Why? If I do or do not wear a seat belt it does not hurt anyone but me so why did everyone get to vote on it? Children yes I understand they should have to wear one we need to protect them. Any thoughts on this?
2006-12-22 06:27:39 · 21 answers · asked by Sassy 3 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Safety
It affects you, but it also impacts insurance costs. Insurance costs, by default, are spread over the entire population who buys that insurance.
2006-12-22 06:36:52 · answer #1 · answered by SS90 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First you must ask the question, What are seat belts for?. They are to help protect you in case of an accident. Right? That being the case, why can the police cite you for not wearing a seat belt when you are not in an accident?Answer, M O N E Y. You get a ticket, job security for the policeman, part of the court cost goes to help pay the Judges retirement, points on your record which could lead to risk insurance which is more money for the insurance agent. It's all about MONEY.
Now think about this. The U.S. Constitution guarantees every Citizen the right to privacy under the 4th. Amendment. Now a policeman stops you for a taillight out and while citing you for that, he sees that you are not wearing a seat belt. OOPS, second charge. Now he may not be violating your privacy by seeing the bad tail light, but he certainly is by seeing you not wearing a seat belt seeing you are already stopped. You pay the seat belt fine. Why? because you don't know that you can get out of it and it would cost too much to fight it. The court system knows that. It is all about M O N E Y. I think you should be fined if in an accident without a seat belt, but not when you don't have an accident.
Small children should have protection. It should and is the adults choice.
2006-12-22 16:28:03 · answer #2 · answered by gyro-nut64 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
First and foremost, driving is a privilege and not a right. Therefore, state authorities can impose rules as to what a driver can and cannot do while driving. Additionally, having been driving in close to 49 of the United States, I have found that none of those states I drove stated that I had the "right of way" at any time. But each state imposed rules which clearly stated when and where I was to yield "right of way". Not wearing a seat belt does not only hurt yourself, but it involves friends and family, insurance companies (which refuse claims when seat belts are not worn), and the justice system as well, when an accident occurs, especially involving injury or death. So next time on the road, think about your privileges, not your rights.
2006-12-24 14:33:37 · answer #3 · answered by John Sr. 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Seat belts protect everyone. They don't only protect the person wearing it. If you don't use your seat belt and you are in a car accident, you become a projectile. If their are other people in the car with you, you could end up hurting them when you get hurtled across the car.
And it's pretty obvious that you haven't been in a car accident before, otherwise you wouldn't be thinking the way you are. Even if your in a minor accident, that seat belt is vital. You'll be glad you're wearing it if God forbid your ever in an accident.
2006-12-22 06:39:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is definitely a good law, because when a car comes to a sudden stop and if you aren't strapped in, you will fly against the windshield, which could possibly hurt your head. Also, like you said, why do I have to wear a seat belt it does not hurt anyone but me so why did everyone get to vote on it? Well, yeah, indirectly it hurts others. It would hurt your family and friends a LOT to know that you had died because you weren't wearing your seat belt.
2006-12-22 06:43:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
My take is, I don't need a law to tell me to wear a seat belt. Common sense dictates that you are safer in an accident wearing one than not. I don't remember ever voting on a seat belt law, I think the powers that be just wanted to protect us from ourselves (where are all the pro-choice people?). When others bring up the "we'll have to pay for your care" argument.....why? That's another issue with lots of branches. Drivers with no insurance, illegals driving w/o licenses and insurance, illegals inundating our ERs and not paying, etc.
But I would like to get rid of the law. If I want to go to the park 2 blocks away and don't want to wear a seat belt, that should be my choice.
2006-12-22 06:58:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
No, it hurts more than you if you are involved in a serious crash. It causes car and health insurance rates for others to rise. If someone with car insurance crashes into you and you normally would have had a minor case of whiplash or something, but your failure to wear a seat belt resulted in more serious injuries, why should the other motorist have to pay extra for your stupidity? And why should the poor family that has a son who broke his arm playing in the yard have to end up paying more at the emergency room to cover people who can't afford to pay the extensive medical bills that are the result of not wearing a seat belt.
2006-12-22 11:33:39 · answer #7 · answered by Ryan R 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well I'm glad you make the children wear seat belts to protect them from injury,but think of the reaction of your children when in the event of a accident they watch you explode through the windshield of your car ,parts of your face being sheared off by the shattering glass,and spattered all over everything in the car including the children. Now who will take care of the children now?
2006-12-22 08:48:44 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not wearing a seat belt is equivalent to having a death wish. I would assume you would want the best chance of survival if involved in a crash. And hurt only yourself is not the issue. Assume you were to be killed in a crash where seat belts could have saved you, others would certainly be hurt by your untimely passing.
2006-12-22 06:39:28 · answer #9 · answered by muleyone 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you. In my state, adult motorcyclists decide if they wear a helmet, or not. A person in a car should have the same choice concerning seat belts.
Its not something that was voted on. The DOT blackmails the states into passing these kinds of restrictive laws.
2006-12-22 18:37:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Becasue if you were to get in an accident and get seriously hurt and lets just say you become paralyzed, well, your insurance is only gonna pay so much then the rest of the cost of you to be taken care of the rest of your life will be at the responsibilty of your family and in the case you dont have a family my taxes will have to pay to keep your oxygen tank filled and to replace your scooter tires every few years from you rolling your paralyzed butt around all because you refused to wear a seatbelt.
2006-12-22 06:38:44 · answer #11 · answered by forrealdude 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋