So manditory helmet laws keep you flying through the air or causing damage to other people or vehicles? They keep people from having to be scraped off the side of the road? Sure they make motorcycles safer than without, but it is still riding similar to not wearing a safety belt in a car.blind_dead_mcjones said:
Poll: Legality of Seatbelt Wearing
- Thread starter cairocat
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I dont think it is victimless, if you have a car full of people, and it suddenly decelarates to stop from 60mph, you're gonna have 4 people go flying around the car/through the window at 60mph... you're trying to tell me that none of them are going to come into contact with each other?
It's already been mentioned, but seatbelts help a driver remain in control of a vehicle, by keeping him in his seat.
Also, regarding the comment about buying alcohol on Sundays? That's just an example of a stupid relic of religion being applied as law. There is absolutely no reason outlawing alcohol sales on Sunday would benefit society; it's strictly legislating morality, which is wrong in my opinion.
Unfortunately, that's a very hotly debated concept (at least here in the US). It's a very liberal concept. I tend to agree with it, but very many (roughly 50%) don't.blind_dead_mcjones said:
Also, regarding the comment about buying alcohol on Sundays? That's just an example of a stupid relic of religion being applied as law. There is absolutely no reason outlawing alcohol sales on Sunday would benefit society; it's strictly legislating morality, which is wrong in my opinion.
the idea is also to wear proper protective suits as well, and assume everyone else on the road is trying to kill you. (do all those and even in if you get hit by a car the worst will suffer is probably a broken leg)Kamehapa said:
almost but not quite, there is a difference, falling off your bike from getting hit by a car is an unavoidable risk, getting severely injured because you couldn't be bothered to put your seatbelt on isn't
No, it should not be forced. The seatbelt could lead to your demise via locking you in place while the car burns or some other scenario where you have to get out quick but cannot because your seatbelt is stuck.
Yeah, and a helmet could get stuck on your head and make you suffocate. Yet strangely, every single person i've known who was killed in a motorcycle accident was not wearing a helmet... Hmmmmm... Just as 9/10 people i've known who were killed in a car accident were not seatbelted. Obviously, correlation is not causation (except this time it is), but we can certainly see a pattern here.demoman_chaos said:
Also, the "seatbelts can trap you" argument is virtually the same reasoning as people who refuse vaccinations because there's a <1% chance of adverse side-effects. And both mistakes can lead to the deaths of others. A flying human body is a very deadly projectile.
As many people stated it is not a victimless crime. So yes it ought to be illigal.
Also extrem stupidity ought to be a crime, the world would look better if it was.
Also extrem stupidity ought to be a crime, the world would look better if it was.
While I do always wear my seatbelt, I do not think compliance should be mandated.
First and foremost the reason why is that we already have more than enough asinine little laws to govern insignificant and mundane elements of daily life. We need to quit having laws made up about everything, cause eventually we wont be able to do anything.
Secondly... If someone doesnt want to wear a belt, So be it, let em go beltless. Fact is its prolly a good thing. Weve got too many people running around as it is, and being at the top of the food chain we have no natural predators, so perhaps we need more things like this to help us thin out the herd. While were at it, can we please remove the warning lables from Windex bottles? Seriously... If your looking under the sink and see a blue bottle and think its raspberry/blueberry koolaid, I say drink up, I doubt were loosing the cure for cancer, and more likely loosing a telemarketer, shoe salesman, or panhandler. You know, Jobs that you can train a blindfolded chimpanzee with full frontal lobotomy to perform.
First and foremost the reason why is that we already have more than enough asinine little laws to govern insignificant and mundane elements of daily life. We need to quit having laws made up about everything, cause eventually we wont be able to do anything.
Secondly... If someone doesnt want to wear a belt, So be it, let em go beltless. Fact is its prolly a good thing. Weve got too many people running around as it is, and being at the top of the food chain we have no natural predators, so perhaps we need more things like this to help us thin out the herd. While were at it, can we please remove the warning lables from Windex bottles? Seriously... If your looking under the sink and see a blue bottle and think its raspberry/blueberry koolaid, I say drink up, I doubt were loosing the cure for cancer, and more likely loosing a telemarketer, shoe salesman, or panhandler. You know, Jobs that you can train a blindfolded chimpanzee with full frontal lobotomy to perform.
I do believe it is illegal here. You get ticketed for not wearing it. In anycase, it is far from victimless. You might be dead but what about your family? Your friends? What if you were a father and the sole provider for a small, disabled little girl? It is simply not fair to the people in your life to risk yours so recklessly. Seat belts save lives people. To be honest, I don't even notice myself buckling up anymore; it is just such an automatic reaction to sitting down in a car seat that I don't need to even think about it.
People get rights and privileges confused quite frequently.
[HEADING=3]Driving is a privilege, not a right.[/HEADING]
Observe traffic rules, including seatbelts and alcohol limits, or do not drive.
This is the same logic that applies to the question of insurance-- you must have insurance, or you just don't drive.
[HEADING=3]Driving is a privilege, not a right.[/HEADING]
Observe traffic rules, including seatbelts and alcohol limits, or do not drive.
This is the same logic that applies to the question of insurance-- you must have insurance, or you just don't drive.
It is absolutely not a 'victimless crime', for all the reasons mentioned above.
And that the guy who habitually forgets to put on his seatbelt is the guy who lets his little daughter ride shotgun without a belt. When she gets projected through the windscreen at 60 mph he actually won't care, because he's dead too.
And that the guy who habitually forgets to put on his seatbelt is the guy who lets his little daughter ride shotgun without a belt. When she gets projected through the windscreen at 60 mph he actually won't care, because he's dead too.
You have to protect drivers from themselves and more importantly, from other drivers.
Even If you think your drivestyle is flawless, that of other drivers might not be. So wear that damned seatbelt.
Even If you think your drivestyle is flawless, that of other drivers might not be. So wear that damned seatbelt.
I'm with Daystar Clarion on this one. It's a victimless crime. The aftermath of an accident is no worse for bystanders if the driver is injured worse (and I'm not a believer in rewarding for "mental trauma". If you don't want to be traumatized, you'll just have to stay in the house).
Realistically, you use up less of a hospital's resources by dying in a horrible accident than by coming through with no more than whiplash. If you survive with horrible injuries, sure, but that's far from a given. A crime with a victim always victimizes similarly.
I'm a big believer in not protecting anyone from themselves through law. Let people protect people they care about from themselves if they want... the government should only protect people from other people... and seatbelt laws are nothing more than a source of revenue for the government through ticketing. Otherwise, they're pointless.
Realistically, you use up less of a hospital's resources by dying in a horrible accident than by coming through with no more than whiplash. If you survive with horrible injuries, sure, but that's far from a given. A crime with a victim always victimizes similarly.
I'm a big believer in not protecting anyone from themselves through law. Let people protect people they care about from themselves if they want... the government should only protect people from other people... and seatbelt laws are nothing more than a source of revenue for the government through ticketing. Otherwise, they're pointless.
Say you're a parent who doesn't wear their seatbelt. You have a collision one day and you snuff it but your securely belted offspring survives. That child now has to cope with the loss of a parent very early in their life, if the child loses both parents this way then the state has to intervene to take care of them at least temporarily.
Death is never victim-less and your actions will have an effect on the lives of others whether you think they will or not, if you can't conceive of a way in which you not wearing a seatbelt can hurt someone else then you're simply not trying hard enough, after all I'm sure most of you have parents who would miss you if you died.
Death is never victim-less and your actions will have an effect on the lives of others whether you think they will or not, if you can't conceive of a way in which you not wearing a seatbelt can hurt someone else then you're simply not trying hard enough, after all I'm sure most of you have parents who would miss you if you died.