A Young Republican learns about natural selection the hard way

[KaNick]

that only 6,100 lives are saved per year because of new seat belt wearers.

Only...

 

[Sarevok]

for not weating a seatbelt... he was kinda asking for it to happen.

 

[FriendlyFire]

No law, or set of laws, has made the government more intrusive and ridiculous than seat belt legislation.

The Irony of it all

 

[Timko]

There are even cases of people being hit from the side at certain angled where they were crushed into their own seatbelts and strangled. If they had not been wearing a seatbelt, they would have been thrown across the car and ended up bruised and broken, but alive.

(bolding mine). Now that's pure conjecture, and I would say that the likelihood of being strangled/having neck broken when wearing a seat belt probably is far, far lower than likelihood of dying if you are sent headfirst across the car into the passenger door (or passenger!)

the driver (or owner of the vehicle) can tell everyone to buckle up. I do, all the time. If you're in the front seat, you can ask the person behind you to buckle up. I don't think unbelted passengers killing front-seat occupants in collisions is all that widespread, though.

I don't know who has the responsibility of making sure who has seatbelts on, especially in US, but what if it is the driver who doesn't like to wear seatbelts? He won't make anyone else wear them and endanger them.

 

[A'AbarachAmadan]

If one is doing the math, that is more than $138 million spent on seat belt laws. But the kicker is this: It is estimated, by researchers for Congress, that only 6,100 lives are saved per year because of new seat belt wearers. Moreover, the increase in the percentage of those who wear seat belts has leveled off.

While I dont' like the government telling me what to do, the above equates to about $23K per life, which from a purely economic standpoint is a significant cost savings for the country considering insurance payouts, etc. Seatbelt laws are annoying, but good for the nation.

 

[Mise]

[qoute=]If one is doing the math, that is more than $138 million spent on seat belt laws. But the kicker is this: It is estimated, by researchers for Congress, that only 6,100 lives are saved per year because of new seat belt wearers. Moreover, the increase in the percentage of those who wear seat belts has leveled off.

While I dont' like the government telling me what to do, the above equates to about $23K per life, which from a purely economic standpoint is a significant cost savings for the country considering insurance payouts, etc. Seatbelt laws are annoying, but good for the nation.

Indeed! And $138 million in a country of 300 million is $0.46 per person.

 

[Shadylookin]

I believe that mandatory seat belt laws are a bad thing.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

While this is an interesting question (mandatory seatbelts), I don't know if people should be mocking this guy's death.

 

[cgannon64]

I've always hated the Darwin Awards, but coupling them with partisan bickering? Sheesh.

EDIT: As far as I know, mandatory seat belt laws, like laws regarding taking up more than one seat on the train, are only used as a way to get back at people who piss off the cops.

 

[Jawz II]

The triumphalism displayed by some posters in reaction to this guys death is nauseating.

There was clearly a point to why he was choosing not to wear his seat belt. I don't happen to agree with the point he was trying to make but flaming him says more about some individuals lack of class than his decision making.

as opposed to the little dance of joy you did when all those iraqi civilians got bombed to bits, right?

you know what they say, if you live in a glas house...

plus who is flaming him? his decision and opinion about seat belt were obviously stoopid, looking at the results, you cant possibly disagree with that!

no, from now on its gods job to flame him

I believe that mandatory seat belt laws are a bad thing.

i think you shouldnt wear seatbelt then

 

[The Last Conformist]

Even if the state doesn't pay for the medical costs for someone who gets injured or killed due to not wearing a seatbelt, it's still gonna pay for removal of wrecked vehicles, decreased tax income from less profitable insurance companies, and-so-on.

If you don't want the state to tell you how to drive, don't drive on state roads.

 

[Jawz II]

i dont understand the logic behind some of the stuff some people have said here

"i think seatbelts are good, but laws making people wear them are bad"



if seatbelts are good, then how is making people wear them a bad thing?
make up your minds

 

[nonconformist]

TLC has a point. You are driving on a road belonging to the state, and therefore you should obey when they tell you what to do. Or else, go drive around in your garden.

 

[Mr. Do]

i dont understand the logic behind some of the stuff some people have said here

"i think seatbelts are good, but laws making people wear them are bad"



if seatbelts are good, then how is making people wear them a bad thing?
make up your minds

supposedly, the government shoul not spend the taxpayers' money to force people to do something that is for their benefit, and people should have the choice to go without. However I think TLC has quite neatly provided a rebuttal for his way of thinking.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Incidentally, would an compulsory seatbelt law really cost alot of money? In fact, one of the reasons I've heard advance for it is that it would save taxpayers money. Now, that might work differently in the states, where taxpayers don't fund hospitals the way they do here, but the missing money's gonna come from insurance companies, who'll increase premiums. Assuming seatbelt laws make more people survive car accidents without dying or suffering serious injury, they should lower everyone's insurance premiums in the long term, offsetting any tax hikes to finance them. Not that I see how they'd be very expensive to monitor. Additionally, fines would provide an additional source of revenue.

 

[IglooDame]

I don't know who has the responsibility of making sure who has seatbelts on, especially in US, but what if it is the driver who doesn't like to wear seatbelts? He won't make anyone else wear them and endanger them.

So how stupid would you feel in suing the driver after he crashes and you're injured as a direct result of not wearing a seatbelt? "He didn't make me wear a seatbelt and he should have done so" would be pretty embarassing, I'd think.

 

[Mr. Do]

Although I didn't really mean it when I made that post, you could take the "taxpayers' money" argument to mean that people who don't wear seatbelts should not have to pay fines for not wearing seatbelts. The financial side of things more applies to marketting campaigns to wear seatbelts, although I don't really think the argument that taxpayer money should not be used in this way holds any water, a it has been shown to be very cost-effective by Mise and AAA.

 

[Jawz II]

Incidentally, would an compulsory seatbelt law really cost alot of money? In fact, one of the reasons I've heard advance for it is that it would save taxpayers money. Now, that might work differently in the states, where taxpayers don't fund hospitals the way they do here, but the missing money's gonna come from insurance companies, who'll increase premiums. Assuming seatbelt laws make more people survive car accidents without dying or suffering serious injury, they should lower everyone's insurance premiums in the long term, offsetting any tax hikes to finance them. Not that I see how they'd be very expensive to monitor. Additionally, fines would provide an additional source of revenue.

now even if one wouldnt count in the money state saves on medical bills by making citizens wear seatblets, consider this my republican friends

the 9/11 attacks killed almost 3000 people, the war in iraq costs 175 million, every day!

and this guy in his article has stated that the state shouldnt have spent those 100 millions on a campgain for seatbelts (which i assume was a one time deal), cause seatbelts only save 6100 lives every year......

 

[anarchywrksbest]

Does America have cool stuff like this?

http://www.thinkseatbelts.com/

We get to see people heads being splattered over windscreens in safety ads, makes you realise how stupid not using a seat belt is.

 

[WillJ]

If you don't want the state to tell you how to drive, don't drive on state roads.

I'm not sure seat belt laws only apply to driving on state roads.