RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Seatbelts. Why don't people wear them??(17 posts)

Seatbelts. Why don't people wear them??94Nole
Aug 11, 2003 6:40 AM
Almost daily I read in the local press about people thrown from vehicles or otherwise injured in a motor vehicle accident that weren't wearing a seltbelt. I know they are not foolproof and don't guarantee prevention from harm, injury or even death, but aren't one's chances of prevention of these things much greater while wearing a seatbelt? Has that been proven? And yes I know that there have been cases where one's life was spared because he/she wasn't wearing the belt.

There is a large interstate highway construction project going on south of Jacksonville, FL and just about everyday there is an accident along that stretch of road.
nothing but stupidityDougSloan
Aug 11, 2003 6:49 AM
I followed home one day a man driving some big car, wearing no seatbelt. Worse, yet, he had a young child, maybe 5, standing (unbelted) in the front seat next to him. Almost made me mad, and it was all I could do to restrain myself from calling the police on the cell phone. It's one thing to endanger yourself (I really don't care), but another to risk a child. Not setting a good example, in any event.

Doug
I think its a habit thing,TJeanloz
Aug 11, 2003 7:14 AM
I would say that wearing a seatbelt or not is really an unconscious decision. I always wear it, but it's not like I think about the risk every time I get in the car - I'm just in the habit of reaching over and buckling up. I assume that people who don't wear their seatbelts never really thought of the danger, and never conditioned themselves to buckle up when they sit down.
still boils down to stupidityDougSloan
Aug 11, 2003 8:24 AM
I doubt there could be a single person in America who has not been exposed to overwhelming evidence that seatbelts dramatically increase safety, not to mention laws requiring them. That being the case, nothing but stupidity would keep someone from developing a habit of using them. I have to believe that it *is* a conscious decision *not* to use them, much like riding a motorcycle without a helmet or smoking. In other words, you simply do not care about the risk.

Doug
a guy I knew...mohair_chair
Aug 11, 2003 8:08 AM
I shared an office with a guy who said with total sincerity and strong conviction that he never wore a seatbelt because he didn't want to burn to death in his car. He claimed that people burned to death in their cars all the time because they couldn't get out of their seatbelts, and he wasn't going to be one of them.

A couple of us heard this and we just looked at him with amazement. He was totally serious. When we pointed out that the reason he wouldn't burn to death was because he would likely be ejected from the car, causing death or serious injury, it didn't matter. As long as he didn't burn to death in his car.

What about the people who freaked out about air bags? Air bags save thousands of lives every year, but they hurt one person and people freak out and want to get rid of them and disable them. The irrationality of people simply amazes me.
2nd on stupidity, furthermore, air bags are undeniablyNo_sprint
Aug 11, 2003 8:33 AM
proven to be better in collisions than not having the bags.
The same reason that riders don't wear helmets.....nmMR_GRUMPY
Aug 11, 2003 8:52 AM
yeah, why do pro bike racers fight helmet rules????? nmClydeTri
Aug 11, 2003 11:30 AM
nm
There's a difference between doing something and a law...TJeanloz
Aug 11, 2003 11:37 AM
While I fully advocate wearing your seatbelt, I am wholly opposed to laws in place in 49 states requiring their use. I am proud to be from the 1 state that doesn't require it.

What business does the government have in dictating how much risk I can have in my life? If I want to be an idiot, I should have the right to be.
something about ...ClydeTri
Aug 11, 2003 11:43 AM
something about where the societal needs outweight the needs of the individual....you are public roads, and if you turn your brain to mush, society will help subsidize your existance for years to come...
That's the heart of the problem...TJeanloz
Aug 11, 2003 11:59 AM
I agree that if society is going to subsidize you in your mush-state, you should wear a seatbelt. But I don't think society should subsidize you. Mush is the punishment for idiocy.
hands: why don't people wash them?JS Haiku Shop
Aug 11, 2003 9:44 AM
same idea.

and what's with the folks who splash their hands with water (2 seconds, no soap), then use 5 hand towels?

can't get over how many people don't wash their hands after visiting the loo.
Why wash hands? I don't even wipe.Spoiler
Aug 11, 2003 7:02 PM
I like to stay one step ahead of the game.
re: tales from the shallow end of the gene pooljrm
Aug 11, 2003 1:29 PM
Who knows, maybe darwin was right?
Seatbelts save life's....DINOSAUR
Aug 11, 2003 7:50 PM
A subject that I am familiar with. For those who don't know, I am a retired Calif Highway Patrol Officer (27 years,3 months ,11 days). I can't even begin to count the number of accidents I investigated in which someone was killed or seriously injured as they failed to buckle up. I used the hear every day from motorist who told me that "they have a friend that knew a guy that was thrown clear of his car when it crashed and caught on fire and he was saved as he was not wearing his seatbelt". Rubbish, first- cars rarely catch on fire. Second- if they do you would be probably knocked unconscious anyway by impact if you were not wearing a seatbelt. When we went to the emergency room to contact a victim of a t/c, one of the first questions the e.r. doctor asked us is if they were wearing a seatbelt. They would look for abrasion marks on their shoulders. By wearing a seatbelt the severity of the injury was greatly reduced. Air bags are another excellent safety factor. One criteria when we bought our now 17 year old daughter a car is that it had to be equipped with an air bag. Driving a car requires 3 things-obey the rules of the road, use common sense, and buckle up. But if people followed this guide there would be very few accidents, fewer police, firemen and paramedics, fewer doctors, a lot of lawyers would be out of work, the courts would be less crowded, and I would not be sitting here being retired with a state pension as I would not have had a career investigating traffic accidents.....
Paying the Darwin bill: Herb Brooks 08/12/03Spunout
Aug 12, 2003 3:44 AM
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030811.wbrooks0811/BNStory/Sports/

Well, hockey is a real man's sport, who need seatbelts!
too bad, howeverDougSloan
Aug 12, 2003 5:48 AM
Technically, the "Darwin bill" would not apply to a 66 year old who has already had children. If one has already reproduced, then he has passed along his genes. Conduct after that is irrelevant.

I just love the documentary about him and the 1980 team, though. Sounded like a total jerk, but we needed a jerk at the time.

Doug