Seatbelt Laws...

[RBatson]

It could have went either way. One of my cousins was in the exact situation but just the reverse happened. He was relatively unscathed while the driver and front passenger were killed. Being thrown from the car saved his life. I do not know if the two in the front were wearing seatbelts or not(before seatbelt laws) but from what I remember, the top of the car was crushed.

I think it should be a personal choice though I think wearing the belt reduces your chances of injury.

[Unit 5302]

Like I've stated below. I don't care if people die in auto accidents because they weren't wearing their seat belts. I just don't want to have to pay for their stupidity. In other words, let people purchase "no seat belt" insurance that allows them to drive without seat belts for the additional estimated cost.

Then I can purchase "seat belt" insurance for a significantly reduced rate.

If somebody purchases "seat belt" insurance and gets into an accident where they aren't wearing their seat belt, the claim should be denied.

[TXinPA]

What is so horribly painful about wearing a seatbelt anyway? Or is it just that someone is telling them to, so they automatically have to rebel against it?

I've always worn mine, I feel weird without it.

BTW, Hi Kell!

[Fat0eknee]

whats horribly painful is that this thread is over a year old

[StangFlyer]

Originally Posted by Fat0eknee

whats horribly painful is that this thread is over a year old

Nothing wrong with bringing back a good debate though.

[chuck88]

Unit5302 wrote:

"Then I can purchase "seat belt" insurance for a significantly reduced rate."

What kind of a discount do you think an insurance company would provide. The discount would be less then $15 a year and the non seat belt style insurance would be a couple of hundred increase. Then the insurance compnay would sell it as "a significantly reduced rate".

Regarding wearing seat belts, I am from the old generation we never wore seat belts, hell I even ripped them out of my first car and threw them in the garbage. It took a while but I got used to them and if I could get used to them any one can.

Why not wear them?

One complaint I have heard from a lot of folks is that the seat belt doesnt lock (my stang does) and keeps getting tighter. In my other vehicle I have a small orange (spring loaded) wood clamp which I place on the belt where it could lock the belt in place and prevent the annoying "tightening up". It cost a few dollars in the Home Depot.

Where your seat belts guys they do save lives.

While we are saving lives do what I do drive 110 MPH (55 saves lives well 110 should save twice as many).

[2001GTPEWTER]

110!? Awesome I'm going for a drive right now.

[Rev]

Originally Posted by bigred90gt

My dad used to tell us, when we were too young to know any different, that the truck wouldnt start without all the seatbelts buckled.

That actually was true sometime around mid to late '70's. It was called a "seat belt interlock". The front seats had weight sensors in them. If a person was seated in the front seat without the seat belt buckled, it worked like a neutral start switch without the car in neutral or park. The car wouldn't start without buckling up. These contraptions lasted only a short time (a few years?) and were always causing problems. You could defeat them by buckling the belt and then sitting on it, but alas, that was more trouble than actually using it.

And come to think of it, They actually fixed it in the next year or so after the governmental mandate so that the seat belt had to be slightly extended (unreeled enough to cover a skinny belly) when it was buckled to stop that trick.

Historical note: Rear seat belts were an optional extra in my car. I do have them though.

Rev

[CobraJet428]

I seldom wore seatbelts prior to last year because of the seat belt alarm going off in my '07 until I put it own. Do I belive seatbelts save lives? Yes. However, i belive it is a matter of personal responsibility to wear them and should not be a matter of legislation. In the end, it is revenue enhancement for state and local governments.

[6T5PONY]

I started wearing seat belts back when you had to go to the local airport to buy them, because car and parts dealers didn't have them. I ALWAYS have my seat belt buckled, in fact it is such a habit that it will be buckled if I back the car out of the garage for a wash!!

That said: the seat belt laws are the most asinine and ridiculous nanny laws on the books. It's nobody's d**n business but mine whether I'm buckled or not! And the idiotic comment that it costs somebody else if I'm injured is hogwash. I insure myself.

Seatbelt laws are, to use the military term, bravo sierra!

Another beef: the auto manufacturers, in an effort to save a couple of bucks a car, stopped installing inertia locks. Now the belt constantly digs into your neck and makes them much more uncomfortable than when you could lock them in a comfortable position. Only stupid - save a buck and make it less likely that the person will use the d**n safety device. The feds should correct that idiotic move, if they are going to do anything.

[thors_1]

well who pays for your doctor/s & medical bills if you aren't wearing your seatbelt? are you saying your going to refuse to let anyone but you pay for the bills? it's a really moot question.. untill your almost in the accident who really wants it on? those who see a car/truck coming at them head on at 60-70 mph, lets ask those people about seatbelts and if they want it on.

[6T5PONY]

Originally Posted by thors_1

. untill your almost in the accident who really wants it on? .

Who wants it on? I want it on. I've used them, as I have said, since before you could buy them for your car. I am very uncomfortable without a belt. (But the idiotic design of the newer ones that constantly dig into you, offsets part of it.)

Anyone who drives without a seatbelt is, in my opinion, acting like an idiot. And, yes, I have had at least two incidents where being secure in my seat helped me avoid a wreck. But it is still none of the government's business.