Seatbelt Laws

[ladyneeva]

My sisters do the same thing, with the cheating the seat belt alarm. At least on our mother's previous car (they don't actually own their own cars), not sure if the current one even has that alarm.

I really don't get it. Their main excuses are that they are fat so the lap belt doesn't fit them and that they are tall so the shoulder belt digs into their neck. Both those excuses are plain silly in my opinion -- I'm heavier than either of them and have yet to encounter a seat belt that doesn't fit. And the neck thing was easily solved by buying an $8 shoulder belt pad at WalMart... and prior to my husband buying our current car, even that has never been needed before. Since they're currently driving a mini-van and not a little two door 'sport-sedan' (what else would you call a grand am? It's not quite a sports car, but it's not really a sedan either lol) I'm really not sure how that is ever an issue.

I'm really not sure why someone would choose not to use a seat belt... even if you're much heavier than I am (nearly 300lbs) you can STILL buy a seat belt extender from a dealership and they're not that expensive compared to your life! And I can't even imagine how lazy you need to be to begrudge the 10 or so seconds it takes to put it on.

But then, I routinely run into people who flat out refuse to wear riding helmets when horseback riding... I guess for some people, looking cool really is more important than being alive and not brain damaged?

[DrFaroohk]

Here's my biggest complaint about seat belt laws:

Wearing a seat belt is going to reduce injuries in an accident.

Wearing seat belts may even PREVENT some accidents (think about it, the car is in an uncontrolled spin, you're not buckled in and you're flying all over the inside of that car, where as if you are buckled you at least have a CHANCE of getting the car under control)....

So more seat belts = less accidents = less injuries = Geico gets to save a few bucks, which means....

my car insurance SHOULD be cheaper.

And its not.

So I feel like everyone makes out good from this deal except me.

[Slytovhand]

So I feel like everyone makes out good from this deal except me.

Til you get hit... and it saves your life and limbs...

[protege]

I should post the photos of my grandmother's 1994 auto accident....if they aren't an argument for seat belt usage...I don't know what is.

I've posted this before on CS. She was on her way to my uncle's parents' house over in the next town, and had a serious accident. Some idiot (and I'm being nice here) was driving a gravel truck with faulty brakes. That truck rear-ended her '91 Olds Cutlass Ciera hard enough...to push it into the path of an oncoming semi He couldn't stop, and hit her head on. The impact took out the entire front end of the car.

There was literally nothing left. When we removed the tarp covering the destroyed car, I was in tears. In fact, about a second after the tarp came off...the engine fell on the ground! Very little remained of the car--there wasn't a straight panel on it. Even the spare tire was folded in half!

Grandma's pretty lucky to be alive after that. Granted, she was pretty fucked up. Two broken shoulders, serious cuts and bruises, plus a hole (caused when one of the pedals sheared off) in her leg. She was alive, but not "awake" yet. That would last about 2 weeks. She spent almost a year in the hospital and had to undergo rehab for her injuries.

My then-12-year-old cousin, who was with her, also got fucked up. His injuries weren't as severe, but they did land him in the hospital for a bit. He got the worst of it from shattered glass, caused when the passenger-side windows were blown out. As a result, the right side of his face appeared to have been 'chewed on.' He had to have surgery to not only repair his face, but to correct his double vision. Now, 15 years on, you can barely see it.

What I'm trying to say is, that without their seat belts, neither one would be alive. Sure, the car had airbags, but they aren't supposed to be your sole protection in an accident. They aren't designed for that, but as a *supplementary* restraint system (hence the "S" in "SRS")

Also consider this, if you are thrown from your vehicle, you're probably going to get fucked up one way or another. Things like trees, rocks, other vehicles (or even your own) do not get out of the way when things are tossed at them!

[Caveat Emptor]

Without seatbelts, even a sudden stop can be dangerous (inertia, anyone???) Laws like this (attempt to) protect people from themselves.

[Rapscallion]

He is also one of those who thinks that because he drives a big truck, he will come out ahead in a car accident.

Typical injury for a trucker is a concave ribcage from the sudden deceleration and the wheel position.

Rapscallion

[crazylegs]

It has never been the difficulty of wearing a seatbelt. It's whether it's right for the government to step in and dictate personal actions that don't affect anyone else.
Yes it's saves lives. So would making alcohol, tobacco, etc. illegal. But few people want that.

They may not be illegal, however the Govt. does place restrictions on who can buy them, where you can buy them etc.

A three point seatbelt can, and will save your life. They're a lawful requirement in the UK for a damn good reason. Mainly this one (GRAPHIC)

Here's a nice little crash test dummy video of a rolling lorry, one dummy wears a belt, one doesn't, guess which one comes off best.

Typical injury for a trucker is a concave ribcage from the sudden deceleration and the wheel position.

Rapscallion

A flail chest (where a/multiple ribs break at two ends) is quite dramatic to watch, essentially you get a section of ribcage that moves at opposing directions to the rest of the ribcage.

[BlaqueKatt]

Getting thrown from a vehicle is almost a myth. It's far too rare to really consider it.

really?

Snopes would like a word with you

"Consider that in 1997 in north Dakota, 103 people died in a total of 88 fatal accidents on state roads. Of those 103 victims, 77 were riding in vehicles equipped with seatbelts but were not wearing them. 34 of the 88 were single vehicle rollovers. Rollovers are the most dangerous type of accidents for unrestrained drivers and passengers, since so many of them are thrown out of their vehicles. For instance 27 of the above mentioned 103 were thrown from their vehicles and killed.

That looks to be about 25% to me maybe my math is off today. Oh wait the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration agrees with me.*


"NHTSA states that ejection from the vehicle is one of the most injurious
events that can happen to an occupant in a crash. Nationwide, only one
percent of occupants using restraints were totally ejected (thrown out of the
vehicle), compared to 24 percent for unrestrained occupants.
Based upon the fatal crash data, safety restraint use plays an important
role in preventing occupant ejection from the vehicle during a crash. In
2001, there were 47 passenger car drivers killed that were totally ejected
from their vehicle at the time of the crash. Of those 47 drivers, 43, or 91.5 percent, were unrestrained. Another 10 out of 13 drivers (76.9 percent) were unrestrained and partially ejected. For light trucks, 39 of 40 fatally injured, unrestrained drivers (97.5 percent) were completely ejected, with another 18 of 20 (90.0 percent)partially ejected while unrestrained.



you were saying?

*stats are for indianna only

[hecubus]

As far as seatbelt laws go, I have no problem having a law that children up to a certain age have to be belted in, but I don't believe adults should be required to wear them. Here (in Wisconsin) we have a seatbelt law, but no motorcycle helmet law, and to me that seems very hypocritical.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that it's pretty stupid to not wear one, I just don't think it should be legally mandated. How many laws do we really need to protect us from ourselves?

I've had an idea for a long time that I believe would result in a lot more people wearing seatbelts or helmets. All you would need a regulation on medical insurance that would state that, if you are in an accident, and you are not wearing a seatbelt or motorcycle helmet, your insurance would not cover any of your injuries sustained in the accident. That way, it's still a personal choice whether you wear a belt or not, but, if you don't wear one, there are consequences.

[Nyoibo]

How many laws do we really need to protect us from ourselves?

Being a frim believer of Darwinism in action, I say none, thin the herd of the curse of the dumb.

[BroomJockey]

Here (in Wisconsin) we have a seatbelt law, but no motorcycle helmet law, and to me that seems very hypocritical.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that it's pretty stupid to not wear one, I just don't think it should be legally mandated. How many laws do we really need to protect us from ourselves?

part the first. How many motorcyclists do you see without helmets? It's quite possible that there's few enough incidents that the legislative body never saw the need to institute the laws since, you know, people were already doing it. Why waste the time?

Part the second. I said before, I say again. It's not to protect you from yourselves. It's to save the rest of us spending as much money saving your now-crippled ass from death.

[AFPheonix]

Also as has been pointed out, seatbelts keep you at the wheel so you can control your car better.
Further, seatbelts keep you from flying around inside the car and hitting your passengers. So, it's not just about protecting you from yourself, it's also about protecting others from you.

Broom Jockey, there are many motorcycle riders who ride without helmets here in the states. Oregon has a helmet law, and you can see riders stopping their bikes to pop helmets off after passing state lines.
I'm ambivalent about them. You're pretty much screwed in crashes over 30 or 40 mph even with a helmet, so I wouldn't mind that being the rider's choice to wear. I prefer a full face, keeps the bugs out of my teeth.

[BroomJockey]

Broom Jockey, there are many motorcycle riders who ride without helmets here in the states. Oregon has a helmet law, and you can see riders stopping their bikes to pop helmets off after passing state lines.

...woooooooow. That's... dumb. "I've already got it on, but I'm gonna stop and take it off. *shrug* It was just a thought as to the reasoning. Apparently not a correct thought. The cynic in me now says "they call them donorcycles for a reason."

[crazylegs]

Don't get me wrong, I believe that it's pretty stupid to not wear one, I just don't think it should be legally mandated.

In the UK every fatalality on the roads costs £1,000,000. This goes from everything from the initial police attendance, NHS costs, Fire + Rescue costs, investigative costs, lost money to the economy due to traffic jams etc etc etc.

I can think of lots of better things to spend the cash on than someone who thought they didn't need and were that good a driver.

[tabbyblack13]

I always wear my seatbelt and I hate it when my passengers don't want to wear them. I feel responsible for them in my vehicle and while I'm a careful driver, I cannot prevent all accidents. They are even required by the company I work for if you are driving on site. I have had to give a lot of grief to other workers here to put on there seatbelts. If they don't and get caught by supervisors said workers could get suspended or worst.

I also hate it when people believe that the bigger the vehicle the safer they are. Trucks and SUV have a higher rate of rolling over.