U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should it be mandated that citizens wear seat belts?
Yes 63 49.61%
No 64 50.39%
Voters: 127. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Old 01-02-2013, 12:14 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 28,292,753 times
Reputation: 7824

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
So now your trying to persuade people they're voting wrong


Maybe people just want their freedom.
"Some things should be left to state, county, and city governing bodies. Not Big Brother."

The poster said this, therefore I have to agree with the poster, unless your poll is "should the federal government regulate the seat belt law" which I would then vote no, but if the poll is should states be allowed to decide if they want to have a seat belt law, then I vote yes.

 
Old 01-02-2013, 12:33 PM
 
Location: USA
13,266 posts, read 10,000,610 times
Reputation: 4228
Public Opinion has shifted to a majority in favor of repealing seat belt laws.

Through this thread and the tons of gun control threads that have been popping up lately, I have to say that I really appreciate the Libertarian and Republican viewpoints in this country. I've been independent for years but grew up in a family of Democrats and always voted that way because of social issues.

I feel that there is a strong majority of Americans coming together who want smaller government and better fiscal responsibility. I don't think the line is "Democrat" or "Republican" anymore. The lines are much more blurry.

Just an observation I've made in the past few weeks.
 
Old 01-02-2013, 12:35 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 28,292,753 times
Reputation: 7824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
Public Opinion has shifted to a majority in favor of repealing seat belt laws.

Through this thread and the tons of gun control threads that have been popping up lately, I have to say that I really appreciate the Libertarian and Republican viewpoints in this country. I've been independent for years but grew up in a family of Democrats and always voted that way because of social issues.

I feel that there is a strong majority of Americans coming together who want smaller government and better fiscal responsibility. I don't think the line is "Democrat" or "Republican" anymore. The lines are much more blurry.

Just an observation I've made in the past few weeks.
Then go forth my good man and get that law repealed I will be intently watching the news waiting for it to happen.
 
Old 01-02-2013, 12:43 PM
 
Location: USA
13,266 posts, read 10,000,610 times
Reputation: 4228
Seat Belt Poll | Bill Roehl

Starting Monday through Memorial Day and the start of graduation season, more than 400 agencies around the state will be spending about $500,000 to dispatch troopers, officers and deputies to issue tickets to anyone they catch not wearing a seat belt.
 
Old 01-02-2013, 12:50 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 28,292,753 times
Reputation: 7824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
Seat Belt Poll | Bill Roehl

Starting Monday through Memorial Day and the start of graduation season, more than 400 agencies around the state will be spending about $500,000 to dispatch troopers, officers and deputies to issue tickets to anyone they catch not wearing a seat belt.
I couldn't find their seat belt poll to see how it turned out, but if you are wondering, I agree with you, it is a waste of money to have troops looking for people not wearing their seat belt when the seat belt use is 91%, but I still support the seat belt law and my hat's off to that county for having such a high seat belt usage, sounds like a county of smart drivers.
 
Old 01-02-2013, 01:06 PM
 
Location: USA
13,266 posts, read 10,000,610 times
Reputation: 4228
Seat belt legislation and the Isles Report | John Adams

"In most countries arguments about seat belt legislation are dead. But it remains a live issue in the United States where such laws are a matter for individual states. As a consequence there exists in the United States a variety of laws and levels of enforcement, and considerable debate about their effectiveness and moral legitimacy.
A recent article on the subject in Time Magazine (“The Hidden Danger of Seat Belts”, 30 November 2006) cited research of mine done many years ago that concluded that seat belt laws had been ineffective in all jurisdictions that had implemented them. It provoked a number of hits on my blog and inquiring emails – hence this blog which attempts to answer some of them.
Why, if I was right, did so few people know that seat belt laws were ineffective? And why had so many legislators ignored this evidence?"
 
Old 01-02-2013, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 28,292,753 times
Reputation: 7824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
Seat belt legislation and the Isles Report | John Adams

"In most countries arguments about seat belt legislation are dead. But it remains a live issue in the United States where such laws are a matter for individual states. As a consequence there exists in the United States a variety of laws and levels of enforcement, and considerable debate about their effectiveness and moral legitimacy.
A recent article on the subject in Time Magazine (“The Hidden Danger of Seat Belts”, 30 November 2006) cited research of mine done many years ago that concluded that seat belt laws had been ineffective in all jurisdictions that had implemented them. It provoked a number of hits on my blog and inquiring emails – hence this blog which attempts to answer some of them.
Why, if I was right, did so few people know that seat belt laws were ineffective? And why had so many legislators ignored this evidence?"
I thought this was an interesting response to the article.
Quote:
Kate Carpenter says:

November 12, 2007 at 9:48 pm (UTC 0)


The word missing from the issue of personal responsibility for their own safety and their dependents, versus state intervention, is Darwin (yes, I know there are still creationists who’ll hang me from a tree for this).
As a road safety engineer I am increasingly of the opinion that we get what we deserve – if we understand (even vaguely) the laws of physics (the laws no-one can break) then we are destined for the Darwin Award for self-removal from the gene pool (hopefully before procreation).
I am uncertain about whether this means we should not assist those who struggle with physics – we strap our children in for their safety, so why stand by and allow less diligent adults to kill themselves or their dependents.
I suppose it’s all down to free will (the right to kill ourselves and our dependents if we wish) versus the state as benevolent parent (highway and police authorities using the naughty step!)
I am sure the debate will outlive me, but meanwhile I’ll keep belting up (and making double sure the person behind me does the same – for my sake as much as theirs!)
On the political issue, I have observed the UK political dimension to highway management, at parish, town, county and national level: Conservatives want free flow driver-uber-alles regardless of child and elderly pedestrian risk i.e. all roundabouts and free-flow traffic. Labour members favour public safety even if it means some delay for car drivers – public net benefit concept – and libdems want whatever might gain local support!
Congratulations John for intelligent, informed debate and thought-provoking articles. I like to be challenged!

Though a useful fact would be how many traffic accident deaths and major injuries happen and what is the percentage of those people that are wearing a seat belt....my guess is this is a great example of Darwinism hard at work.
 
Old 01-02-2013, 01:22 PM
 
Location: USA
13,266 posts, read 10,000,610 times
Reputation: 4228
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
I thought this was an interesting response to the article.


Though a useful fact would be how many traffic accident deaths and major injuries happen and what is the percentage of those people that are wearing a seat belt....my guess is this is a great example of Darwinism hard at work.
A response where the poster did not say whether they supported, or opposed the law, simply threw out statistics.


To answer your question, I'd assume those who have been in more accidents would wear seat belts at a higher rate than those who haven't. And to cut you off before you make the claim your letting onto, not wearing a seat belt does not equal death. Wearing a seat belt and being in an accident does not mean you'll survive.

I guess Darwin is at work on all the humans who have been drinking and smoking the past thousand years. Those people sure are gone now.

Lastly, I love how you focus in on a commentator rather than a man who provided research for legislation in over 12 countries.
 
Old 01-02-2013, 01:25 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 28,292,753 times
Reputation: 7824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
A response where the poster did not say whether they supported, or opposed the law, simply threw out statistics.


To answer your question, I'd assume those who have been in more accidents would wear seat belts at a higher rate than those who haven't. And to cut you off before you make the claim your letting onto, not wearing a seat belt does not equal death. Wearing a seat belt and being in an accident does not mean you'll survive.

I guess Darwin is at work on all the humans who have been drinking and smoking the past thousand years. Those people sure are gone now.

Lastly, I love how you focus in on a commentator rather than a man who provided research for legislation in over 12 countries.
There you go "assuming" again. If only you had facts to back up your assumptions so you don't make an a** out of yourself. Not wearing a seat belt when you drive means you are taking a higher risk and you cannot prevent an accident from happening when it is someone else who causes the accident, so it is impossible to know when you will need a seat belt for a future accident.
 
Old 01-02-2013, 01:27 PM
 
Location: USA
13,266 posts, read 10,000,610 times
Reputation: 4228
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
There you go "assuming" again. If only you had facts to back up your assumptions so you don't make an a** out of yourself. Not wearing a seat belt when you drive means you are taking a higher risk and you cannot prevent an accident from happening when it is someone else who causes the accident, so it is impossible to know when you will need a seat belt for a future accident.
Thanks Sherlock. Your so bright (cute smiley)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top