dynamic of the situation. Prohibition has been shown not to work as people will simply get their fill from black market sources. It would be more expensive to police a ban and still have to deal with the consequences of cig and booze use than it would to legalise and tax it to offset the costs. Smokers and drinkers can still function in a modern society as members of the workforce and contribute taxes even if they may reduce their lifespan into retirement. The dynamic for cigarettes and alcohol is very different to seat-belts because seatbelt use is not taxed. Whereas with alcohol and cigs there is a cost to the taxpayer associated with their use and abuse, there is a benefit to the taxpayer associated with wearing a seatbelt. Therefore it is cost effective to implement and enforce laws which encourage people to use a seatbelt and reduce the potential costs and risk in the event of an accident, and the bonus is that those who do not comply face a small on the spot fine. The Govt wouldn't and indeed didn't give a shit about your safety in your car until someone pointed out how much accidents were costing and ways to reduce the severity of the injuries and numbers of fatalities were implemented. This is all about money and has nothing to do with "mommy Govt". |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
