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.
"It's about making money for the state and letting law enforcement make pretense stops to harass people of interest"
A seat belt law may (or may not) be about govt revenues, etc.
Actually wearing a seat belt is about prevention of injuries and deaths.
You can say the same about not smoking, eating healthy, keeping your knives sharp, etc.
We don't have state laws requiring adults to do these other things to prevent injury and death. We let adults choose whether to wear a seatbelt, helmet, etc. That's not to say some choices aren't stupid.
35000 deaths X 48% = 16,800 died who were not buckled up
52% of people that died were wearing seat belts. 48% were not.
Would be helpful to know the total number of drivers that wear seat belts versus not. Let's assume 70% which I think is on the low side.
There are a lot more people wearing seat belts than are not wearing seat belts. So people wearing seat belts in a crash make up about half the deaths. What does that mean? But as a population they are a much larger slice of the pie of overall drivers. So 18,000 belted people died out of a belted population of 140,000,000 (assuming there are 200 million drivers and 70% wear belts). 16,800 died unbelted out of an unbelted population of 60,000,000. I know which group I'd want to take my chances with.
Do a little critical thinking with the numbers. Not everything is a tin-foil-hat government conspiracy theory. But whatever - Live Free or Die in NH, belted or unbelted. I don't need a law in NH to tell me to do something that's common sense and proven.
I did little critical thinking.. I'd rather be part of the 48% chance of dying rather than the 52 % as you said I don't need law to tell me to use common sense.. ..and btw 50 percent is 1/2..not 52 percent.
Once seat-belt laws were passed in any form, supporters returned each legislative session to lobby for amendments, such as including all occupants, increasing fines, eliminating exemptions, and changing to primary enforcement, so that the police could stop a motorist merely under suspicion of not using a seat belt.
Such action by seat-belt law supporters shows the insidious nature of such laws, and supporters continue to lobby for stricter enforcement and heavier penalties. Even the U.S. Supreme Court in 2001 added its own flavor of tyranny by ruling it was legal for a Texas police officer to arrest, handcuff, and jail a woman, and impound her car, for not buckling up herself and her children.5 Our nation, founded on freedom, certainly has come a long way from Patrick Henry’s cry, “Give me liberty or give me death,” to “Click it or ticket.”
After the automakers did the DOT’s bidding, the government went back on its word and mandated installation of air bags anyway. Also, the very law the automakers worked for, supposedly to save people’s lives, turned on them. While using seat belts saves some lives, doing so can injure and kill others. That got the attention of lawyers. Moreover, some seat-belt systems were defective.6 As a result, since 1985 the automakers have faced hundreds of millions of dollars in damages in hundreds of lawsuits.
Loss of Freedom
While the hundreds of millions of dollars spent in support of seat-belt laws has been a horrendous financial burden to society, the greatest cost is really not money. It’s the loss of freedom. Seat-belt laws infringe a person’s rights as guaranteed in the Fourth, Fifth, and the Ninth Amendments, and the civil rights section of the Fourteenth Amendment. Such laws are an unwarranted intrusion by government into the personal lives of citizens; they deny through prior restraint the right to determine one’s own individual personal health-care standard.
While seat-belt use might save some people in certain kinds of traffic accidents, there is ample evidence that in other kinds, people have been more seriously injured and even killed only because they used seat belts. Some people have been saved from death in certain kinds of accidents only because a seat belt was not used. In those cases, the malicious nature of seat-belt laws is further revealed: such persons are subject to fines for not dying in the accident while using a so-called safety device arbitrarily chosen by politicians.
The state has no authority to subject people to death and injury in certain kinds of traffic accidents just because it hopes others will be saved in other kinds of accidents merely by chance. The state has no authority to take chances with a person’s body, the ultimate private property.
I did little critical thinking.. I'd rather be part of the 48% chance of dying rather than the 52 % as you said I don't need law to tell me to use common sense.. ..and btw 50 percent is 1/2..not 52 percent.
You're right. You did little critical thinking. You simply do not understand the numbers and you are misguided about the 48/52% numbers. You are interpreting those percentages in the wrong way, which is why I explained it but believe what you want to believe. I support your right to make that misguided decision.
You're right. You did little critical thinking. You simply do not understand the numbers and you are misguided about the 48/52% numbers. You are interpreting those percentages in the wrong way, which is why I explained it but believe what you want to believe. I support your right to make that misguided decision.
Nothing misguided about it.. 52 percent DIED while wearing seatbelts compared to 48 percent who DIED while not wearing. there it is.. easy to understand.. forget the "interpretation " which is just another way of saying I don't like the what I read so let me try to skew it. What is misguided is trusting a "safety" device that has been a contributing factor in the deaths of many .. but hey if you want to continue being misguided I also support your right to do so.
But let me ask you.. if you had a 52 % chance of being shot tomorrow for wearing the color orange
or a 48 % chance if you were wearing green.. which would you choose?
Nothing misguided about it.. 52 percent DIED while wearing seatbelts compared to 48 percent who DIED while not wearing. there it is.. easy to understand.. forget the "interpretation " which is just another way of saying I don't like the what I read so let me try to skew it. What is misguided is trusting a "safety" device that has been a contributing factor in the deaths of many .. but hey if you want to continue being misguided I also support your right to do so.
But let me ask you.. if you had a 52 % chance of being shot tomorrow for wearing the color orange
or a 48 % chance if you were wearing green.. which would you choose?
You don't understand math. Read my explanation in my previous post and tell me which group you'd rather be in.
I still wouldn't support a law making it illegal to wear green.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyDave
But let me ask you.. if you had a 52 % chance of being shot tomorrow for wearing the color orange or a 48 % chance if you were wearing green.. which would you choose?
Here's a better example:
One in four people wear green, the rest wear orange. No other choices are permitted.
Yesterday, 90 people died. 52% of the dead wore orange, 48% wore green.
Knowing these facts, what color shirt do you want to wear tomorrow?
You don't understand math. Read my explanation in my previous post and tell me which group you'd rather be in.
actually I do and mathematically it boils down to a crap shoot..statistically 50/50 .. ie seatbelts cannot give significantly better odds to be considered a life saving device
One in four people wear green, the rest wear orange. No other choices are permitted.
Yesterday, 90 people died. 52% of the dead wore orange, 48% wore green.
Knowing these facts, what color shirt do you want to wear tomorrow?
Skewed to make the presumption that it is one in four ...but what you really have is statistically 1 in 2, and knowing that I will wear green
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.
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.
I still wouldn't support a law making it illegal to wear green.
