Seat Belt Laws

one thing i will say as to the defense of seatbelt laws is that if you crash into someone and it is somehow your fault. if that person DIED, you go to jail. so i would perfer the dumb fuck live =]. i agree for the most part with you though.

Actually, I was under the impression that in some (maybe most) cases, failure to be wearing a seat belt can remove some accountability from the person at fault for the accident.

So long as medical care is subsidized in all the ways it is there will be a social cost to endangering yourself. I completely agree with the sentiment, but I can understand the law. Still, a lot of people don't seem to grasp that a good idea doesn't necessarily make a good law. If you ask me, the government should only be concernced with public goods (defense, education, etc) and enforcing contracts. But I live in Boston where you can't put a potted plant outside your window without three police detectives stopping traffic for you so FML.

but you can have a pot plant in boston now, can't you!

i dont have any problem with these kind of laws. they are totally logic and im absolutely positive in government retstrictions as long as it's for a good benefit. but i guess that's totally dependent on what philosophy you have. liberty of freedom, letting it loose, is probably what could cause detrimental consequences, not the opposite way around.

and no im not against all this freedom stuff, but i also think in order for a country to work it has to be limited in some ways (obviously a balance).

can give you an example of why too much freedom has it's negative effects. in swedish schools for example the climate is getting tougher and tougher and it's all because of the freedom kids nowadays have. they see rights and no obligations. a teacher can't tell them to shut the fuck up because they don't think she has the right to tell them so. it has completely lost it's authoritative state which is directly a result of too much freedom and too much liberty of rights.

"Even still, if you think it's reasonable for the government to force you to wear a seat belt, by definition, you must also think it is reasonable for the government to ration food so that people will not become obese, right?"

yes.

On February 22 2009 10:53 nolan wrote: but you can have a pot plant in boston now, can't you!

lol true

On February 22 2009 11:07 SpasticInk wrote: "Even still, if you think it's reasonable for the government to force you to wear a seat belt, by definition, you must also think it is reasonable for the government to ration food so that people will not become obese, right?" yes.

lolwat

Go to court.
Get Alan Shore.

On February 22 2009 11:15 ReDDcaFFe wrote: Go to court. Get Alan Shore.

Hahahaha yes! I love Boston Legal! I'm so sad it's over now. I completely agree with you Nolan in terms of your sentiment about drug law. Drug law is absolutely fucking ridiculous and really should get the most disgusting overhaul considering all the problems it causes. In fact I had an entire 3rd year Criminology class based on drug policy taught by a guy who's been a Lawyer for 20 years and an activist who is very against the current drug law policies around the world. Was really interesting even if it was just the same argument every week.

That being said the seat-belt law reasoning likely revolves around the costs of treatment for those who get injured because they were not wearing a seat-belt and also the loss of productivity when someone dies because they were not wearing it not to mention the ripple effect it will have on those connected to them and perhaps even dependent upon them financially. The problem is as you say the snowball effect of such legislation. Where do we decide what is okay for the government to draw a line on and what is not. For instance should laws be made to eliminate obesity or perhaps garbage production or smoking etc. All things that end up costing the public a lot of money and plenty of Grey-Areas.

However I don't think it makes much sense at all to have an absolute resistance to all forms of policy that encourage on civil liberties. I think each policy should be looked at as a case by case basis in a free and democratic society and the population should be allowed to decide whether they support it or not. If the vast majority of the population agrees to the policy and thinks it a good idea then you end up in a situation of greatest good for the greatest number. Not that this last statement hasn't been used to do some terrible things. Ironically this stuff is kind of related to the Crimes of The Powerful fourth year class I'm taking right now and writing an essay for.

/End erratic rant/commentary

they make a seatbelt law mostly because of the stupid people that drive while are drunk.

no rules = no punishment = more stupid people killing themselves and other people.

stupid people killing themselves = good for humanity

I agree wholeheartedly , let stupid people die. No more helmet/seat belt laws and fines , gambling with your life should be a right for everyone.
If there were no such rules people might actually start thinking more about what's best for themselves, instead of imagining a state running around with a safety net trying to help those who don't think. Or perhaps the stupid ppl would all eventually all die and there would be no more need for such laws.

On February 22 2009 11:53 bongky wrote: they make a seatbelt law mostly because of the stupid people that drive while are drunk. no rules = no punishment = more stupid people killing themselves and other people.

seat belts and helmets have nothing to do with endangering someone else

The guy not wearing a seatbelt endangers everyone else in the car, not wearing a seatbelt can hurt others.

stop bitching like a girl. in uk we have mandatory seat belts and funnily enough these kinds of laws actually get people to take notice of these things and do them (like not having your dog shit everywhere which is a common courtesy but no one bothered with before it became illegal and now is socially unacceptable). it saves lives so its a good thing

go to some country (like iran) where they have a traffic system but no traffic laws and people drive like shit- down the wrong side of the road, dont abide by lanes, turn into incoming traffic, dont obey lights, never stop for pedestrians (just slow down/swerve around you)... traffic accidents are humongous but then again drivers deserve their liberties

On February 22 2009 12:29 Orome wrote: The guy not wearing a seatbelt endangers everyone else in the car, not wearing a seatbelt can hurt others.

This post wins

In Virginia it's a law and they can pull u over for not wearing a seatbelt. I don't see anyone who doesn't like it. Hell, I feel unsafe riding with someone in a car when they're not wearing their seatbelt.

seat belt laws, air bags, and crumple frames increase how often drivers crash. if you're driving around in a bubble that prevents you from dying, you're a lot less likely to care about getting in a crash. the answer to driver safety problems is to attach a bayonet to the steering column and angle the bayonet toward the driver's chest.

the other problem with these safety measures is that without serious, life-threatening injuries to drivers and passengers, there's a lot less opportunity to harvest the organs of "cadaveric" donors (still living but non-functioning, in this case). safe cars limit how often stupid people's organs can be transplanted into smart people. on this forum there should be a huge push for a return to the days of good old american rolling iron.

Doomer brings up a valid point, also if you fly through the windshield you could potential hit someone however unlikely it may be. Agree with you for the most part though.

On February 22 2009 12:47 WastedGate wrote: Show nested quote + On February 22 2009 12:29 Orome wrote: The guy not wearing a seatbelt endangers everyone else in the car, not wearing a seatbelt can hurt others. This post wins

lol so wait if the other guys in the car are afraid of their lives because the driver isn't wearing a seat belt (!),aren't they supposed to tell him something about it?
I can imagine you guys getting into a car to see that the driver wears no seat belt,then you get embarrassed about your fear and just breath out in relief that there's a law about seat belts, so that when you ask him to put it on he'll think that you are lawful citizens instead of scared for your lives.

I tell you one day people are going to vote for obligatory daily exercise. Gun carrying police officers are going to wake us up every day and force us to defeat cholesterol on a daily basis.
Because one day a driver might have a heart attack by the evil cholesterol and bring everyone in the car to a premature and tragic death. The guys who fearlessly allowed a fat guy drive them home can't obviously be held responsible for their choice,the state must protect them!

On February 22 2009 13:47 lebowski wrote: Show nested quote + On February 22 2009 12:47 WastedGate wrote:   On February 22 2009 12:29 Orome wrote: The guy not wearing a seatbelt endangers everyone else in the car, not wearing a seatbelt can hurt others. This post wins lol so wait if the other guys in the car are afraid of their lives because the driver isn't wearing a seat belt (!),aren't they supposed to tell him something about it? I can imagine you guys getting into a car to see that the driver wears no seat belt,then you get embarrassed about your fear and just breath out in relief that there's a law about seat belts, so that when you ask him to put it on he'll think that you are lawful citizens instead of scared for your lives.

and what about if its a CHILD thats in the car with the unbelted adults? your argument is stupid. it endagers the LIVES of other people in the car when an unbelted passenger is flying around the inside of the cab during the accident.

too much government in USA. we need less stupid laws and less high priced bureaucrats to tell us how to live. this country hasn't had true 'freedom' for a long time and we are moving rapidly towards socialism. even Premier Vladimir Putin warned us that we are fast becoming a former land of the free

wastedgate,

who said anything about passengers?

who is forcing people to drive with people who aren't wearing seat belts? if you don't feel safe in a vehicle with someone who is not wearing a seat belt, then do not enter vehicles containing people who do not wear seat belts. if someone will not wear one in the car per your request, seek alternate transportation.

believe it or not, humans are capable of making their own decisions.

On February 22 2009 12:39 genjix wrote: stop bitching like a girl. in uk we have mandatory seat belts and funnily enough these kinds of laws actually get people to take notice of these things and do them (like not having your dog shit everywhere which is a common courtesy but no one bothered with before it became illegal and now is socially unacceptable). it saves lives so its a good thing go to some country (like iran) where they have a traffic system but no traffic laws and people drive like shit- down the wrong side of the road, dont abide by lanes, turn into incoming traffic, dont obey lights, never stop for pedestrians (just slow down/swerve around you)... traffic accidents are humongous but then again drivers deserve their liberties

how am i bitching like a girl exactly? if anyone sounds like they're bitching like a girl it's most certainly you.

and in what way did i advocate having an iranian lawless traffic system? there's sufficient information out there informing the public that wearing a seatbelt is the most safe way to travel via car. why should it be government business to enforce everyone living in a safe manner? it would save lives if we rationed food, would it be a good thing if the UK made sure you only ate a certain amount of cholesterol per day, punishable by fine if you did not choose to comply?

your argument is weak and pathetic, try again.

If you're not wearing a seat belt when you get into an accident you might fly through the windshield and land on an old lady walking nearby who would have otherwise been an uninjured witness but is now a victim, you selfish bastard.

jk jk jk =)

Yeah I hear ya. It's weird cause I agree with you on seatbelts but kind of wish something was done about obesity - like if you become a disgusting lardass piece of shit some hell should be rained down upon you, because it is NOT natural. The only fat people I've seen in india are rich people or lazy people. In the USA so many people are overweight it's fucking ridiculous and makes me feel pretty disgusted and ashamed of my countrymen WTF people, eat a fucking salad now and then. We have way too much access to shit we don't need here in the USA. We over consume with no regard for the environmental or personal consequences.

Anyway, about marijuana I'm also with you.

On February 22 2009 14:12 nolan wrote: wastedgate, who said anything about passengers? who is forcing people to drive with people who aren't wearing seat belts? if you don't feel safe in a vehicle with someone who is not wearing a seat belt, then do not enter vehicles containing people who do not wear seat belts. if someone will not wear one in the car per your request, seek alternate transportation. believe it or not, humans are capable of making their own decisions.

like i said before, what about kids who CANT make that decision?

On February 22 2009 13:05 failsafe wrote: seat belt laws, air bags, and crumple frames increase how often drivers crash. if you're driving around in a bubble that prevents you from dying, you're a lot less likely to care about getting in a crash. the answer to driver safety problems is to attach a bayonet to the steering column and angle the bayonet toward the driver's chest. the other problem with these safety measures is that without serious, life-threatening injuries to drivers and passengers, there's a lot less opportunity to harvest the organs of "cadaveric" donors (still living but non-functioning, in this case). safe cars limit how often stupid people's organs can be transplanted into smart people. on this forum there should be a huge push for a return to the days of good old american rolling iron.

best post in this thread!!!! roflmao!

And I am a bit torn cause part of me does believe in letting stupid people die, natural selection, survival of the fitest and all that jazz. We do so much to save people from themselves that we're keeping more and more idiots on this planet than nature intended. We're already having population explosion all over the world. Letting the idiots kill themselves would help deal with that problem.

But at the same time I believe in universal health care, cause it's a human right to have access to medical treatment. BUT it's funny, cause my GF and I were talking about universal healthcare during the election and we both agreed that it should be free to everyone who got sick or hurt by accident, no fault of their own, but idiots should get a fine. Like if you get lung cancer due to smoking then you gotta pay for any medical treatment related to that, but if you get bitten by a mosquito and get malaria then you should be taken care of for free. So this would apply in our seatbetl scenario - if you were wearing a seatbelt and still got injured in a car crash you'd get free medical treatment, and if you were NOT wearing a seatbelt you'd have to pay for all your medical bills. This way we can get rid of the seatbelt laws but at the same time encourage people to wear them, and not feel a need to make it a law because of the cost to the govt to fix people who weren't wearing seatbelts cause those idiots have to pay for their own bills.

I definitely lean left and towards more socialist style of govt in certain areas like healthcare, education and so on, but I don't believe in losing accountability. You act like an idiot you don't get the benefits of the free shit.

Thanks for the laugh. Some of the most flawed reasoning and extrapolations I have ever read. Magnificent effort.

your a good man nolan, i dont read these super long blog posts but the title is cool

BTW hows the rap carrer coming along?

I agree with nolan's general point. I don't know any research or anything along with it, but I too feel less safe when someone is in the car with me without a seatbelt. I'm pretty sure debris flying around in cars is a major source of injury in vehicular accidents.

i think nolans blog should be a featured blog. But yea im with nolan on this one.. i thought NH had a great system setup with the seatbelt laws and just those types of laws in general.. with all these bailouts and things that are going on, gov is getting closer and closer and reaching further and further.. i really think someone needs to keep um in check..

Just another reason to pull you over, and another reason you have to pay the government. In IL they raised the prices on all motor related tickets. Speeding, no seat belt, no insurance ect. They More then doubled of what it used to be. Also in IL if you get 2 moving violation tickets you get your license suspended for 6 months. That means if i forget to use my signal 2 times and get pulled over from the time i get my license till im 21, ill get my license taken away. How the fuck are ppl supposed to do anything in US without a license.
Another ridiculous law they have here is if you get (2 or 3, not sure exactly) drinking tickets (not driving related) you also get your license suspended.

I think everybody should wear the seatbelt and people who dont are stupid idiots however i dont believe its the gobernment's job to enforce things like this, freedom is much more important.

On February 22 2009 14:36 WastedGate wrote: Show nested quote + On February 22 2009 14:12 nolan wrote: wastedgate, who said anything about passengers? who is forcing people to drive with people who aren't wearing seat belts? if you don't feel safe in a vehicle with someone who is not wearing a seat belt, then do not enter vehicles containing people who do not wear seat belts. if someone will not wear one in the car per your request, seek alternate transportation. believe it or not, humans are capable of making their own decisions. like i said before, what about kids who CANT make that decision?

really ridiculous. Fine,make a law about endangering minors by not wearing a seat belt,include old ladies suffering from alzheimer's etc.
I want to hear your reasons for the rest 90% of cases of traveling alone or with sane adults, or for the helmet scenario.
Why the fuck does someone have to pay a fine for not driving with a helmet?
You refuse to focus on the unacceptable philosophy behind these laws and instead you desperately try to bring up specific scenarios to justify the overall absurdity

fuck i am so torn on this issue

but i mean... i have some friends who probably wouldn't wear seatbelts if they didn't have to (it's the law here). and i really would NOT like them to ever die or end up in wheelchairs because of this.

just think if you have some friends or an uncle who probably wouldn't wear a seatbelt every time, it would be absolutely devastating if they died in an accident. and while almost everyone knows that a seatbelt is important, some would still underestimate how much it would make a difference in a crash

Yes, seat belt laws a pretty bad in the sense that it's the government telling us what to do. However the reality is that in our current system, if some idiot who doesn't wear a seat belt gets smashed up and can't pay his hospitals bills, the tax dollars do (through different avenues). Plus there's rehab, ambulances, etc.