[Brian_C6]

Topic open.....

Your thoughts on the seat belt law and officers being able to pull you over for it. I disagree with it. I disagree with the stupid law to begin with. Another step towards government control over "what is good" for the people.

The real issue here is money. The state gets a $14 million grant from the federal gov if the law is passed. Do I smell BULLSHIT!!??

Brian

[01YZF6]

NH already has it mandated that they can pull you over if 1 person in the vehicle is not wearing a seatbelt ( even if they are over 18) and has the right to "ask" for ID ( read as probe for other offenses to write up)

[neuthunder]

ehhh i wear one anyway and anyone that is with me usually puts one on about 50 ft down the road outta fear

[bentbryan]

Originally posted by Brian_C6
I disagree with the stupid law to begin with. Another step towards government control over "what is good" for the people.

The real issue here is money. The state gets a $14 million grant from the federal gov if the law is passed. Do I smell BULLSHIT!!??

Brian

+ 1

[hessogood]

I'm for a seatbelt law just as strong as I'm for a helmet law. Being able to pull you over and get charged for a moving violation is BS though. I don't believe it should hike your insurance. I recently started wearing my seatbelt all the time, never used to before. I was starting to feel like a hypocrite because I'm a saftey preacher on 2 wheels. What's the difference on 4?

[Currently]

I never used to wear a seatbelt till I took engineering physics in college .. (went to college when I was 35) and "saw" the forces involved in an accident.

About 4 months after that, one of my friends driving a corrolla collided with pickup that pulled a U turn in front of him. He was wearing his belt and the forces were so great that the belt cut his skin from shoulder to breast.

He was only going about 35 -40 mph ...

What I learned by that is not you have to wear your seat belt.

What I really learned is that you cannot predict idiots
and you have to do you best to protect yourself from their actions.

[benVFR]

Why would you need to take engineering physics to understand that? Never had an accident as a child or even thought about it? I think part of the reason in this case for a law is without the laws we probably wouldn't even have seatbelts in cars, much less crash structures, airbags, ABS, etc..

Call me a cynic but I don't believe the car companies would have developed any of those things without being forced to. The laws forcing people to wear them are just part of the picture.

This is totally different then helmets IMO because helmets don't have anything to do with the bike manufacturer.

[hessogood]

Originally posted by benVFR
Why would you need to take engineering physics to understand that? Never had an accident as a child or even thought about it? I think part of the reason in this case for a law is without the laws we probably wouldn't even have seatbelts in cars, much less crash structures, airbags, ABS, etc..

Call me a cynic but I don't believe the car companies would have developed any of those things without being forced to. The laws forcing people to wear them are just part of the picture.

This is totally different then helmets IMO because helmets don't have anything to do with the bike manufacturer.

Was your opinion in there? I think Brian is searching for what you think of the law, not an opposition to other's opinions or a conspiracy theory.

How can helmets and seatbelts be 'totally different'? They're both motor vehicle saftey devices serving the exact same purpose. We're not talking about manufacture or marketing, this is a safety issue. But to go on that topic, of course manufacturers would have airbags, seatbelts and ABS. Law does not require side curtains and everything else they do that far exceeds regulations. That's like saying we have stop signs so that the sheet metal industry can prosper.

[benVFR]

Just like Ford would happily build exploding Pintos & Explorers that will rollover, I think they would happily build cars with no airbags, seatbelts, etc.. if no one was forcing them too.

The reason I think helmets are different is if helmets are not required there are enough of us that will buy them that they would still be developed.

An aftermarket seatbelt solution would never be as good as an integrated safety system in a car IMO.

The law doesn't bother me. Most states (edit) have it. Only way it would bother me is if they busted me in my driveway or something, or no leniency if they nailed you 10 ft out of the garage.

[FazerChic]

Seat belt laws don't bother me. I started wearing my seatbelt 14 years ago. I was in the military and it was mandatory to wear one on base, so I just stuck with it.

[RandyO]

I think there are enuf people that want safety features that the manufacturers would be offering them, I would prefer they be oprional, especially airbags

[benVFR]

I think I prefer them to be optional too..

It's just I believe the progress will be much slower without some kind of government pressure and/or insurance industry pressure.

The specific area that makes me wish some of them were optional is for sports cars and cars which are otherwise supposed to be fun and/or economical, as the safety devices are one item that has made cars so porky. But apparently americans want porky cars so dropping some of the safety items might not matter.

[MissTwisties]

I'm on the fence for that one...I agree with it, but don't really care either if people are not wearing theirs in their own car? If they get in my car, they HAVE TO wear their seat belt. I heard something to the effect that if one person is not wearing their seat belt in your car, you can have to pay a ticket, or maybe it's the person not wearing the seat belt getting ticketed?

I always wear mine, and my daughters always have to buckle up also. The other day we were leaving for Quebec, it was VERY slippery outside, we were taking the small streets behind our house to get to the highway, and on one corner, Man God slowed down to make a stop, we were going maybe 25-30 miles an hour....the Envoy NEVER stopped...and went hitting a electric pole across the street. I remember my whole body moving forward and then going back hitting the seat. Somehow, and that I can't remember how it happend, I hurt my pinky finger, and the pressure from my seatbelt made my pendant hurt me in the chest, nothing bad, but just enough to be sensitive for a few days on that little spot. Now that surprised me, and I told my husband "holy shit...the impact was kinda strong for the SUV only going a few miles an hour...what would it be like if you were driving 70 miles an hour???" If I haden't wear my seat belt that day, even tho the hit was indeed at a very low speed, I'm pretty sure I would have hit my head on the dash board.

[odduc]

I disagree with the stupid law to begin with. Another step towards government control over "what is good" for the people.

ditto.......

Just say "NO" to any more government control !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Brian_C6]

Obviously choosing to wear your seatbelt is a smarter, safer decision and I'm pretty positive no one here disagrees. I think everyone here agrees wearing one should increase your chances of survival and/or protect you against major injury during an auto accident. You don't need physicist or an engineer to tell me... the proof is in the statistics. You wear your seatbelt = you increase your safety. My concern here is not the question of safety. My main concern is... "choice". I can no longer CHOOSE NOT to wear one.

Any doctor will tell you drinking alcohol isn't healthy. Any doctor will tell you eating fried food is unhealthy. But you still have the choice to eat whatever you want, right? The argument up at the house is insurance costs. They say, "People who are uninsured, and hurt in auto accidents are costing the state money.... in turn "effecting" other people. If everyone wears seatbelts, the health cost will drop." In my opinion, that is the only valid argument and it doesn't validate a law.

I will take this back to the healthy food issue. What is the difference between forcing seatbelts on people to control health costs vs. controlling food intake on unhealthy people to control health cost?

Eating healthy and wearing a seatbelt technically is the "right" thing to do and both will save everyone money. Am I crazy here? What is next... no more McDonalds?

Brian

[TheIglu]

I think the law isn't worthwhile.

For children, that's another story altogether. Parents should be fined up the ass if they let their kids run amuck in the car with no seatbelts. Adults know better, kids don't.

[benVFR]

Don't be thinking I'd actually be out there fighting for seatbelt laws.

Getting worked up over this is hard for me to do though... it does not harm me to wear a seatbelt, or really limit me in any way.

There are far bigger fish to fry and things to worry about.

[SSearchVT]

I wear my seatbelt by choice everytime I get in the car. Personally I don't think it should be a law for adults - sort of.

The problem arises when people are involved in accidents and because they chose not to use readily available and proven safety equipment end up getting injured more severely then if they had used their seatbelt. A large portion of the medical bills for these folks is covered by insurance. Insurance companies need to re-coup losses. They do this by charging higher rates. So, I am paying more money because of a decision someone else made.

Because of this twist I feel it should be a law. Find a way to keep me from having to pay for other peoples decisions and I'll change my position...

[Honclfibr]

I agree with mandatory seatbelt laws for children under X years of age (18 seems to be the agreed upon "age of adulthood" so fine then, 18). Children do not have the experience to properly process the risks inherent in the world around them, and must be forcibly sheltered from those risks until they have the necessary experience to make informed decisions. If the parents cannot make the correct decision in the best interest of the child (which is, indisputably, for the child to wear a seatbelt), then the state should step in; children should not suffer for the irresponsibility of their parents when at all possible.

I disagree with mandatory seatbelt laws (and, while we're at it, mandatory helmet laws) for people over the age of consent. If you've lived in this world for long enough to recognize that driving a car without a seatbelt (/ riding a motorcyle without a helmet) is a dangerous activity, and still wish to do so, that should be your right.

As a corollary, I support the refusal of federal funds to maintain the health of those adults who suffer injuries in an accident that could have been prevented by wearing a seatbelt / helmet, etc but who chose not to. If you have secured medical insurance to pay for your vegetative state resulting from travelling through the windshield of your car at 65 mph without a seatbelt, good for you. If not, sorry, we're going to have to pull the plug. We told you it was dangerous, you didn't listen and you didn't purchase medical insurance despite having 18+ years to consider the facts about not wearing a seatbelt/helmet. Not our problem, better luck next life.

[benVFR]

There's probably a law that says the insurance company can't deny claims if there is evidence that the "victims" were not wearing seatbelts. So maybe that is where it would have to start.

What if I am not wearing a seatbelt and you and I have an accident that is 100% your fault? Your insurance would be asked to pay instead of mine. That's a totally different scenario then if I'm not wearing a seatbelt and I crash into a tree all by myself...

Unfortunately it's complicated just like everything else in life...

[JeffL]

Well, just a testament to how dumb people are. If people wont wear a seat belt under their own accord, the government will just have to mandate common sense and intelligence. I wish them good luck with that though.

[odduc]

I think the point was the government control issue. I certainly have no problem with seatbelts and we should all be wearing them. However, why does the government need to force us to wear it if we don't want to? Our individual, personal freedoms are being taken away slowly, just like the frog in the warm water which eventually boils and kills it, we're being lulled into giving more and more control to our government. A seatbelt law today; tommorrow who knows what we'll be forced to do. Enough already ! I've written about this sort of thing several times from this space and I still don't understand why more people aren't furious about the government machine. I guess the water is only lukewarm right now, so it "feels" good.

Haven't we figured out, yet, that EVERYTHING the government takes control of gets fucked up beyond recognition? So, what happens when the government fucks up? A new agency is created to police the offending agency and the government machine keeps growing and growing......

end of rant............................................

[odduc]

If people wont wear a seat belt under their own accord, the government will just have to mandate common sense and intelligence.

It is not the business of government to mandate common sense!!!

[bentbryan]

Originally posted by Brian_C6
Your thoughts on the seat belt law and officers being able to pull you over for it.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think this thread is getting alittle off the original topic. It's not that you can be issued a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt (assuming it's an additional charge for some moving violation) but the fact that police will now be looking for seat-belt violations and subsequently stopping vehicles for that sole reason. Personally, I feel the police have much better things to do than look for people not wearing their seatbelts.

[creamsicle]

Am I missing something here? Is there a seatbelt law in NH now for adults? I knew there was one for kids under a certain age.