Seatbelt Law
- Thread starter Dymphna
- Start date
K
Kain99
Guest
It's only a fragment of my reasoning Frank. The reasoning displayed in this thread against the seatbelt law is simply further proof that people are so ignorant the Government has to step in and mandate their use.
Christy
b*tch rocket
Oh c'mon Kain, gimme a break! I've known instances where seatbelts have saved lives, however I've also seen instances where not wearing a seatbelt has saved lives.
Amazingly enough, People die!
Ain't that a shocker?! Some drown in their bathtubs, some have the misfortune of walking in front of a bus etc.. ALL can subjected to a "law" for our own protection. Truth be told, tons of lives could be saved every year if the government just fined anyone with a bathtub. We don't really need them anyway (with the advent of shower. I'm stunned that I survived childhood. Back in the days where I roamed freely in the backseat of my parents car.
I must have some special blessing from God that I survived that! Not to mention I NEVER wore a bicycle helmet! And Holy Mother of Mary, my dad kept several loaded firearms lying about the house! 
cattitude
My Sweetest Boy
Originally posted by Christy
[BI'm stunned that I survived childhood. Back in the days where I roamed freely in the backseat of my parents car.
Well, Christy, I remember my brother had one of those very safe car seats..you know the one with the little metal hooks that went over the front seat and it had that neat steering while with a horn. Very cool. When we were a little older my mother took us to get Halloween costumes and smashed us all into the windshield and dash when we were involved in a rearender. Another time my sister was was just a toddler and she was floating in the back of a station wagon...dad took off and she feel into the metal door opener and required plastic surgery to fix the gash on her nose.
Last edited:
Frank
Chairman of the Board
What ones might they be? You're saying that although I believe the law to be an infringement on my rights, I must be "ignorant" because I disagree with you? MAKE your case, but don't resort to name calling.
I do not agree with even the IDEA that if I am ignorant of such things, the government's job is to "educate" me, anymore than you would agree it is MY job to "educate" you.
I understand my liberties to be more or less boundless with the exception of where they infringe upon the liberties of others. This is where people argue. I may THINK I have the right to never look at an ugly person or eat in a restaurant with people of a certain race - but I don't have that right, and such "liberties" infringe on others. I may think I have the right to play music very loud into the late night hours, but I don't, because THAT does infringe upon others.
What I do in the privacy of my own home, or in my own car, is my own business until it infringes upon someone else - and is a reasonable infringement. I think it is more important that police direct their attentions to the drivers that are CAUSING accidents, than drivers who aren't doing anything (but actually MIGHT become a victim of the crazy reckless guys they OUGHT to be pulling over) and in the tiniest fraction of auto trips, they COULD hurt themselves.
Think of it this way - if you needed to raise cash - what would you have YOUR cops do - sit idly in their cruisers, waiting to ticket the large portion of otherwise law-abiding drivers who aren't belted - or actually drive, find and catch the ones causing the trouble?
Why DOES the law make sense to anyone? This is like requiring kids to wear protective outerwear to the playground, because bullies might pick on them (and fining them, when they don't). Doesn't it make MORE sense, to get the bullies?
Kain, do you know what the #1 cause of death in America is? Heart disease. And what is the #1 cause of heart disease? Obesity.
Now, using your logic, we should fine or incarcerate fat people since they're causing the most work for the coroners. After all, when someone is so ignorant, the government should surely step in and mandate their food intake. Right?
How about that junk food tax the fascists have been talking about? It's for your own good, right? Because you're so ignorant that you eat things that are bad for you, right?
Now, using your logic, we should fine or incarcerate fat people since they're causing the most work for the coroners. After all, when someone is so ignorant, the government should surely step in and mandate their food intake. Right?
How about that junk food tax the fascists have been talking about? It's for your own good, right? Because you're so ignorant that you eat things that are bad for you, right?
K
Kain99
Guest
Originally posted by Kain99
Simple! People don't like being told what to do. I imagine they lean heavily on the "If I want to be ejected from my vehicle at 60 miles and hour...what do you care?" line of thinking.
This is of course, a selfish and ignorant position. Obviously, they have absolutely no idea what it costs to clean up scenes where the occupants of vehicles have refused to buckle up. I won't get into the hours of biological hazard clean up involved but I will say that it ain't pretty.
Made my point on page #1 Seat belts save lives and money! This State is in the hole big time! Why in the he!! should Maryland pay Hazmat overtime to Paramedics on duty who should be out saving lives? Guess what happens when a crew is out on the road sifting through tons of brain matter. Yep! A second crew is called in to stand watch. It's ridiculous.
You guys just hate being told what to do! Your like a bunch of rebellious children. "Nobody can tell me what to do!" Please!
To those who have pointed out how lucky thay are to be alive.... You are absolutely right!
The fat comment is simply to ridiculous to directly address.
K
Kain99
Guest
Originally posted by cariblue
This is what they do when they have nothing of substance to offer.
Last edited by a moderator:
K
Kain99
Guest
Cripes! I hate that! "offer" Just when I was getting all froggy! 
Figures! Must be an omen to shut the heck up again.....
Figures! Must be an omen to shut the heck up again.....
K
Kain99
Guest
Why move? The U.S. is happy to accomodate you! 
Yeah, we caught that. Or at least the People's Republik of Maryland is, anyway.
jlabsher
Sorry about that chief.
I've been in several accidents, some with seatbelts, some without. I know in one that the seatbelt saved my life, all I got was a bruise where the belt was after rolling down a 60 foot embankment end over end in an escort. I wear it when I leave town, but not going to the store, even though I drive 65 down 235 like everybody else.
My kids tell me to put it on. BUT, I don't think it is the government's place to MAKE me wear it. Just like it isn't the government's place to tell my kid to wear a brain bucket on her bike, or tell me to stop using tobacco, or alcohol, ad nauseum...
It is a civil liberty issue, thankfully America is built around individual freedoms, any attempt to quell these freedoms by either party is, in my opinion wrong. (stepping off soapbox...)
Think of all those EMS guys I'm keeping employed, not to mention somebody to hose me off the pavement.
My kids tell me to put it on. BUT, I don't think it is the government's place to MAKE me wear it. Just like it isn't the government's place to tell my kid to wear a brain bucket on her bike, or tell me to stop using tobacco, or alcohol, ad nauseum...
It is a civil liberty issue, thankfully America is built around individual freedoms, any attempt to quell these freedoms by either party is, in my opinion wrong. (stepping off soapbox...)
Think of all those EMS guys I'm keeping employed, not to mention somebody to hose me off the pavement.
And there you have it. The cop that ticketed me pretty much said so. I was like, "Gosh, this is what they've got you doing all day now?" And he replied, "Haven't you heard? Maryland has a deficit to make up."
StillCrazy
Member
Please save us from ourselves
After reading the previous four pages, here's what I got...
The pro-seatbelt argument is that it saves clean-up time at an accident site, thereby saving money. It also provides an income source from ticketing those law-breaking no-seat-belt-for-me users. That's not good enough for me - aren't they suposed to be SAFETY belts. If they are so safe - why do the newer cars have air bags. Someone is feeding us a line of BS.
When I get a few extra months to spare maybe I'll do a little research to uncover how much of my expenditures were due to safety related costs - personal physical safety (seat belt, helmet), financial safety (the product warning labels designed to prevent lawsuits), home value saftey ( homeowner insurance and asssociations), and on and on.
Whatever happened to being responsible for your own actions. Practice defensive driving and you're likely to not find yourself in an accident. Drive like a fool, then die like a fool and clense the gene pool.
After reading the previous four pages, here's what I got...
The pro-seatbelt argument is that it saves clean-up time at an accident site, thereby saving money. It also provides an income source from ticketing those law-breaking no-seat-belt-for-me users. That's not good enough for me - aren't they suposed to be SAFETY belts. If they are so safe - why do the newer cars have air bags. Someone is feeding us a line of BS.
When I get a few extra months to spare maybe I'll do a little research to uncover how much of my expenditures were due to safety related costs - personal physical safety (seat belt, helmet), financial safety (the product warning labels designed to prevent lawsuits), home value saftey ( homeowner insurance and asssociations), and on and on.
Whatever happened to being responsible for your own actions. Practice defensive driving and you're likely to not find yourself in an accident. Drive like a fool, then die like a fool and clense the gene pool.
