I can understand that being unbuckled in a car with other people poses a risk to the others if you were to get into an accident. But to me choosing not to buckle up when you are riding by yourself is simply just an act of stupidity, not really hurting anyone else.
So why is law enforcement cracking down on this whole seat belt thing regardless if you are riding with others or going solo?
To try to save people from their own stupidity.
For some strange reason, scraping brains off tarmac isn’t something the Police or EMS enjoy doing.
People that end up crippled due to their own stupidity still become a burden on society. It’s the same argument with the motorcycle helmet laws. We don’t want your sense of “freedom” and “personal choice” to impose an unnecessary burden on the rest of us who have some common sense.
Buckle up, put on your helmet and get a clue.
It also costs more money and screws up traffic worse when they have to spend a couple hours scraping people off the road during rush hour. It’s much nicer when they call a wrecker and everyone walks away.
This not being GD I won’t go into the rights and wrongs of it. However, there are rational arguments to be made to the effect that injuring yourself has effects beyond those upon you alone.
Well, in my state you can ride a motorcycle w/o a helmet. Thus, I think wearing a seatbelt should be a personal choice as well.
*I’m not saying that it is a good idea to not wear a seat belt, only that the law (here at least) is a little confused to say the least.
It’s more than that. I’m sure I don’t have to provide any links that show how unsafe it is to get into a wreck when seatbelts aren’t worn.
But never discount the power of the almighty dollar when it comes to things like this…
from ehow.com (bolding mine)
That’s partly what I was getting at. The other part is that if people know that the law is being aggressively enforced, then they stand to take a hit in the wallet if they don’t buckle up.
I’m OK with the no helmet rule as long as motorcyclists die when they crash if the only other option is to outlast their insurance while on life support.
OK, my last post was harsher than my true feelings. I don’t want anyone to die. I just think that personal freedoms shouldn’t come at the expense of the tax payers paying the tab for these freedoms. On something like this, I would imagine there’s plenty of evidence to support why helmets should be worn.
This. I’m a traffic junky, and accidents with fatalities take forever to clean up, because the police have to collect far more evidence than just injury accidents. This costs the public money in being late, wastes gas, and can be a safety hazard if emergency equipment gets blocked in the backup.
So if I get a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt I am paying to not have that freedom?
Brain scraping or no brain scraping, I think just the fact there is a fatality makes the job harder.
I don’t understand. Why are cops enforcing the law? Really? :rolleyes:
As mentioned above, you’re paying because I don’t want to clean up your mutilated corpse, or pay your medical bills when you’re insurance runs out, you declare bankruptcy, and end up a burden on the state. Beyond that, take it to GD.
Another factor: a driver in a car that gets hit stays in position and is more likely to be able to control the vehicle somewhat, possibly avoiding a secondary collision.
Because, in the opinion of those who make and enforce such laws, the benefits outweigh the costs.
Benefits:
Lives are saved and serious injuries avoided, because people buckle up who otherwise wouldn’t for various reasons.
Revenue is collected from people who are ticketed for refusing to comply.
You can insist that loved ones, passengers in your car, etc. buckle up without looking like it’s you that’s being bossy.
Costs:
A choice has been taken away, so there’s some decrease in personal freedom.
There is cost and effort involved in enforcing the law.
If you buckle up because of the law, you may experience discomfort or inconvenience, while if you forget or refuse, you may have to pay.
Whether the benefits outweigh the costs, resulting in a net good for people and society, is a matter of debate, but the law exists because someone, at least, believes they do.
Seems like a lot of assumptions are being made in such an instance. I can see where you are coming from, but THAT is the sole answer to the question of the logic behind ‘click it or ticket’? Not to mention the ‘optional’ motorcycle helmets.
I am still paying off a seatbelt ticket I got a few months ago (grr), and it is especially aggravating because I normally wear my seatbelt, but had just jumped into the van to go a couple of blocks at a speed that would never exceed 15 MPH, and got nabbed.
I don’t agree with the law, but here is an argument for it that I haven’t heard promulgated elsewhere:
In an emergency avoidance situation, being strapped in can make you a better driver! You are in much better control of your vehicle if you can focus on your controls and not staying put in your seat. I admit that it is probably an exceedingly rare scenario, but still, a life saved…
As to the real reason, it is the same as the one for red light cameras: revenue enhancement.
My first car didn’t have seat belts. Since it was a roadster, I tended to take corners fast. I supplemented it with a newer model (same car, down on power due to emissions equipment) that had seat belts. I felt much more in control, being strapped in, when going around corners.
I wish I had been wearing the seat belt in the Toyota truck I was in a head-on collision in. I’d still have a knee, rather than have been hobbling around for the last 29-1/2 years.