p3rsian

i believe wearing a seat belt should be optional .
i dont see how you can harm any one but yourself by not wearing a seat belt.

avlena

so, then do you dislike all "victim-less crimes", such as prostitution, drugs, etc?

personally, i fully support seatbelts, and i think a person is an idiot to go w/o. When i was 15, i flipped and totalled our car, and the only thing that kept my little brother from flying out of the back seat was that my dad had yelled at him earlier to put on his seatbelt. If it hadn't been for the seatbelts, we definitely wouldn't have been able to walk away with little to no injuries.

there's a lot of laws out there designed to prevent your own stupidity, so that you won't hurt yourself. i believe it's very hard to have a 100% victimless crime, because i think there's always some side effect. for example, let's say the law is overturned, and people stop wearing their seatbelts. our already clogged hospitals become clogged with people injured in car wrecks cuz they weren't wearing a seatbelt, and now emergency waits increase even more (last time i was in one, i waited for 4 hours), because the doctors are trying to save someone who flew into a windshield. the person's family now has to make due with loss of income, and deal with a death. etc.

__________________
Have a groovy day!

gwilks98

I'm with Persian on this one. I believe it should be optional, but I believe that if you choose not to wear a belt, you waive the right to any form of life insurance. It doesn't make much sense to ask them to pay for anyone elses stupidity.

__________________
"I know the pieces fit, cause I watched them fall away."

"Cold silence has
A tendancy to
Atrophy any
Sense of compassion."

MJK

BigJon

What about when your body launches from your car in an accident and lands into oncoming traffic...causing more accidents?

__________________

Mike_N_Ike

That's actually a consideration.

Wearing a seatbelt can stop you and your passengers from turning into several hundred pound missiles in the event of an accident.

One other way in which they affect the safety of other drivers is that in the event of a mild accident that might cause the car to jolt one way or another, seat belts help the driver remain in front of the steering wheel and able to operate the car.

__________________
-Mike

BigJon

Didn't think of that one!

Also, a seatbelt can keep a minor fender bender from turning into a "insurance spending" injury accident.

molecularfire

Hmmm... I'm kinda worried about where this thread is going. There is a distinct possibility that I might agree with Persian here...

Actually, I do agree that wearing seat belts should be optional. It is a victimless crime and like drugs and prostitution I think should be legal. IMO, our society is willing to let people kill themselves, and I'm fine with it. Fewer people means less traffic. However, I do not agree with society's allowance of letting people kill their children or anyone else's children for that matter with their own selfishness and stupidity. I am perfectly willing to support the revoking of the mandatory seat belt law as long as it is still mandatory for those under 18 or 21 and as long as we can punish the driver if a minor passenger is not seat belted.

__________________
Disclaimer - The above opinion should not be taken as medical advise. My only advise is to talk to your doctor. If you are stupid enough to take anything I say seriously, you have nobody to blame for your cranio-anal inversion but your stupid self.

I may not be smart enough to do everything but I am dumb enough to try anything. - Beastboy.

kimchicowboy

after my friend died by not wearing a seatbelt because it was uncomfortable, i make everyone in my car if i'm driving buckle-up. i'm never going to take chances, and as a friend or family member, i feel like it would be my responsibility to do so.

__________________
"I pick my nose too but never eat it." - bachviet, 3/30/04

if anyone wants to go scuba diving in oahu or wants to learn who to scuba dive in oahu, PM me.

InfiniteNothing

You have to wear a seat belt because of limited resources. You crowd the hospitals and medical resources. Your seat belt also limits the cost of medical insurance and car insurance which I pay.

__________________
As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.

Cubsfan

I agree here. I'm ok with it being optional, as long as if you get ejected from your car, you don't have to be treated if there's more serious injuries.

ialsohaveadream

Well when you go flying out of your car and cause someone else to be injured, I'm sure it'll comfort them that you waived your right to life insurance or treatment for injuries...

ShawnLee

I used to think it should be optional since I'm usually all for free will and personal responsibility. But...

I like the law because it forces people to wear it. Duh, but when I drive, a good number of people I've given rides to have refused to wear it, usually Koreans (not to get down on other Koreans, but some tend to have their stupid points). Appealing to the comfort/safety tradeoff always fails. I then go ballistic, tell them to walk back home (when they don't know the way), and mention the law. It's usually the legal aspect that catches them.

As for it being a victimless crime, I once agreed, but then I read a summary of a study done by the University of Tokyo (or some other Japanese school). If I remember it correctly, they studied traffic accidents around the world and said that there was an eighty percent increase in fatalities when people in the back didn't wear seatbelts. Apparently, getting smacked from behind with a human body at the moment of impact will tend to break people's necks. So...

Edit: Ok, I read it wrong. They did the study in Japan where back seat seatbelts are optional, and it wasn't eighty percent, it was five times as likely, which doesn't give a straight percentage number. The eighty came from where they apparently estimated that eighty percent of deaths could have been prevented if the people in back had worn seatbelts.

__________________

Roots SD

It's all about the insurance. Or what if the State had to pay for your crippled a$$ in the hospital because you drove through a badly lit intersection?. You would most likely require physical therapy or worse yet be in a coma. What if your family was forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills. It affects too many others to be a "personal" choice.

__________________

kimchicowboy

why not we all be friends, encourage each other to wear seatbelts because we never know when an accident is going to happen. sure, you don't want to wear it, that's your fault. but how would you feel if your friend died because you didn't make him/her to wear it and a freak accident occurred? accidents can happen anywhere. my poor friend. the wheel came off, he was thrown from the car, and the car landed on him.

ShawnLee

Not to throw a wet blanket on the safety party we're having (including my own post) but I just thought of my friend. He got in an accident in high school. His shoulder harness, not his lap belt, broke and he slammed his head forward and hit the steering wheel. This sucks, but if it hadn't failed, a pole would have impaled his head as it was above him when he sat back up. Apparently, when the police got there the cop asked, "Where's the body?" and my buddy raised his hand.

molecularfire

So, what about people who kill themselves and tax our hospital and medical resources by doing other reckless things that our society allows like bad diets (diabetes, heart problems, obesity) or alcoholism (liver failure, mental problems, etc...) or reckless sexual activity (STDs, children they're not prepared for, cervical cancer), etc... Any of those tax our medical system much more than car accidents do. We either say that it's ok for people to kill themselves or we don't. Who gets to say which method of hurting/killing yourself and taxing our health care system is acceptable? When does the govt. get to limit our rights and when don't they?

StonedWheat

woah, talk about slippery slope .

__________________
"Cynicism is knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing."

-Oscar Wilde

InfiniteNothing

Basically, my rights end where yours begin. Apparently the right to go seatbelt/helmet free didn't make it. The right to privacy however, is guaranteed. It's all a mater of priority of rights... some rights usurp others. Also alcoholism, smoking, obesity, and sexual disease mostly affect the policy holder's fee, not health care as a whole.

bachviet

I ask everybody riding in my car to wear seatbelts because it's better for everyone. I always wear seatbelt when I drive.

__________________
Dell Dimension 9200 | Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.4GHz) | 4x1GB DDR2 | 256MB nVidia GeForce 8800GT

Dell Studio 17 | Intel Core i7-720QM (1.6GHz) | 2x2GB DDR3 1066MHz | 1GHz ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4650

Intel P4-C 3.0GHz | ECS 865PE-A | 3x512MB PC3200 | 128MB PNY GeForce 6600GT

avlena

do explain why it's slippery? because a number of people have also argued that if people stopped wearing seatbelts, it will affect our hospital system. i believe in cause and effect, every action has a reaction, and whatnot.

what would be interesting is if anyone has stats on the countries with seat belt law vs. w/o, and how the death rates vary. i would assume that some people would wear them, recognizing the safety benefits, but i'm sure people would also do w/o cuz it's a nuisance.

Cantacuzene

Whoa, you don't see any victims in prostitution?!

avlena

hence the quotemarks. and my continued statement that i don't believe in 100% victimless crimes. but, i was informed by a criminology student that prostitution is typically considered a victim-less crime.

StonedWheat

I was actually referring to how you brought prostitution and drugs into a seatbelt discussion. That's quite a different "victimless crime" than not wearing your seatbelt IMO. I guess some could disagree...but could you imagine being thrown in jail for not wearing a seatbelt?

Nanotech9

i almost always wear my seatbelt... yes, i think it should be optional, but at the same time, i dont. you see, from my perspective of racing cars etc, i think every car should come with a roll cage, and 4pt harnesses for all passengers. If the auto industry was REALLY about safety, they'ed do it.

as far as it being mandatory.. well, i donno... see, i've been known to break 160 on a bike, and theres no seatbelts on a bike... then again, theres no windshield to hit either. I donno. i live a very confused life.

__________________

speedracer120

Don't worry Nano, we all live confused lives.

If you're in my car and under 18, the seatbelt is on, or else I'll show you how easy it is to realize you need a seatbelt.

If you're over 18, it's your call. I may or may not like it but you should be old enough to know better and decide for yourself, not to mention pay for your ticket.

Personally, it flabergasts me as to why people won't take a second to add a layer of protection. And don't tell me they don't help protect you because I still have my mom who would've died on the road years ago, and I still have burn marks from a few months ago without which I would've died after being thrown over the center divide onto oncoming traffic.

__________________
Off in La La Land

psycho-

personally, i think the problem here is the

a) Added social costs - Higher death rates, injury rates. Very likely, the gov't will be pushed to support those who can't take care of themselves. The true net cost in lost wages, social services, lost productivity cannot be seen due to imperfect information .

b)Actuarial costs - Higher insurance rates. Any insurance coverage beyond liability will induce Moral Hazard from unbelted drivers. BUT, the insurance companies now don't know who does and who doesn't wear seatbelts. Liability and injury costs will go up due to the imperfect information.

c)Social responsibilities - If someone here is in a position to dictate the actions of others (parent to child), then they are effectively dictating risky behaviour among those whom they are socially responsible for.

__________________
Victor

bachviet

Remember that both the driver and the passenger get seatbelt tickets even if only the passenger doesn't wear his/her in CA. Are you going to make that person (18+) to pay for your ticket too?

Maarchk

I dont think that is correct. You get a ticket as the driver is a passenger under 18 is without a seat belt. Once they are over 18, then they alone get the ticket.

__________________
"The girl is crafty like ice is cold."

"I left my heart in san francisco... And my liver at Moe's Tavern."

A real friend is one who listens to you as much as they talk to you.

speedracer120

Even if that were the case, yes of course I'd make them pay for my ticket. Hell. I warned them and they ignored what I said. If they won't promise to pay up, they can walk home, I don't need to be around ingrates like that.

bachviet

I don't think so.

My co-workers almost got two tickets when one of them (the passenger) didn't wear his seatbelt.