posted on April 8, 2001 11:55:36 PM new
Some people refuse to wear seatbelts when driving or riding in cars. They give various reasons for refusing, including personal choice, being trapped in a real emergency, and not being comfortable.
What I'm wondering is what do these people do when they fly in a commercial airline. Before take-off, and landing, the seatbelt light goes on and the attendant checks EVERYBODY for cooperation. The airline, which is a private company controlled by a government agency now controls you. Do they still refuse?
The question is, if you don't wear them in your car, do you wear them in a plane? Why?
posted on April 9, 2001 06:49:59 AM new
Wearing a seatbelt in a plane just keeps you from rolling around and causing damage to other passengers in the event of turbulence. In the event of a crash, if you stay with your assigned seat they can identify you more easily.
One of the comics from the 60's said, "the lap restraint on an airplane holds the lower half of your body in place when the plane crashes into a mountain." I think it was Shelly Berman!
Cheery Bye!
[ edited by zilvy on Apr 9, 2001 02:14 PM ]
posted on April 9, 2001 08:06:15 AM new
Morning yeager
I just feel being required to do most anything that the government has decided is 'in my best interest' is repressing my freedom of choice.
While I do abide by laws that are passed, that doesn't mean I have to like or agree with them. I'm an adult and after studying any issue I feel I should be free to make my own personal decisions about my own body. I resent the government making those personal decisions for me.
Just like the helmet law. Any adult knows the likelyhood of a severe head injury causing tremendous trama or death. But why do you feel you, or anyone else, has the right to insist you can make a better decision for the person who doesn't want to wear one? Same thing with seat belts. Why does the personal decision you've made have to be imposed on everyone else? IMO, we can (and should be allowed) to each make our own choices.
posted on April 9, 2001 08:17:34 AM new
The other side of the coin: The government does have access to the studies that show the horrific damage to unrestrained bodies, or heads without helmets.
For each decision that we make, in any part of life (especially one that is life threatening) their is an innocent, mourning one left behind...if our decision was not right.
I agree that big brother can be a pain...I hate being trapped with a seat belt. I hate the way the rubbing wears my clothes and the
wrinkles in my lightwieght clothing.
But, everytime I get in the car I think about
the other drivers who are out to get me, I also think "Brain Trauma" and buckle up.
I know the ones that care the most about me
will be tickled pink if I make it because of the seat belt...and there won't be the horrendous decision of should we keep her on
life support, and hopefully a shorter stay in the hospital. JMO
posted on April 9, 2001 08:30:52 AM new "Why does the personal decision you've made have to be imposed on everyone else? IMO, we can (and should be allowed) to each make our own choices".
Why ? Asked by such a proponent of the lowering of care payments using taxpayer funds?
How about why should your "personal decision" be imposed as a burden on everyone else?
"There were significant savings for California taxpayers, who have carried much of the economic burden for motorcycle crashes as fewer than half of hospitalized motorcyclists have private insurance".
posted on April 9, 2001 09:23:23 AM new
Why should people follow the seat belts laws and the helmet laws? Because I do not wish to pay for others stupid and moronic behavior. Unfortunately, our country does not allow medical facilities to disconnect your life support and place the lifeless corpse on the curb when the insurance compny stops paying. If the individual make some effort to prevent serious injury such as the seat belt or the helmet, fine.
posted on April 9, 2001 10:25:47 AM new
Yes I wear the seat belt in a plane when the light comes on. No, I dont wear one in my car. Why? Because I dont want to and there is no stewardess to check.
posted on April 9, 2001 10:46:59 AM new
Hi Zilvy - Yes, all the related facts are there for anyone who wants to read them. That (hopefully) would be part of their decision making process. And while I certainly appreciate your concern for those that they will leave behind, to me, it's still a personal choice decision. I support your decision, I just argue for the rights of those who don't agree.
On the insurance issue; It's still a freedom of choice issue to me; less government intruding into our lives.
Does that mean that you, who wish to force the seat belt or helmet issue/laws onto others, want to oppress all dangerous activities that you or others think may lead to anyone being injured? People who engage in any high risk activity can be hurt/injured/killed and the government/insurance companies will still pay. Should their rights to freely enjoy their passtimes be taken away too because a report says that it's too dangerous?
posted on April 9, 2001 11:36:17 AM new
Fine and dandy. Your personal decision is to perform risky behavior. My personal decision is to not have to pay for the consequences of your risky behavior. Frankly, I think if you don't want to wear a seatbelt and are involved in accident that you should be left where you are to save the rest of us the money of having to care for you.
If you get in my car, you damned well wear the seatbelt or you walk. My car, my rule and to heck with your personal feelings. How's that for allowing others to have their personal decisions?
[ edited by Shadowcat on Apr 9, 2001 11:38 AM ]
posted on April 9, 2001 11:56:27 AM new
Shadowcat - How's that? Just fine with me. I have no objection to different points of views/opinions.
Whether I like/agree with the laws I do abide by them. And those of you who don't want to pay for any accident that might occur because people choose to engage in 'high risk' behaviors, will be paying, whether or not you want to.....
posted on April 9, 2001 12:05:08 PM new
I will walk, thanks. Better yet, I will drive my own car
Speaking of responsibility. How about those people who go rock climbing and get stuck or fall, and rescue workers have to go get them? My question is, should the people who are taking those risks have to PAY for the emergency crew to go get them back down? (Thats just an example).
posted on April 9, 2001 12:10:43 PM new
To lightly touch on something similar:
I pay taxes. I am in the gray area where I cant get medicare or medical, because I make too much. I also cant get welfare, nor want it, because I am capable of working and dont need them, although making ends meet keeps me broke and living from pay check to pay check and NO savings account. Foodstamps would help, but still, I try to do it on my own. I pay for those who wont or cant feed themselves or their children. I have paid taxes all my life and never asked for assistance. If I am not wearing my seat belt, and I have an accident, then what I paid in for others will more than make up what I might need. So if leaving me "where I am" is the mindset, then it should also apply to all welfare recipients who also got where they are to ask for assistance. Right?
[ edited by Hepburn on Apr 9, 2001 12:11 PM ]
posted on April 9, 2001 12:12:17 PM newSpeaking of responsibility. How about those people who go rock climbing and get stuck or fall, and rescue workers have to go get them?
From today's paper:
A local teenager whose car was found upside down in a canal has contacted police to say he was the one they had been seeking for six hours. He said he fell asleeep while driving and awoke in the water. He got a ride to his girlfriend's house and went to sleep. When he got home, his mother told him the police were looking for him. Police said he will be billed for the hours emergency responders spent looking for him.
People who make poor choices which have a financial impact on others are already being asked to pay.
posted on April 9, 2001 12:46:21 PM newHepburn If I am not wearing my seat belt, and I have an accident, then what I paid in for others will more than make up what I might need.
So you pay $10,000 a year in taxes just for the health care of others. You must be very wealthy. The cost of care for an unprotected accident victim could exceed $10,000 on month for the rest of their life. Not to mention the financial hit to the victim's family, etc. etc. etc....
[ edited by mark090 on Apr 9, 2001 12:48 PM ]
posted on April 9, 2001 01:48:58 PM new
Instead of getting into a debate of why I choose not to wear my seatbelt, the possibility of me killing myself from not doing so and taxpayers paying for my breathing tube and oxygen pumps, I will say "ok. Whatever you say" and move on.
posted on April 9, 2001 02:24:02 PM new
Hep ~
Do you have children or do you ever transport minors in your car? If so, please ask them to buckle up!
A very sad and true story:
"Buckle Up. It's the law." has been in Florida for a few years.
Just over a year ago, my neighbor was routinely driving on I-95 (one of the nations worst highways ~ even Howard Stern talks about it!). He, his wife, and his son were involved in a horrible accident. The man was driving, but he was not found to be at fault for the accident. The wife did not survive intensive care (too many internal injuries), the son was DOA. In addition to this mans grieving for the loss of his family and his guilt for being at the wheel, he was prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter in the death of his son. His son was only 7, a minor, and he wasn't wearing a safety belt.
How awful is that?
only ZOOMIN here
posted on April 9, 2001 05:59:41 PM new
I was one who didn't like seat belts....didn't fit the female anatomy, I'm short so it always cut across my throat or face, took time to put...and the list went on. Then, my husband's business got into the safety testing area. I was able to view a crash test...sled full of dummies crashing into a barrier. In less than a blink of an eye, it is amazing to see what damage can be done to vehicle and occupants. Some of those dummies "didn't make it" if they'd been human. It was an eerie and chilling experience.
I became a believer and now always wear my seat belt. I rather survive a crash in my car and suffer a broken leg than be tossed thru the windsheld and die or suffer such head trama that I'd be a vegetable for the rest of my life.
But, did I need my government to make laws for me to decided this? Logic says "no," but practicallity says "yes." If govenment action and research into crash worthiness of automoblies hadn't come about, I'd still be unbuckled. Government regulations forced the issue, forced the research, forced the public to become aware. No one can make you buckle-up...law or no law...but at least you know it's your life you are gambling with. It's your choice and you may pay dearly for your decision. Perhaps we need tort reform such that when a person dies in a car crash and they were not buckled-in, their families will not be able to sue other parties involved in the crash that resulted in your death. I hope your passengers are buckled-up so you don't take them with you.
posted on April 9, 2001 06:55:58 PM new
If you don't where your seatbelt and your paying for car insurance,remember one thing if you happen to be involved in an accident and you don't have it on, you just gave your insurance company a perfect out,and they will not pay one dime.This is the first thing noted on the police report.I wouldn't know about that other than it happened to me and none of my medical bills where paid by my insurance company.The only bills paid where from the other guys insurance only because the accident was his fault.But I will say if your in the back seat,your better off without it.
posted on April 10, 2001 04:25:55 AM new
In Michigan it has been the law for several years now. At first, if was a law enforced as a secondary issue. When a police officer stopped you for a traffic offense, you could be issued a traffic ticket for the offense, i.e. speeding. Additionally, if the officer noticed you were'nt been wearing your seatbelt when you stopped for him, you would receive another ticket for the seatbelt violation.
The current law in Michigan is that the officer can stop you as a primary offense for a seatbelt violation. If you are driving down the street going the speed limit without the seatbelt, you can be stopped and ticketed for non-use of the seatbelt.
The Michigan State Police always have public service commercials on TV about this.
Hepburn I will send a stewardess to stand on your street corner to check you for your seatbelt.
posted on April 10, 2001 11:00:53 AM new
{{{mint4you}}}
thank you for opening your heart.
We Love You, Hepburn!!
(okay, so it's not quite as poetic as mint but it comes from the heart!)
posted on April 10, 2001 11:18:03 AM new
As to whether or not it is a personal decision not affecting anyone else... WRONG!
It is easier to control your car if you are strapped in and not sliding or flipping about the passenger compartment. If someone t-bones you or just side swipes you, you WILL go flopping around unless you are strapped in. Now, picture the un-belted driver careening out of control into the family van filled with kindergarten aged kids... get my point?
I hope you are never driving around on my stretch of US 1 while any of my loved ones are out there. Your personal freedom of choice just might kill them.
)
