UPDATE x2: Could someone show me why I'm wrong?

[Skeleon]

You're absolutely right. But I believe the only laws that are justifiable are the ones that protect an individual's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I realize it sounds cheesy, but I wholeheartedly believe and laws that extend beyond that are the actual infringements.

Well, but why seatbelts? Those laws are meant to protect your life. Wouldn't that fall into your own definition?
Also, what about drugs? They're illegal to own, even if you don't sell them or anything (therefore not endangering anybody else but you).
That law is still infringing your freedom of owning and using drugs, but it's still there to protect your life.
I could understand you if you were criticizing some law that made absolutely no sense ("everybody must wear a hat on tuesdays from 8 AM to 12 AM" or something weird like that), but those laws do make sense.
They infringe your freedoms to protect your life!

 

[CrustyMedic]

Recently there have been an exceedingly large amount of seatbelt commercials ("Click it or Ticket").

Now I'd like to hear a legitimate argument for pro-seatbelt laws because I find that forcing people to participate in something like that is infringing on individual freedoms.

I wear my seatbelt most of the time because it's safer in general, but shouldn't it be a personal choice?

We have had seatbelt laws in Canada here for a long time, for most of my life I can remember haveing to wear a belt even if it was "ah-hem" a lap belt. It's no biggie.

As for your right to choice, sure I'm game.

But I have first hand experience with people who don't wear seatbelts having significant injuries/death even at low imact speeds verus the how the "**ck* did you walk away from that crash. "Oh I was wearing a seat belt"

As you can tell, I'm a poster boy for seat belts. This is just a little social engineering by your government, albiet 35 years after everyone else. lol


*edit. if you want the rights and freedoms to fly through a windshied, sure...you have the significant possibility in the event of an accident to be dead right.

*edit. I do get where your coming from with government becoming more intrusive in our lives

 

[jebussaves88]

By not doing your seatbelt, you actually are endangering other peoples lives. People have been killed by other people flying through windshields and then there's the old "Sarah knew her killer".

 

[joystickjunki3]

I wear my seatbelt most of the time because it's safer in general, but shouldn't it be a personal choice?

Most likely, the only reason you feel this way is because of the reactance effect. You feel that a freedom is being suppressed and because of that you feel the need to lash out. There have been studies done that show this.

Now to stay on topic. Say you are in an accident that is your fault. The person in the other car isn't wearing a seat belt and is killed. While the person's death isn't necessarily your fault because they were the ones who chose not to wear the seat belt, don't you think you'd feel guilt? It can cause some psychological problems.

So I'm only caring about freedom because I feel they suppressed it? It's not that I disagree w/ the reactance effect, it's that I don't think that's the only reason I feel this way. If your internet was blocked from exploring "questionable" websites (lets just say violent video games), then wouldn't you lash out?

For every action, a reaction. I get that, but I don't feel that my argument against the law is any less valid.

But back to your hypothetical. That has happened to me before. He didn't die, but he was hospitalized and the doctors said it was because he hadn't worn his seatbelt.

 

[cathou]

Recently there have been an exceedingly large amount of seatbelt commercials ("Click it or Ticket").

Now I'd like to hear a legitimate argument for pro-seatbelt laws because I find that forcing people to participate in something like that is infringing on individual freedoms.

I wear my seatbelt most of the time because it's safer in general, but shouldn't it be a personal choice?

Oooh also, I think this varies by state, but I'm pretty sure in some areas a cop can't pull you over just for not wearing your seatbelt. If you get pulled over for speeding AND you're not wearing your seatbelt, then you can get ticketed for both.

i dont know for the usa, but i'm dman sure that here the cop have every right to pull you over to give you a ticket if you dont wear it. they dont need another reason.

and like somebody say, if the car wasnt made with safety belt, you can not wears it and not have a ticket.

 

[joystickjunki3]

This happened several days ago.

We decided we're ok with natural selection.

^Win

Seriously though, people die. It's in the government's best interest (mostly) to make sure its people are safe. Also, each person is worth something to the governemnt in tax money and for economic reasons. If people started to die left right and centre all the time on the roads because of no seatbelt then the government is losing out on money.

But, then again, seeing the image of a baby being torpedoed out of a windscreen is too beautiful to miss.

I suppose this is the most compelling argument I've heard so far.

But I dislike taxes as well, or at least to the point that they are today.

And as much as I dislike seatbelt laws, children's seatbelt law make sense to me because they are not adults and most of them cannot think in the same rational ways that adults can.

 

[WinkyTheGreat]

I wear my seatbelt most of the time because it's safer in general, but shouldn't it be a personal choice?

Most likely, the only reason you feel this way is because of the reactance effect. You feel that a freedom is being suppressed and because of that you feel the need to lash out. There have been studies done that show this.

Now to stay on topic. Say you are in an accident that is your fault. The person in the other car isn't wearing a seat belt and is killed. While the person's death isn't necessarily your fault because they were the ones who chose not to wear the seat belt, don't you think you'd feel guilt? It can cause some psychological problems.

So I'm only caring about freedom because I feel they suppressed it? It's not that I disagree w/ the reactance effect, it's that I don't think that's the only reason I feel this way. If your internet was blocked from exploring "questionable" websites (lets just say violent video games), then wouldn't you lash out?

For every action, a reaction. I get that, but I don't feel that my argument against the law is any less valid.

But back to your hypothetical. That has happened to me before. He didn't die, but he was hospitalized and the doctors said it was because he hadn't worn his seatbelt.

That's not the only reason, but it's one of those trivial things that you're worrying about. You say you do it already so what's the big deal?

 

[Susan Arendt]

Because it's not just a law for the driver, but for all passengers in the car - including children, people sitting in the back seat, and so forth. Rather than try to have law saying "Only children under the age of 18, and those sitting in one of the front seats, unless they're in the middle of the back and therefore have an unobstructed flight path through the windshield" etc, etc, the law simply says you're in a moving car, ya gotta have a seat belt on.

Let's say your passenger in the back seat isn't wearing a seatbelt and you suddenly have to slam on the brakes to avoid an accident. That passenger may fly forward, hitting you and forcing you to slam on the gas - or even just smacking your head into the steering wheel. Or perhaps they're thrown sideways into the person sitting next to them, and slam their head into the window. All very possible if they're not restrained by a seat belt.

 

[joystickjunki3]

Recently there have been an exceedingly large amount of seatbelt commercials ("Click it or Ticket").

Now I'd like to hear a legitimate argument for pro-seatbelt laws because I find that forcing people to participate in something like that is infringing on individual freedoms.

I wear my seatbelt most of the time because it's safer in general, but shouldn't it be a personal choice?

We have had seatbelt laws in Canada here for a long time, for most of my life I can remember haveing to wear a belt even if it was "ah-hem" a lap belt. It's no biggie.

As for your right to choice, sure I'm game.

But I have first hand experience with people who don't wear seatbelts having significant injuries/death even at low imact speeds verus the how the "**ck* did you walk away from that crash. "Oh I was wearing a seat belt"

As you can tell, I'm a poster boy for seat belts. This is just a little social engineering by your government, albiet 35 years after everyone else. lol


*edit. if you want the rights and freedoms to fly through a windshied, sure...you have the significant possibility in the event of an accident to be dead right.

*edit. I do get where your coming from with government becoming more intrusive in our lives

I understand where you're coming from as well.

So far, outside of this thread, the best argument I've heard for pro-seatbelt laws is that people w/o health insurance get covered by others' tax dollars. Maybe the solution to this is to exempt any who weren't wearing seatbelts or helmets from government health care in the case of the accident.

 

[Bofus Teefus]

I don't think anyone really argues that they save lives and prevent injury. That has been pretty much established. Why force it?

Economics. "Seatbelts save lives" is not quite as important as "seatbelts help prevent injury" when you look at the cost associated with an accident. In otherwise minor accidents, not having a seatbelt on can lead to a hospital stay, which is expensive. For the uninsured (or poorly insured) the cost goes to the taxpayers. That is why you should be forced to wear your seatbelt. I don't want to pay your hospital bill when you don't wear it.

EDIT- I so got ninja'd it's not even funny. Same post time.

 

[Erana]

Its a good idea, and it would be an infringement of rights if it effected only the individual. Bodies are dangerous to others, apparently, and I like the idea of my country protecting me from other people's idiocy.

 

[joystickjunki3]

Because it's not just a law for the driver, but for all passengers in the car - including children, people sitting in the back seat, and so forth. Rather than try to have law saying "Only children under the age of 18, and those sitting in one of the front seats, unless they're in the middle of the back and therefore have an unobstructed flight path through the windshield" etc, etc, the law simply says you're in a moving car, ya gotta have a seat belt on.

Let's say your passenger in the back seat isn't wearing a seatbelt and you suddenly have to slam on the brakes to avoid an accident. That passenger may fly forward, hitting you and forcing you to slam on the gas - or even just smacking your head into the steering wheel. Or perhaps they're thrown sideways into the person sitting next to them, and slam their head into the window. All very possible if they're not restrained by a seat belt.

I don't know about a lot of other states, but when I was learning to drive and went to the DMV for classes and tests we were taught that passengers only were required to wear seatbelts if they were under the age of 14. The only time all passengers were required to wear seatbelts was when the driver still had a learning permit.

To repeat, I'm not sure about other states, though.

 

[joystickjunki3]

I don't think anyone really argues that they save lives and prevent injury. That has been pretty much established. Why force it?

Economics. "Seatbelts save lives" is not quite as important as "seatbelts help prevent injury" when you look at the cost associated with an accident. In otherwise minor accidents, not having a seatbelt on can lead to a hospital stay, which is expensive. For the uninsured (or poorly insured) the cost goes to the taxpayers. That is why you should be forced to wear your seatbelt. I don't want to pay your hospital bill when you don't wear it.

I said it in the post before yours: Maybe the solution to this is to exempt any who weren't wearing seatbelts or helmets from government health care in the case of the accident.

 

[El Poncho]

why not where the seatbelt not as if ur gonna be running about the vehicle, and its not wasting anytime since u will be in the car anyway :|

 

[nova18]

I don't think anyone really argues that they save lives and prevent injury. That has been pretty much established. Why force it?

Economics. "Seatbelts save lives" is not quite as important as "seatbelts help prevent injury" when you look at the cost associated with an accident. In otherwise minor accidents, not having a seatbelt on can lead to a hospital stay, which is expensive. For the uninsured (or poorly insured) the cost goes to the taxpayers. That is why you should be forced to wear your seatbelt. I don't want to pay your hospital bill when you don't wear it.

The point that I was going to make.
Imagine that 10 people today were involved in a crash and didn't wear their seatbelts.
Out of those 10, 4 died and 6 are heavily injured.

Now the taxpayer must pay for emergency services to clear up the wreckage, provide treatment to the injured and take care of the deceased. Now that those 4 people are dead, they arent paying taxes, so the Government is slightly out of pocket.

Its in a nations best interests to keep people alive, because it costs them less to keep their populace alive and they get more money from taxes.

I dont see the big deal about wearing seatbelts, its easy and it stops you from dying. Anyone who has a problem with that is obviously picking at faults that arent there.

 

[joystickjunki3]

I don't think anyone really argues that they save lives and prevent injury. That has been pretty much established. Why force it?

Economics. "Seatbelts save lives" is not quite as important as "seatbelts help prevent injury" when you look at the cost associated with an accident. In otherwise minor accidents, not having a seatbelt on can lead to a hospital stay, which is expensive. For the uninsured (or poorly insured) the cost goes to the taxpayers. That is why you should be forced to wear your seatbelt. I don't want to pay your hospital bill when you don't wear it.

The point that I was going to make.
Imagine that 10 people today were involved in a crash and didn't wear their seatbelts.
Out of those 10, 4 died and 6 are heavily injured.

Now the taxpayer must pay for emergency services to clear up the wreckage, provide treatment to the injured and take care of the deceased. Now that those 4 people are dead, they arent paying taxes, so the Government is slightly out of pocket.

Its in a nations best interests to keep people alive, because it costs them less to keep their populace alive and they get more money from taxes.

I dont see the big deal about wearing seatbelts, its easy and it stops you from dying. Anyone who has a problem with that is obviously picking at faults that arent there.

Seriously, for the 3rd time.

Maybe the solution to this is to exempt any who weren't wearing seatbelts or helmets from government health care in the case of the accident.

EDIT: Also, my problem is not w/ seatbelts themselves. It's just the laws requiring individuals to wear them.

 

[razer17]

Recently there have been an exceedingly large amount of seatbelt commercials ("Click it or Ticket").

Now I'd like to hear a legitimate argument for pro-seatbelt laws because I find that forcing people to participate in something like that is infringing on individual freedoms.

I wear my seatbelt most of the time because it's safer in general, but shouldn't it be a personal choice?

EDIT: I suppose this argument also applies to helmets for motorcycles, etc.

well mainly because not wearing a seatbelt is dangerous for others if your in the back. then there is the fact if someone hits you, and you die because you don't wear a seatbelt/helmet, you have scared them, because they killed you through your own stupidity. then there is the fact that it helps the families (they don't die, family doesn't have to grieve). and also there is that seatbelts and helmets = less injuries = lower cost to your friendli local health services/ government health budget can be used on things other than idiots injured through their own stupidity.

 

[Amsay]

Slightly different. Limiting speed saves others' lives as well. If I don't put on my seatbelt, whose life am I risking other than my own?

If there are others in the car you are also risking their life, a body crashing around can be very dangerous for others in an accident.

How often does a body crash around in the car enough to harm others in the car?

Regardless of that, airbags generally minimize movement of bodies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-9JR2P4wWI&feature=PlayList&p=81A4D25DE7E892E2&index=4

/thread

 

[Zombie_Fish]

Now I'd like to hear a legitimate argument for pro-seatbelt laws because I find that forcing people to participate in something like that is infringing on individual freedoms.

But the purpose of laws is to infringe on people's rights. Doesn't the law against murder infringe your right to kill? Doesn't the law against stealing infringe your right to kill?

Laws are designed to infringe our rights for security. If you say that this law is stupid for infringing people's rights then you would have to go against every other law as well.