http://www.lohud.com/article/20105240321

 

I still cant believe that there are laws like this.Damn cops are just out to make money for the municipalities.Thank god its still a secondary in PA

 

I can't say i agree with your statement since I know a good amount of cops.. and acturally am training to become one.
-
side note seatbelts are important, especially in our cars since we don't have air bags >.>

 

I can't believe it either, as the law can't make people act reasonably or responsibly.

In the best of all possible worlds, drivers, of their own volition, would make an attempt to protect themselves and their car's occupants--wearing belts would certainly a part of that.

JamesC

 

Yeah. Maybe the law should be abolished for 18+ & just let people kill themselves.

I mean.....If they wanna die in a wreck? Let them. Call it 'population control'

But then you'd have people killing themselves in wrecks & leaving kids behind without a father or mother. Which would increase the number of foster kids/adopted kids & straining the economy even further. After all...You've got 3 kids of your own, your brother/sister dies & you end up with their 3 kids. Your house is now too small, gotta buy a bigger house or cram them in the available rooms. Now your budget is SHOT, your savings gone.

I honestly think the ignition should be hooked up through the seatbelt. Not latched = no start. So people would either wear it or latch it & have to sit on top of it, but a sensor could exist in the retractor side to sense if it is just latched or stretched far enough for a person to actually be wearing the seatbelt. Or hack the wiring to get around it.

 

i agree 100% with this

and if its not bad enough to die in a auto accident leavings you loved ones to grieve, but if your *** get seriously f-ed up and you are a veggie for the rest of you life, then I AND EVERY OTHER TAXPAYER in the state/counrty has to pay you medical bills for the rest of you miserable pathetic existence.

Buckle you damn set belt and deal with it, respect the police, they may save your *** one day.

 

Most cars had the seatbelt/ignition interlock starting in 1975.
I have no idea when it was discontinued.....................

 

Yeah because safety belts are a number one concern, way more than drugs, murderers, border hoppers, etc. Let's waste our time worrying about a seat belt someones not wearing some more please.

Just my opinion.

 

yes, but putting on your seatbelt is a simple thing to do, start there. Is it really that much of an inconvenience? Sorry if it kills your "cool" factor.

The country needs desperate help in other areas too, but thats unrelated to this.

 

Not too sure why you wouldn't wear a seatbelt. Especially if you have nieces and nephews in the car, why do they need your limp body flying around inside the vehicle when it flips and wacking them and killing them.
Sometimes you have to put others in front of you.

 

Where do you think the state Gov't gets the money for dealing with the issues you stated... a lot it issuing tickets. from their perspective they are saving lives and making money. i cant argue with that

 

shouldn't it be more like my body my choice...oh wait that's abortion, so we can decided to take a life but we can't decide if we want or need preventing meatures for ours. there so many things that should be inforced along with belts, like cell phones, texting, reading, puting on make up, smoking...if anything other than keeping both hands on the wheel should be band, but i guess the thought is as long as youre buckle you can do all of the above ha?

perhaps points should go on your llicense
follow by suspension and such but no is all bout the benjamines....

 

FYI, taking on the cell phone is a primary in NJ, and texting will be soon, if it isnt already.

people need to be held responcable for their actions, that alone would solve many of this countries problems. too much, "whatever, whatever, i'll do what i want" attitude in this country.

 

maybe they should put points on for it, maybe then more people would listen, even for cell phones. Cant remember how many times i have almost been wrecked by people playing with their phone on the road. People in this state cant drive, the people from florida and NY are worse, and there seem to be a lot of them around here.

 

so when can i choose who gets/doesnt get my tax money when they are a veggie in the hospital after a crash?

 

I don't think anywhere in there it said I didn't wear my seat belt, so don't assume I don't, thank you. I understand it's a simple thing to do, and I'm not 12 years old so the "cool" factor does not apply to this situation. For police to honestly set up barriers to check to see if people are wearing a seat belt is the biggest waste of time and a good excuse for them to buy a couple dozen of whatever donuts they like and sit around all day. Now if a cop is driving around and sees someone not wearing their seat belt and pulls them over than that's fine, and I understand they are doing their job by enforcing the law. But seriously, setting up a barrier to check, come on man, they really have nothing more important to take care of in society?

 

I also remember the NY State trooper that did our drivers education class
telling us " I never unbuckled a dead man!".

Its just big brother lookin' out for ya'all along with your VDM control and data
recorder in your new cars and lets not forget Onstar !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Put on yer tinfoil hats boys..............Its 1984 and George Orwell was right!

 

mmmm it funny you would think seat belts was just invented in the last ten years. because when i was a kid i never once heard or seen a seat belt ticket yet alone anyone wear them.

really i believe it's your car your life so what you don't want a seatbelt fine just go face first in to one of your 15 airbags fine.

as with cell phone they use to be built in to the car's in the 80s -90s i could buy a BMW or Benz with one installed. but now in the last 5 years, they cause accident.

it's just easy money soon we will not be able to have a GPS in the car or turn the station on the radio.

 

no he wouldn't that would be the EMT's or paramedics job
so that right

 

THIS.

AND THIS.

\thread

 

It's so saddening to see that in 20 posts no one could come up with the concept of personal freedom, or personal responsibility. Its like helmet laws, if you don't want to wear a helmet then you can't benefit from one since your so stupid a brain injury wouldn't be noticable. I always wear my seatbelt since i'm not stupid. I hate that it's a law. Mostly an excuse for revenue or an opportunity to stop for another reason. Big municipalities love these laws since they generate so much cash in the name of "public safety". the poster who stated cops are just doing their jobs is correct, a large part of their job is generating revenue.

 

Wow I didn't think my Little warning of be careful and don't get a ticket would have caused so such posting for or against the law. All I know is I haven't meet any of you but be safe Click it and be around for me to meet someday.

 

The simple fact is people are stupid, they need to be watched and policed because they are too dumb to take care of themselves... take for instance, my neighbor, one day I saw him driving past my house, windows down with his 5 year old daughter sitting on the window sill. If people were smart, this kind of effort would be unnecessary.

 

Unfortunately "people need to be watched" is the battle cry of liberal America, it only serves to restrict YOUR freedom inthe name of "Safety". No thanks.

 

And I suppose you prefer that people be allowed to do what ever they like without any consequences? It's the peoples' choice, if they acted like they should then there would be no need to be watched, but they can't so here we are having to make laws that it's illegal to have sex with an animal because people can't figure it out on their own!


But anyway,

 

In PA you have every right to ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but, while traveling in a car, a stupid law requires me to wear a seatbelt?

This thread is as stupid as the lawmakers who pass the bills into law. It is an endless debate!!

They will do whatever they want after they are in office. Our Government is way too big in PA, and the people should be able to decide if they choose to use a belt or not, just like the motorcycle gang.

The last time I was pulled over was for window tint..and it took me 2 seconds to click my belt on before I actually pulled over.

There are about 20 other stupid issues that also come to mind...but why argue it?? Whats the point.

 

NOW...No cell phone will not operate while it detects an ignition signal, that would be nice.

Laws are there to be broken. Even the cell phone issue, where I live, you can be cited for using it while driving. You know what...everyone still is blabbing their big mouths, and could care less about getting cited.

If lawmakers want people to wear a belt, make their car un operational until the belt is clicked. Dont make some lame law up about it.

 

If the majority does not like the law, then lobby for the laws to be changed. Everyone has the right to vote for people both in and out of our senate. As far as seatbelts are concerned, there is a reason why they are being enforced, and it isn't to bust everyone's *****, its because we share the roads with people who can care less about everyone's safety. You may think your the greatest driver out there, but you can be slammed into by some careless idiot simply waiting for a red light....;

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=-qvXbIenivk

 

I am reminded of yet another quote "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin. I agree people are absolutely pathetically stupid...however the government is FAR too involved in our lives...and some laws are just rediclous this just so happens to be one of them. If you're not Intelligent enough to protect yourself and buckle up and/or drive cautiously its probably about time you've been removed from the gene pool. The government and mass media both need to be put in check soon....or we will literally be living in a nationwide "panopticon", you can take that straight to the bank....

 

IT IS ONLY ABOUT MONEY.

NO MATTER HOW THEY LIE ANY SAY "ITS BE FOR DA CHILLENS!!

IF IT WAS ABOUT SAFETY THERE WOULD BE HELMET LAWS.

ITS JUST "A LITTLE EXTRA" ROAD TAX FOR BROKE *** TOWNS/CITIES THAT SPEND MOST OF THEIR BUDGET ON WELFARE GARBAGE.

THE COPS ARE JUST TAX COLLECTORS.

 

[quote='85_Tribute;4556810]And I suppose you prefer that people be allowed to do what ever they like without any consequences? It's the peoples' choice, if they acted like they should then there would be no need to be watched, but they can't so here we are having to make laws that it's illegal to have sex with an animal because people can't figure it out on their own!

The consequences are increased injury and or death. Thats a personal decision. In most cases people should be able to do whatever they like so long as they don't endanger others. It seems you're more than willing to determine how people should "act".

 

Exactly the point i was thinking about when i read this! i believe the quote is from the Declaration of Independence. Amazingly Brilliant and clear headed people those founding fathers. If only we had their sensibility today!

 

The simple fact is that its a free country. If someone wants to endanger their life....let'em!!!! I wear my seat belt though... its habit from flying so much. But if I were pulled over for something like that....heh.....id go off on that cop. My husband got shot and shot at for 20 years to earn the right to be called an officer! I'll be $#@$'d if I call a cop officer! Its a violation of our constitutional rights if ya ask me! Pretty soon there will be laws against everything.

 

I understand accidents can, and will happen. How about a motorcycle, with no helmet, bangs into you, while sitting at a light. You did not have your seat belt on, and YOU GET CITED??? Now, I am just using this as an example.

I have no problems with laws, but laws that are not consistent just make no sense. You wanna pass speeding laws, and PA state inspection laws, I am all for that, but when it comes to seat belts, I say it should be just like the motorcycle people...."let those who ride decide".

Just remember a lot of these so called laws, directly, or indirectly, cost YOU, the taxpayer in the long run. In PA we have way too many representatives in Harrisburg, just dreaming up stuff to pass. Too large of a government....NOT GOOD...by any means...IMO.

 

I do not believe our fore fathers would be upset with the way things are today. THEY started this nation!!! They were slave owners, land takers, and the types of business men who loaned, and required very high interest, upon repayment. This country is running exactly how they planned....IMO!!

 

Nicely put IMO.

 

Keep in mind, that this law was handed down to the states by the Federal Government. Now, the entire principle by which this country is based, is that we are a collection of 50 individual states, and the role of the federal government was originally just to keep all of the individual states playing nicely with each other. Over the years, that's obviously changed into the scenario we have now, in which the states have no individual power.

The federal government technically can't force any individual states to adopt or initiate specific laws... but what they CAN do is decide to cut all federal funding to those states. That's what happened with this stupid seat belt law. While a lot of states already had seat belt laws, some, like New Hampshire, chose to leave it up to the individual to decide. They held out as long as they could, but even NH was forced to adopt the law when the federal government threatened to block the payment of all federal highway maintenance money.

So... why is the federal government so hot for this law? It's got nothing to do with ticket revenue. It's 100% because of insurance company lobbyists. Insurance companies save money when people don't get as badly hurt.

Oddly enough, back in the late 80s when airbags were starting to become a viable option, the insurance companies lobbied against them, because at the time they felt that it was cheaper for somebody to die than it was for them to get hurt and require medical attention. Of course, cars are now safer, and apparently it's less likely that somebody is going to die, so the insurance company now would prefer that you wear your seatbelt to minimize the cost of your hospital visit.

So there you have it. We all are being protected from ourselves by the federal government, all to keep the insurance companies happy.

 

i'm no motorcycle rider, but I know that they lobbied hard for repeal of helmet laws because they made the care that the helmets make it MORE likely that accidents will happen, because of the reduction in visibility and the fact that it muffles hearing.

Try and make an arguement that seatbelts make an accident more likely to happen. You won't be able to without being laughed out of the room.

I'm a conservative as they come, and even I don't have an issue with seat belt laws. (so much for it being a liberal thing)

here's one thing that I don't think has been mentioned yet as an argument for wearing them. If you get hit and you are planted behind the wheel, you are more likely to regain control of your car, possibly avoiding more damages or injuries to yourself or others. I know I don't want to be hit by a car that the driver has been flung over the passenger side. For what? because somebody cries "personal liberty"?

give me a break and grow up you bunch of crybabies

 

Do you have any hard statistics that prove that others are less likely to become injured based on sealt-belt wearers being able to regain control of their cars, or are you just speculating?

My guess is that such a situation would occur in a very, very small percentage of accidents.

In my opinion, it's foolish and irresponsible to infringe upon our personal choices based on the slim chance that it may result in a safer outcome in some infinitesimally small percentage of situations.

With our freedom comes a specific amount of risk. Not just with seat belts, but with everything. Every one of our freedoms increases our risk level to some extent. You can not have both, and as far as I'm concerned, it's a travesty to trade freedom for reduced risk. Trading freedom for a percieved, unproven reduction in risk is even more foolish.

I'm just waiting for the day that the government makes it a law that I have to wear a helmet in the shower. Sound stupid? So did seat belt laws 50 years ago.

 

SO they can force us to wear seatbelts but they cant stop ppl from taking part of the nations biggest killer smoking i mean i dont want them to because im a smoker but i have to say i do not wear my seat belt most of the time because when i was 17 i got in a accident and i got stuck even worst because of the seat belt im not saying its a great idea to wear one i just dont wear one because of that one accident im almost terrified by them i mean if im planning on going out and driving like a complete @$$hole of course im going to wear my belt but if im taking my time and just cruising i dont wear it. it sucks that our govt can control us this much. i thought this was a country by the ppl for the ppl when did we all vote and say that we want these type of laws in affect? we didnt. i do understand that its a safety issue but also if people would actually put down there cell phones stop messing with the radio or stop drinking and driving and actually pay attention to the road there would be alot less accidents i live in schenectady ny and most of the time if im wearing a seatbelt its because i dont trust other people because i drive smart.

 

you guys are missing the big picture- this is a reason for them to pull you over and get a closer look at you. it is a stupid law. for every statistic that says one thing there is another saying the opposite. i was in a bad car wreck in which i was thrown through the windshield not wearing my seatbelt, i was sitting passenger front and that area was crushed completely, i was told i was lucky "i wasnt wearing a seatbelt". after that i had to believe that you can die either way so it should be your choice

 

This is lunacy! Driving is not a right protected by personal liberties and the constitution.

it's a privledge, and if you want to do it, you follow the rules of the road, including the requirement that you wear a seat belt.

do you constitutional historians also think it's your right to drive your car with bad brakes and bald tires? Those are also safety issues that if ignored, could cause you harm, but the government requires you follow the law in order to take your car out on the road

 

bad tires and brakes endanger OTHERS. Besides were not talking about worn or bald seatbelts. We're talking about being required to USE them. BTW you dont have a RIGHT to healthcare, but that is shoved down your throat too. I'm sick of big brother and big government. One of the reasons were so screwed fiscally is because *******s in government keep making things more expensive.

 

exactly! when you stop questioning authority and the right to personal choice you have stopped being an individual. this is big brother at its finest, looking to weed out the free minded so the rest of the flock does what its told, wrong or right

 

This is lunacy! Driving is not a right protected by personal liberties and the constitution.

it's a privledge, and if you want to do it, you follow the rules of the road, including the requirement that you drive a safe car.

Do you constitutional historians also think it's your right to drive your old, unsafe, not up to current crash test standards, junk old cars? Driving these old junk cars is a safety issue that if ignored could cause you harm, the government rightly requires you drive a car that is no older than 3 years and is up to current crash test standards to drive on the road.

SEIG HEIL BROTHER! All will step in line or OFF TO THE OVENS!

 

sad but true tacgnol

 

I'm not against seat belts but as far as safety goes our 3rd gens are safer if in a wreck with newer cars. Have a head on at 30 MPH with a 2010 camaro and you will have to replace some front end parts while the 2010 will not even be recognized as a car afterward.
that might be an exaggeration but I don't really want to test it.

 

 

There is a difference between being safe and coming out of a crash with an intact car. Case in point... last week my DD got rear ended, bad enough to spin me out. I barely felt the collision, but the frame was collapsed on it. The frame absorbed all of the damage, and saved my back and neck from injury. Sure the car was totaled, but I'm fine. It was a shame to total out a good car, but I'm very happy that both I and my 13 year old son didn't have an lingering effects.

 

So what you are trying to say is "they dont build em like they used to"? This is for you.

http://online.wsj.com/video/chevy-cr...91DE4035D.html

I doubt a 20+ year old third gen would fare well with a 2010 model. I understand the vid shows a 59 model year, but compare your safety equipment in your car to a 2010...I think you get the idea!!