REMINDER - Wear your Seat-Belt

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: Trav


When you start saying things "It's all about like cost/benefit to society" and "collective decisions" we are pretty much done, I know what that kind of thinking is and I want no part of it.



If you really feel that way, you should buy yourself 40 acres and erect a fence; but no cheating, ordering stuff on Amazon and using the roads I pay for to get it there!

I'm sorry, but this irrational fear of the word "collective" by a radical, vocal minority has just gone off the deep end. As functioning societies, there are some things that are "collective" by definition. It's not a dirty word, nor is looking at cost/benefit ratios to society as whole. If you really feel otherwise, I suggest you get workin' on that fence (but plan on building it with tools you mine from your own property and beat into hand-made chisels...).

Alternatively, you can move to the Congo or something, where there are very lax societal rules.


The Congo eh?

 

[yonyon]

Originally Posted By: Trav

When you start saying things "It's all about like cost/benefit to society" and "collective decisions" we are pretty much done, I know what that kind of thinking is and I want no part of it.


You don't want the trains to run on time?

 

[andyd]

Every time there is a traffic fatality in MA, the road gets shut down while the State Police investigates the scene. If a Med Flight is involved, traffic in both directions is halted. The manpower and resources are my tax dollars at work. The incalculable man hours lost by the traffic disruptions is a waste too. Any nannyware in this age of multi-tasking should be welcomed. Anything,as long as the car and its occupants arrive alive and didn't screw up traffic in the process. I dunno about you guys,but, the less time I spend driving, is more time spent doing fun stuff

 

[Trav]

That has little to do seat belts in as much as most of these people cant drive a riding mower properly never mind a car.
MA drivers are the worst in the country, maybe even the world. You don't need seat belts with these folks you need a ejector seat.

 

[andyd]

Nothing and everything. It is all part of a piece. Anything that reduces injury should be touted. Less motor vehicle accidents benefit everybody , except body shops.

I'm not looking for a perfect driving world where every driver is a competent race trained unit driving a well tuned rocket. I just wanna get home.
If you can do that 100% and never hold up traffic without a belt on, then have at it, you 're not the wrassen frassen maroon who cost me 45 minutes on my Thursday run to Yarmouth. For the rest of the appliance driving , texting , multi-tasking yoyos , they need all the state enforced nanny ware they can get.

BTW, look at my sig. No airbags, kinda sorta ABS on all season tires. Besides, I dont have enough of an attention span left to lose focus on my driving.

 

[Trav]

Matter of opinion. I believe in small Government and no nanny state. No one says don't put the belts in cars or even have a public safety campaign but get the social engineering based fines of the table.

The problem with nanny state ideas is for many its not a problem and it all sounds good until they come after something they like, then its too late.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: surfstar
Originally Posted By: Trav
What is the problem with letting people make their own decisions?


Because the public, in general, is stupid. They DO need to be protected from themselves.


Here's a quick, simple way to save lives - why would you argue against that? -and expend so much energy in doing so?

Fatality rates for miles driven are at the lowest level ever, and you want to say "*&%#ing Nanny State!!!" and complain about it.
Want to drive without seat belts, air bags, ESC, crumple zones, and take your chances? Buy a classic car and have fun.


Politicians come from the public so therefor the Politicians are stupid too. Why does being elected make them know better?

Trav isn't against seat belts. He is against being forced to wear them. I am on his side. I have no problem with others wearing them. It should be my choice to drive with or without a seat belt. Thank god NH has no caved to pressure and continues to allow it to be our choice.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Trav


The problem with nanny state ideas is for many its not a problem and it all sounds good until they come after something they like, then its too late.

 

[Number21]

I've been driving a 1973 Chevy truck for my daily driver for years, it only came with lap belts and they didn't work anyway so I never wore it. 2 months ago I traded it for a new F350. The seat belt just saved my life about 3 hours ago. I went off the road in some really bad fog. I think the truck is totaled. If I was driving the Chevy I'd probably be dead. I'm sore but I'm not in the hospital.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Number21
I've been driving a 1973 Chevy truck for my daily driver for years, it only came with lap belts and they didn't work anyway so I never wore it. 2 months ago I traded it for a new F350. The seat belt just saved my life about 3 hours ago. I went off the road in some really bad fog. I think the truck is totaled. If I was driving the Chevy I'd probably be dead. I'm sore but I'm not in the hospital.


How about The seat belt may have just saved my life about 3 hours ago.
Sorry you lost the truck and I am glad you walked away but that doesn't prove the air bag or other passive systems didn't have something to do with it or the belt alone was you sole savior.
It may well have been but its not provable one way or the other.

 

[pandus13]

Originally Posted By: Number21
I've been driving a 1973 Chevy truck for my daily driver for years, it only came with lap belts and they didn't work anyway so I never wore it. 2 months ago I traded it for a new F350. The seat belt just saved my life about 3 hours ago. I went off the road in some really bad fog. I think the truck is totaled. If I was driving the Chevy I'd probably be dead. I'm sore but I'm not in the hospital.

Glad you are still with us.
but I'm with Trav on this: the whole truck modern tech acted as one piece and get you home also in one piece.
so the "old" new faithful actually give his/her "life" protecting you.

still glad you are still with us.

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Matter of opinion. I believe in small Government and no nanny state. No one says don't put the belts in cars or even have a public safety campaign but get the social engineering based fines of the table.

The problem with nanny state ideas is for many its not a problem and it all sounds good until they come after something they like, then its too late.



As I've said, I agree with you. If you don't want to wear a seat belt, you shouldn't have to do so. I just don't want to pay for someone the silly choice of someone else. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Not wearing a seat belt has a cost to society. Yes, "society". If you choose to drive on publicly owned and maintained roads, then you're buying into the collective, whether or not you despise words like "collective", "public" and "society".

If one wants to have a reasonable discussion about various nanny aids, then I think that's great. Not wearing seat belts? This seems pretty unreasonable, since there's no real downside. Wearing seat belts saves lives and money; not wearing them costs resources. No one is "forcing" anyone to wear a seat belt? Don't like it? Don't drive on public roads--or, be fined if you're going to drive without your seat belt.

As I said, I don't care if people want their freedom, but that freedom stops at my pocket book. Why should I be paying for people who don't want to wear their seatbelts?

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: JOD
As I said, I don't care if people want their freedom, but that freedom stops at my pocket book

Fine. Then ban soda, hamburger, hot dogs, fried food of all kinds, red meat, french fries.
Lower the BAC to zero and put a cop outside every bar, fine every obese person with a tax (yes they can do since the ACA).

Fine every homeowner that doesn't use ice melt or uses to much ice melt (its bad for the environment they claim), start taking CO2 measurements on every home chimney.
This is jut a short list you can add a thousand things to the list.

All these things effect "your" and everyone else's pocket in one way or another but that's the price of a free society. Someone else will assimilate the cost in some way for every one of us as we do them.

Social engineering through the use of fines is Socialism/Communism, it has no place in the USA. Like I said IMO you present nothing more than a specious argument.

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: Trav

Social engineering through the use of fines is Socialism/Communism, it has no place in the USA. Like I said IMO you present nothing more than a specious argument.



I prefer to think of it as "fee based"! Engage in risky behavior, pay for it. Again, I don't find it specious at all; just because you think of it as such, doesn't make it so.

If you agree to use PUBLICLY FUNDED ROADS, you're participating in "social engineering". We can agree to disagree, and that's cool. Me, I'm OK with seat belt fines.

 

[Trajan]

What social engineering?

Fining people for breaking the law is a consequence of doing so.

Now if you don't want to wear a helmet or use a seatbelt, fine with me.

So long as you foot the bill on your own if you get injured. I don't want to pay for your idiocy either through higher premiums or tax money spent to care for you after the accident.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: JOD
As I said, I don't care if people want their freedom, but that freedom stops at my pocket book

Fine. Then ban soda, hamburger, hot dogs, fried food of all kinds, red meat, french fries.
Lower the BAC to zero and put a cop outside every bar, fine every obese person with a tax (yes they can do since the ACA).

Fine every homeowner that doesn't use ice melt or uses to much ice melt (its bad for the environment they claim), start taking CO2 measurements on every home chimney.
This is jut a short list you can add a thousand things to the list.

All these things effect "your" and everyone else's pocket in one way or another but that's the price of a free society. Someone else will assimilate the cost in some way for every one of us as we do them.

Social engineering through the use of fines is Socialism/Communism, it has no place in the USA. Like I said IMO you present nothing more than a specious argument.



The way I see it, is without the law some idiots will laugh at other not so idiots for wearing seat belts all the time. Then these not so idiots will try to "prove themselves" by not wearing seat belts.

Don't laugh, this happens when I was in high school in the mid 90s, still a percentage of people at the time refuse to wear seat belts and laugh at others and give them peer pressure for doing so.

 

[Number21]

Originally Posted By: Trav
How about The seat belt may have just saved my life about 3 hours ago.

Well, was there an official investigation done that says the seat belt saved my life? No, but the seat belt tattoo I have on my chest right now says that's the only thing that held me in my seat. No question I would have hit something else, like the steering wheel, or the windshield. The airbags did not go off. The truck ended up at such a downward angle that you can't physically sit in the seat without being held in.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: PandaBear

The way I see it, is without the law some idiots will laugh at other not so idiots for wearing seat belts all the time. Then these not so idiots will try to "prove themselves" by not wearing seat belts.

Don't laugh, this happens when I was in high school in the mid 90s, still a percentage of people at the time refuse to wear seat belts and laugh at others and give them peer pressure for doing so.

When I was a kid, it was actually the adults who were so used to not wearing seat belts and us kids (who understood what they did) that did. I mean - my parents had a 1974 model car with a seat belt interlock system that gave this awful buzzing sound if a seat was occupied and the belt wasn't latched. So all members of my extended family riding in this car would get around that by buckling the belt and sitting on top of it. It seemed like it would be more comfortable to just use it the way it was intended.

My grandmother seemed to be adamant that she wasn't going to wear a seat belt. When the California mandatory seat belt law, I thought she'd be resisting it, and she did for some time.

The odd thing was that you never saw people on TV wearing seat belts in the early 80s and before. When TV shows and movies started showing it as routine, then it because a much easier sell for the public. One of the first shows where I saw it was on Moonlighting. They even had a scene where the main character destroys a car, but makes sure he'd belted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjOr-UEQcaI

 

[Number21]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
My grandmother seemed to be adamant that she wasn't going to wear a seat belt. When the California mandatory seat belt law, I thought she'd be resisting it, and she did for some time.


I think that is part of the problem with making it a law. People will refuse to wear them simply on the grounds that they do not want to obey that law.

 

[65cuda]

My inlaws and my Dad didn't want to wear seatbelts and I was fine with it, but I also told them that I wouldn't push the issue until I got a ticket for it. Of course none of the trucks or cars the inlaws had, had seat belts in them so they didn't see the use of them. I always thought that they were a good idea and have used them since the early 70's. I do sometimes wonder with all the air bags that cars have on them if maybe we haven't gone a little too far.