REMINDER - Wear your Seat-Belt

Status
Not open for further replies.
New Zealand was far from a nanny state when seatbelt and helmet laws were introduced in the early '70's, but it was the start of protecting ourselves from ourselves. Full blown nanny state now.

This accident last year is pretty conclusive - 3 Americans killed when not wearing a seatbelt, those who did had minor injuries. They were obviously used to not wearing them, but it cost them their lives in an unfamiliar country.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/8787029/Tongariro-fatal-driver-new-to-NZ-roads
 
I was in a head on when I was 17 years old. I had my seatbelt on and got some minor bruising. My best friend was driving and didn't have his belt on and he hit the windshield. He was fine eventhough he broke the windshield with his forehead. I fully expected to look over and see him dead. It was scary as H E double hockey sticks.
 
I am living proof that not wearing a seat can be a life saver.
In the early 80's I was hit head on while stopped at a red light, I broke a few ribs on the floor shifter and my shoulder but if I had been wearing a seat belt I would have been decapitated.

The other cars chrome steel bumper came off and went through my windshield, it hit the drivers seat headrest and drove it through the rear window.
If I had have been wearing a seat belt it would have been my head.

Sure you can say one in a million but so what, I should be able to make my own decision, fortunately I have a medical exemption for not wearing one.
If some of this metal hardware gets damaged by the belt in even a minor accident I could bleed to death internally.

Laws like this are just another nanny State cash grab by people who think they know what's better for you than you do and by God they are going to pass laws to prove it.
 
Originally Posted By: Trav
Laws like this are just another nanny State cash grab by people who think they know what's better for you than you do and by God they are going to pass laws to prove it.


While I agree with the sentiment it took an act of Congress to put seatbelts into cars--the auto makers cried about how it'd bankrupt them. It took years before people started accepting seatbelts: it's nice to believe that one would not let their opinions be swayed by others, but we know how pervasive peer pressure is. If "no one" wears their seatbelt would you? [Not aimed at you Trav, a question for the general audience.] If you automatically answer yes, try to think about how many loved ones would make that same decision, then think about those who can't make that decision (underaged persons).
 
One time I was in a hurry to get somewhere (across the street to get parking before some deadline). My wife had a bad habit of not wearing seat belt for short distance and I had to do an emergency stop, the stop is enough to get her body up the seat and her head almost into the windshield.

Since that day she know that wearing seat belt is important even if you are just driving a short distance.
 
I live in a state without any seatbelt or helmet laws. I am thankful though they require both for 19 and under as kids should be protected from parents stupidity or their own lack of driving skill.

Interestingly enough there is a helmet law for toddler up riding bicycles, scooters etc in my state.
 
Originally Posted By: Trav
I am living proof that not wearing a seat can be a life saver.


Congrats - you're a member of the 1%


Originally Posted By: Trav
Laws like this are just another nanny State cash grab by people who think they know what's better for you than you do and by God they are going to pass laws to prove it.


As inept as politicians/government are, isn't it that much more depressing when they do in fact "know what's better for you than you do"?
 
A driver just died this morning on California Route 1 when his car rolled over and he was ejected from the car. I remember one Black Friday morning a driver probably dozed off and rolled over his Volvo. His daughters were ejected from the car and both died. The reason why they weren't belted was because they had bought tons of stuff and sort of squeezed in so there would be more room for the stuff they bought.
 
Originally Posted By: surfstar
Originally Posted By: Trav
I am living proof that not wearing a seat can be a life saver.


Congrats - you're a member of the 1%


Originally Posted By: Trav
Laws like this are just another nanny State cash grab by people who think they know what's better for you than you do and by God they are going to pass laws to prove it.


As inept as politicians/government are, isn't it that much more depressing when they do in fact "know what's better for you than you do"?


The point is let the individual decide and no they do not know better!
I would like to see the statistics on how many people were killed or injured because of the seat belt.
I personally know of 2 killed and 3 seriously injured because of them not including myself and yes they would have survived or sustained less injuries without it.

IMHO with mandatory passive systems like air bags seat belt use should be optional at the drivers discretion, course that would be setting fire to the money tree.

http://www.motorists.org/seat-belt-laws/testimony

http://www.fiberpipe.net/~tiktin/Documents/seatbeltskill.htm
 
Originally Posted By: Trav
I would like to see the statistics on how many people were killed or injured because of the seat belt.
I personally know of 2 killed and 3 seriously injured because of them not including myself and yes they would have survived or sustained less injuries without it.

IMHO with mandatory passive systems like air bags seat belt use should be optional at the drivers discretion, course that would be setting fire to the money tree.

http://www.motorists.org/seat-belt-laws/testimony

http://www.fiberpipe.net/~tiktin/Documents/seatbeltskill.htm


Gee, I'd like to see those statistics also. Your links only provide anti-government propaganda / conspiracy theories where you could substitute any law in. No actual proof or data regarding seat belts.
 
Neither proof or data but just another point of view. One might say the pro seat belt gang has ginned up their "proof" also.

Who can say with any amount of certainty how many of the people who died with no seat belt would have been saved or those who died with a seat belt wouldn't have died if they were not wearing one.
There is no real data or even if there is some ginned up data how would you prove it?

How many have been trapped by the seat belt and died because they couldn't get out of the car?
How many have been thrown clear of a wreck that went up in flames or totally destroyed the cabin?
How many have had their internals organs loosened and died who may not have died if they had not been lashed to the seat?

Don't misunderstand me I am not saying you shouldn't wear one if you want but it should be a personal choice and not a money making scheme.
There are 2 sides to every coin, let people decide based on which side they chose to believe especially when there is no real data supporting either.

I love the supposed data like x number of lives have been saved.
Says who? Based on what? Prove it! It cannot be proven.
 
Originally Posted By: Trav
Neither proof or data but just another point of view. One might say the pro seat belt gang has ginned up their "proof" also.

Who can say with any amount of certainty how many of the people who died with no seat belt would have been saved or those who died with a seat belt wouldn't have died if they were not wearing one.
There is no real data or even if there is some ginned up data how would you prove it?

How many have been trapped by the seat belt and died because they couldn't get out of the car?
How many have been thrown clear of a wreck that went up in flames or totally destroyed the cabin?
How many have had their internals organs loosened and died who may not have died if they had not been lashed to the seat?

Don't misunderstand me I am not saying you shouldn't wear one if you want but it should be a personal choice and not a money making scheme.
There are 2 sides to every coin, let people decide based on which side they chose to believe especially when there is no real data supporting either.

I love the supposed data like x number of lives have been saved.
Says who? Based on what? Prove it! It cannot be proven.
My Mum's car had a window hammer/seat belt cutter tool clipped to the dash of her CRV .

I dont feel right in the work van without being belted in. In the E 150 van it helps keep you at the controls. Traffic fatalities drop every year, so the nanny ware seems to working. It is called progress
laugh.gif
 
So you are claiming the reduction in traffic fatalities is based on seat belts use? By how much?
What about improvement in vehicle safety like crumple zones, energy absorbing materials, passive restraint systems? How much of those numbers can be attributed to those developments?
Lets see the numbers. Hint. There are none.

Sure they may keep you in the seat in a van and i can see their use in motor sports but notice the design of the belt is not the same as in a family coach.
Why no shoulder belts on aircraft for passengers or the flight crew who use a multi point harness? How about School buses where most don't even have lap belts?
 
Originally Posted By: Trav
So you are claiming the reduction in traffic fatalities is based on seat belts use? By how much?
What about improvement in vehicle safety like crumple zones, energy absorbing materials, passive restraint systems? How much of those numbers can be attributed to those developments?
Lets see the numbers. Hint. There are none.

Sure they may keep you in the seat in a van and i can see their use in motor sports but notice the design of the belt is not the same as in a family coach.
Why no shoulder belts on aircraft for passengers or the flight crew who use a multi point harness? How about School buses where most don't even have lap belts?






Quote:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/20...and-bus-safety/

In Indianapolis, a bus carrying 50 students, ages 5 to 16, to the Lighthouse Charter School ran into a concrete bridge abutment. The 60-year-old driver of the bus was killed, as was 5-year old student Donasty Smith. Two other students were critically injured.


All I see is you're repeating the arguments about being "thrown clear". In the real world getting ejected from a vehicle means doing so unprotected. People get rolled over by the own vehicles, run over by other vehicles, or suffer massive trauma as a result of slamming at high speed onto pavement. There are anecdotes about getting ejected from a vehicle that burst into flames, but there are also lots of anecdotes about occupants who became unconscious when they would likely have remained conscious (with the ability to unbelt and get out of there) had they been belted, and the vehicle burst into flames.

Regardless of the design, it's almost universally better to remain inside a car than to be tossed outside, through a window, and onto whatever (likely hard) surface is outside.

This has been studied for a long time. The following is an old paper:

Quote:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2619855

In virtually all circumstances, the chance of survival in a crash is much greater if the occupant is not ejected from the vehicle. Several estimates of the increased risk of death as a result of ejection (ranging from 2.5 to 25) have been made, but none were specific to the crash mode and most did not control for crash severity. The current study examined the relative risk of fatality due to ejection, by crash type and crash mode, using the Fatal Accident Reporting System data from the years 1982 through 1986. Crash type was defined as either single vehicle or multivehicle and crash mode included rollover, nonrollover, and/or direction of impact. Crash severity was controlled for using a paired comparison method of analysis. Both crash type and crash mode were found to have substantial effects on the relative risk of death due to ejection. In addition, risk differences across seating position exist. Depending on crash mode or type, the risks ranged from about 1.5 to 8. Single-vehicle rollover crashes have the highest increased risk of death due to ejection: about eightfold for the driver and sevenfold for the right front passenger.


Quote:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/enforce/PrimaryEnforcement/pages/AppA.htm

Ejection from the vehicle is one of the most injurious events that can happen to a person in a crash. In fatal crashes in 2004, 74 percent of passenger vehicle occupants who were totally ejected from the vehicle were killed. Safety belts are effective in preventing total ejections: only
1 percent of the occupants reported to have been using restraints were totally ejected, compared with 29 percent of the unrestrained occupants.

More than one-half of the passenger vehicle occupants killed in traffic crashes in 2004 were unrestrained.

http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/airbags/RuralCrashes/pages/CriticalNeed.htm

Ejection from the vehicle is one of the most injurious events that can happen to a person in a crash. In fatal crashes in 2004, 74 percent of passenger vehicle occupants who were totally ejected from the vehicle were killed. In the same year, 72 percent of the people killed (5,959) who were partially or totally ejected from a passenger vehicle, were riding in a rural area. Of this number, 92 percent were not wearing seat belts or not properly restrained in a child safety seat. Seat belts are effective in preventing ejections: overall, 44 percent of unrestrained passenger vehicle occupants killed are ejected, partially or totally, from the vehicle, as compared to only 5 percent of restrained occupants.


All you really need to do is look at the raw numbers. The majority of people dying as a result of vehicle collisions these days are unbelted, but the majority of drivers/passengers on the road are belted. This does account for crumple zones, airbags (which work better when belted), and energy absorbing materials. The safety features are designed around the occupants being restrained. It's not an absolute protection, but it's pretty clear that the chances of surviving an accident go way up with seat belts.
 
Quote:
All I see is you're repeating the arguments about being "thrown clear

What are you talking about? I mentioned it once in the form of a question.
What are you doing finding a bit of data (some of it 20 yrs old) and making up the argument to fit it? You are the one fixated on vehicle ejections, every link you posted has to do with it.
Originally Posted By: trav
How many have been thrown clear of a wreck that went up in flames or totally destroyed the cabin?


I never said it is better or worse to be kept inside the car, driving a convertible you would be a fool not to use the belt, I assume a greater number of people thrown from the car are in these.

Originally Posted By: trav
How about School buses where most don't even have lap belts?

Instead of answering the question you come up with school bus accidents.
Why are they not mandatory? Simple question.
Could it be that School buses are regulated at a state level and enforcement and collection of fines would be too difficult at the local level and of no benefit to local coffers?
It sure seems like if there is no money involved somewhere no one gives a rats rear about safety.

There are belts that work. Multi point with center release are the best, the shoulder belt put in passenger cars are basically a "better than nothing" belt, the fact that most sanctioning bodies don't allow them confirms that.

Quote:
14,856 died in crashes on roads with speed limits of 55 mph and above, accounting for 79 percent of all passenger vehicle fatalities on high-speed roads. Fifty-two percent of those killed on rural high-speed roads were unrestrained.

That would indicate 48% of those killed were belted in, a 4% difference. Sounds like statistical noise to me.
It also shows that these belts did little to protect the occupants over the vehicles passive systems.
In the other statistics where unbelted deaths were higher who can say how many of these wouldn't have died anyway even if belted in.

Look we can go back and forth with this all day (well maybe you can I need to work and don't really care one way or another) but my point is a simple one.

Why not let people decide for themselves?
Why this need by the nanny state to protect people in spite of themselves?
We know its not really about safety from the school bus link you provided, if it were every school bus would have shoulder belts mandated years ago.
 
Originally Posted By: Trav

Who can say with any amount of certainty how many of the people who died with no seat belt would have been saved or those who died with a seat belt wouldn't have died if they were not wearing one.

How many have had their internals organs loosened and died who may not have died if they had not been lashed to the seat?


I witnessed firsthand somebody who died on impact, and he was wearing his seat belt.

A car in the left lane in front of me, for reasons which will never be known, kept going straight as the road curved to the right. Hopped over the short barrier separating the two halves of the road, and hit a full-sized van head-on in a 50MPH zone. The guy in the van died instantly as the van stopped abruptly. My mom, who jumped out of our car to offer first aid, was perplexed that the guy in the van had no visible injuries, had his seat belt on, but was unconscious. Nobody could get to him right away because the impact jammed the doors shut. Finally the paramedics got to him as we were waiting to give our witness accounts to the police, and they said he had no pulse.

My mom talked to some doctors where she worked, and they explained that in a collision like that, the heart tears itself from your aorta, severing it. You die of a stroke as your blood pressure goes to zero. I don't think he would have been any better off without a seat belt, though.

In case anybody is curious, the guy driving the car (Buick LeSabre) was conscious, as was his wife in the passenger seat. Both had their seat belts. His car spun 360 degrees after ricocheting off the van, and set off the airbags. He had some internal injuries and died a few days later. His wife made it, but broke her arm. They never did figure out what happened to cause it. He wasn't drunk and didn't have a stroke.

Still hasn't changed my view on seatbelts, I still wear them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top