Laws i don't get

i've been pondering this and i don't get it...everytime i go to SC i see people helmetless on motorcycles. i know there's a law saying that once ur over 21 u have a choice in wearin a helmet...but these states always push for everyone to wear seatbelts...doesn't make any sense to me

That's a law I don't get, especially since a friend of mine died last year on his motorcycle wearing a helmet. He swerved to avoid a car, fell and hit his head on the curb and died due to the trauma of the impact(cranial and spinal injuries).
If a helmet couldn't save him, how is not wearing one going to save any of these morons that don't wear one.

Darwinism in effect. If you're going to partake in a very dangerous activity, which riding a motorcycle definately is, without protecting the most vunerable part of your body, you can expect things like that to happen.

What really ticks me off is when it happens to someone who has a family they support, and instead of dying, they simply spend the rest of their life with an IQ of 70. Also, people with head injuries that have reduced their mental capacity often are very prone to anger and violence.

The cynic in my says that the insurance companies were looking for ways to increase rates so they pushed to make not wearing seatbelts a primary offense. That means tickets. That means points. That means increased premiums.

The helmet law is just one for cleanup. You smash into something on a motorcycle, you're probably going to die. At least with a helmet on, your head stays in one piece which makes the deceased easier to identify.

The cynic is leaving now.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

I think seat belts AND helmets should be mandatory. Seatbelts and Helmets can and do save lives, not always but that miniscual amount of not always seems to make people think they don't work. Wearing a seatbelt or helmet WILL increase your chances of surviving an accident. Now you may argue, "Its my life and I'll do what I want." Well if your a parent its not just your life that will be affected, if you die because you weren't wearing a seatbelt or helmet your kids get to enjoy mourning your death. Seatbelts and Helmets aren't that hard to use nor are they horrendously uncomfortable.

Exercise and a good diet help save lives too. Should their be laws for those?

The maximum speed limit on roads is 70 (or whatever it is). Should there be a law that forces manufacturers to make cars that cannot go any faster?

Skydiving should be outlawed?

There should be laws banning scuba diving in underwater caves?


BECAUSE ITS A GOOD IDEA OR CAN SAVE LIVES DOES NOT MEAN IT SHOULD BE A LAW!













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Deaths caused by unhealth eating, scuba diving, and skydiving combined don't even come close to the number of deaths caused by not wearing a seatbelt or helmet. Not everynody eats unhealthy, not everybody scuba or skydives. Everybody drives, it is an activity that we all do and driving affects us all. Cars go faster than 70 for passing situations and closed course driving. If you don't wanna wear a seatbelt or helmet, be my freaking guest. Would you want your parents or your children not wearing seatbelts knowing full well that their more likely to die in a crash without one?

Deaths caused by unhealth eating, scuba diving, and skydiving combined don't even come close to the number of deaths caused by not wearing a seatbelt or helmet. Not everynody eats unhealthy, not everybody scuba or skydives. Everybody drives, it is an activity that we all do and driving affects us all. Cars go faster than 70 for passing situations and closed course driving. If you don't wanna wear a seatbelt or helmet, be my freaking guest. Would you want your parents or your children not wearing seatbelts knowing full well that their more likely to die in a crash without one?
Agreed.
Way too many people die all the time because they didn't wear their seat belt. The laws concerning seat belts make perfect sense when you look at it this way.

Let me just say once you've walked away from an accident because you were thrown clear while the person in the seatbelt was crushed. You might understand an aversion to seat belts.

btw - not everyone drives Not even close. So repeat the statment. Just because its a good idea doesn't mean it should be a law.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

You're most likely to survive while still strapped inside of the car than if you were thrown out of it. The car is designed to take an impact; your body isn't.

Also, maybe not everyone drives, but everyone has been a passenger in a car. The law applies to everyone in the car, not just the driver.

Actually, it's stupid that we're required to buy cars with seatbelts and airbags, and other safety junk, when if we wanted to we could go out and buy a motorcycle, or a Kit car and build it ourselves, and we wouldn't be required to have any of that junk.
Helmets are good, when somebody hits you, not when you hit something. If somebody broadside you with their car, there's a good chance you going crack your head open on their hood. With a helmet, you only end up having your crushed leg amputated from the knee down...

Let me just say once you've walked away from an accident because you were thrown clear while the person in the seatbelt was crushed. You might understand an aversion to seat belts.

btw - not everyone drives Not even close. So repeat the statment. Just because its a good idea doesn't mean it should be a law.

Th instance where wearing a seatbelt wouldn't save your life is a miniscual amount. And yes not everybody drives but everybody is at least a passenger several times a year. So automibles do effect everybody.

Do you wear a selt belt Yogs? If you ever have kids are you not gonna have them wear seatbelts?

Th instance where wearing a seatbelt wouldn't save your life is a miniscual amount. And yes not everybody drives but everybody is at least a passenger several times a year. So automibles do effect everybody.

Do you wear a selt belt Yogs? If you ever have kids are you not gonna have them wear seatbelts?

If you want to talk about the odds, getting into an accident while driving your car is a miniscule amount as well. Do they have seatbelts on busses? How about trolleys? Subways? Trains? Many people rarely ever get into a car to go places. Most people here will considering this is a message board.

I'm not here to debate if seatbelts make you safer. Thats not the point. The point is that not every good idea should be a law. This is one of those.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Bad ideas shouldn't be laws either.
My question is, why wouldn't you wear a seatbelt? Is it for the same reasons that you wouldn't use your blinkers?

Bad ideas shouldn't be laws either.
My question is, why wouldn't you wear a seatbelt? Is it for the same reasons that you wouldn't use your blinkers?

If you have to get in and out of your car a shitload of times every day, putting your seatbelt on constantly gets really old, it's one annoyance I avoid when I'm out in the field and not in town.

I think it's a good idea to wear seat belts while driving. Do I think it should be a law? NO. If someone wants to decorate the inside of their car with themselves, go for it, if they want to be restrained and much safer, go for it. These are the kinds of laws which turn peolple into mindless idiots, because the government thinks for them instead of letting them think for themselves.

I don't think it should be a law, because it should be common sense. Though at the same time, it's good to have such a law, at least for the sake of children, especially since there are so many people lacking common sense.
Of course, I'd rather simply educate children to buckle themselves up, assuming that they're old enough to - than make a law forcing them to make the "right" decision.

The general principle about laws is that they exist to protect personal rights and freedom except where the exercise of personal rights and freedoms impinge on the rights of others either to individuals or society as a whole.

First observation...

Now most European market cars are designed with restraint and crash systems for a seatbelt restrained driver and passenger. That's how their crash standard is set up - and in many countries the seatbelt compliance is in the high 80 percentiles or better. This means that the airbag deployment can be gentler, the bag is smaller and the airbag is a supplementary system. This also applies to side impacts as well as a seatbelt provides some anchorage of the hip and chest region.

The US crash standards are essentially designed so that the airbag can restrain a 90 kg male in the event of a 35 mph frontal impact. It assumes that they are unrestrained by a seatbelt - which means that the airbag is considerably bigger and has to deploy much much faster.

Now the consequence of the US standard is that it probably has resulted in the needless deaths of many children and smaller framed drivers. Simply because the force required to hold a 90 kg male in a seat who is about 20 inches from the seatbelt at 35 mph is a huge amount. Apply this sort of force on a child or a smaller adult who is potentially only 10-15 inches from the steering wheel then the airbag can be the predominant source of injury or potentially death.

Second observation...

Also the use of the US Crash Standard also has significant effect potentially on aesthetics... A swoopy roofline like a Ferrari puts the driver's head quite close to the top of the windshield. For an airbag only, non-seatbelt restrained occupant this presents a significant increase in potential head injury criterion (HIC). If however, you present the roofline of a F-150, the windshield is quite a distance from the head and the effect on the HIC from the roofline is reduced. Now you may want your sportscar to look like an SUV but I don't...

Third observation...

In NZ, we have a universal state-funded accident rehabilitation and compensation fund. So when you are hurt in an accident, the fund pays for the treatment and rehabilitation of the injury. Because you cannot sue for personal injury here because of the state fund (or ACC), society as a whole funds your treatment. The taxpayer then has some say in the individual ensuring that they take precautions against injury (after all they foot the bill).

Fourth observation...

Helmets, Seatbelts, Airbags and other crash systems are there to reduce or mitigate crash injury. They are not going to make you bulletproof - people die in race cars, or racing motorbikes with far stricter rules on safety. But in almost all cases, the safety systems do prevent or reduce injuries... although your likelihood of surviving a 60 mph frontal head on collision with or without a seatbelt are frankly not good but almost surely better than 5 years ago let alone 20 years ago.

It could be argued that adopting crash standards is a foolish thing to do as well. Why should I have to spend more money on a car because all of these safety systems are in place... indeed it's arguably a infringement on your rights as a consumer to purchase car that doesn't have an airbag, nor seatbelts, nor a safety glass windshield because it means you don't have a choice of buying a cheaper car...

... sometimes granny laws are there to protect the innocent, the naive and the almost criminally stupid...

I would just like to point out that an unrestrained person in a vehicle that's involved in an accident has the potential to injure or kill others in the vehicle, or to be ejected into others on the sidewalk. So in that sense AT LEAST you can count seatbelts as a public safety measure.

It just plain stupid. Some people say "it's my life, I can do what I want", and that's the worst 'excuse' I'v ever heard. Think of your family and friends, or the poor guy who has to clean up your messy corpse.

I've seen the type of things doctors and paramedics have to do to save your life. Catheter tubes arn't fun. Wear your fucking seatbelt so no one has to scrape you off the road.

PA got rid of the law requiring all motorcyclists to wear helmets in September 2003.

More power to the idiots w/o a helmet, but I still maintain that if you crash, and your brains are spilling out in the roadway, I will NOT hold your brains in until the medics arrive.

I don't think it should be a law, because it should be common sense. Though at the same time, it's good to have such a law, at least for the sake of children, especially since there are so many people lacking common sense.
Of course, I'd rather simply educate children to buckle themselves up, assuming that they're old enough to - than make a law forcing them to make the "right" decision.
I agree 110%.