Seatbelt Laws

[dam prayer noobs]

You're the one missing the point. I don't care the slightest about your safety. This is about you putting other people in potential danger. Let's say you're in the backseat of a car, and you're not wearing your seatbelt. If you crash you'll smash into the seat in front of you, and harm the one sitting in it, to name one example.

Wow, you are a fucking idiot dude. Lol putting other people in danger by flying into them in a car crash, oh man this is going in my sig. If you are so scared of other passengers flying into you then just fucking TELL them to put on a seat belt lmao, would probably do more good than making it illegal. The possibility of a passenger flying into you is so small, that it would be stupid to justify any law by it.

And your little scenario there, you do realize that in a car crash, all the passengers are flying at the same rate, so when the rear passenger hits the front seat, the front passenger is hitting the air bag, and the front seat absorbs all the shock. Damn, you are pretty stupid dude.

 

[rhall072]

I flipped my tib Tuscani doin 85 around a terrbile turn lmfao, saved the car then a deer jumped off the hill and i swerved off the cliff lmfao, i had my seatbelt off and i'm fine.

 

[MiM3]

If one is to fuckin' lazy to pull a strap around them to save their life,
Well then they should not drive.

 

[The Riddler_]

Guess the car should of hit the guy then. They teach you in driving courses not to swerve, as it just makes it much worse

Then the person would likely go to jail for man slaughter.

So you agree with being fined every time you don't look both ways before crossing the street... wow.

Just an argument. But TBH, it's alittle extreme. But if it could help your safety and others, i wouldn't be too mad at the new law =/. Just not a big fine.

I'm not disputing the effectiveness of the seatbelt. Yes, it's a good idea to wear them. Yes, the Government owns the roads. That's why I said it wasn't a very good question.

The question I wanted to ask was this: Is it moral for the Government to protect people from themselves? If you want to do something like not wear a seatbelt, kill yourself, etc, do you believe the Government has a right to punish you for not taking care of yourself?

Let me explain this one more time.

Quick scenario:

3 People; A, B, and C.

Person A and B are driving in a car. Person A doesn't have his/her seatbelt on yet person B does. While Person A is driving, Person C tries to cut in front of person A but fails and hits them on the side. Person A's hands fly off the steering wheel, and head hits the windshield. While he/she is knocked unconscious, the car is driving into the opposite side of traffic with no one to turn the wheel. While person B is sitting in his/her seatbelt basically waiting to be hit by the traffic.

It affects more than the driver. So it isn't mainly protecting themselves from themselves, but protecting others also.

See it now?

 

[dam prayer noobs]

Just an argument. But TBH, it's alittle extreme. But if it could help your safety and others, i wouldn't be too mad at the new law =/. Just not a big fine.

"Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin

People like you are the number one reason this nation is turning into totalitarianism. Soon we will barely be able to do anything without the government's consent. This is just like terrorism, we gave up all of our rights so the government could "protect" us from terrorism, which occurs less often than car crashes and homicides.

 

[Kiabin]

I think it should be drive at your own risk, as it's only for your safety .

 

[The Riddler_]

"Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin

People like you are the number one reason this nation is turning into totalitarianism. Soon we will barely be able to do anything without the government's consent. This is just like terrorism, we gave up all of our rights so the government could "protect" us from terrorism, which occurs less often than car crashes and homicides.

Lol, i'm not extremely against rights. All rights are grand. But the only way a Utopia could be formed is either with order or with forever peace. It would force a good habit. Which I do not see anything wrong.

You are about free choices. But If I say you can't have any wrong/evil choice, you say it's wrong. Because it's their choice. But what is best, is what's best.

What do you say about a man walking down train tracks while a train is coming. The train can't stop, the man is committing suicide. With the death on the conductors hands. Is it right to make it illegal to walk down the tracks at anytime? But at the same time it is controlling his actions and limiting his rights.

Also, Franklin's quote is too die hard and isn't 100% relevant. Not looking both ways could end up death and a punishment on an innocent man's hands. That's permanent. Also, i'd say the quote is outdated. Times have changed. Circumstances have changed.

 

[dam prayer noobs]

Lol, i'm not extremely against rights. All rights are grand. But the only way a Utopia could be formed is either with order or with forever peace. It would force a good habit. Which I do not see anything wrong.

You are about free choices. But If I say you can't have any wrong/evil choice, you say it's wrong. Because it's their choice. But what is best, is what's best.

What do you say about a man walking down train tracks while a train is coming. The train can't stop, the man is committing suicide. With the death on the conductors hands. Is it right to make it illegal to walk down the tracks at anytime? But at the same time it is controlling his actions and limiting his rights.

Also, Franklin's quote is too die hard and isn't 100% relevant. Not looking both ways could end up death and a punishment on an innocent man's hands. That's permanent. Also, i'd say the quote is outdated. Times have changed. Circumstances have changed.

You can't get people to not do stupid things, this is a given. Even though wearing seat belts is law, tens of thousands of seat belt tickets are given out every year. You can't control people's choices, which is why it doesn't matter what you say is the right or wrong thing to do, or what is or is not allowed, people are going to do it anyways. The police never bust through the bathroom door when you are about to slit your wrist open, and they never pop up in a dark alley while someone is getting mugged, and they are not going to go push a guy off the tracks right before a train hits him. The only thing the government and the legal system can do is punish you after you have committed the act and try to scare you into not doing something, but we all know this method is a complete failure, because we still have around 16,000 homicides a year in the US.

 

[wtp]

There should be a sealtbelt law.

Ignorance should never give permanent disabilities.

 

[Kiabin]

There should be a sealtbelt law.

Ignorance should never give permanent disabilities.

Not true. The stupid pigs think they can controll EVERYTHING. I don't wear my seatbelt, hopefully to just make them angry. I don't care, as it's only a 10 dollar fine where I'm from.

 

[The Riddler_]

You can't get people to not do stupid things, this is a given. Even though wearing seat belts is law, tens of thousands of seat belt tickets are given out every year. You can't control people's choices, which is why it doesn't matter what you say is the right or wrong thing to do, or what is or is not allowed, people are going to do it anyways. The police never bust through the bathroom door when you are about to slit your wrist open, and they never pop up in a dark alley while someone is getting mugged, and they are not going to go push a guy off the tracks right before a train hits him. The only thing the government and the legal system can do is punish you after you have committed the act and try to scare you into not doing something, but we all know this method is a complete failure, because we still have around 16,000 homicides a year in the US.

Sooooo. Since you can't stop it, do nothing. The perfect solution.

Or, get as close as possible and run by fear. I wouldn't do it, but it's the closet thing to do before you start infringing on peoples rights. Would you prefer 100% surveillance?

Some ruin the privileges for all.

 

[wtp]

Not true. The stupid pigs think they can controll EVERYTHING. I don't wear my seatbelt, hopefully to just make them angry. I don't care, as it's only a 10 dollar fine where I'm from.

It's a illogical decision to not wear a seatbelt. Even if you're doing it to smite them, which probably doesn't work well.

 

[Kiabin]

It's a illogical decision to not wear a seatbelt. Even if you're doing it to smite them, which probably doesn't work well.

Good point, but the cops are too controllative. I guess it has nothing to do with them =| .

 

[The Riddler_]

Good point, but the cops are too controllative. I guess it has nothing to do with them =| .

Why mock a person that cares too much.

 

[K-3-V-1-N]

Let me explain this one more time.

Quick scenario:

3 People; A, B, and C.

Person A and B are driving in a car. Person A doesn't have his/her seatbelt on yet person B does. While Person A is driving, Person C tries to cut in front of person A but fails and hits them on the side. Person A's hands fly off the steering wheel, and head hits the windshield. While he/she is knocked unconscious, the car is driving into the opposite side of traffic with no one to turn the wheel. While person B is sitting in his/her seatbelt basically waiting to be hit by the traffic.

It affects more than the driver. So it isn't mainly protecting themselves from themselves, but protecting others also.

See it now?

I'm not disputing the effectiveness of the seatbelt. Yes, it's a good idea to wear them. Yes, the Government owns the roads. That's why I said it wasn't a very good question.

The question I wanted to ask was this: Is it moral for the Government to protect people from themselves? If you want to do something like not wear a seatbelt, kill yourself, etc, do you believe the Government has a right to punish you for not taking care of yourself?

So, you see, it has nothing to do with seatbelts. That's what I've been trying to say for the last couple pages. I denounce the question I asked in favor of the one highlighted in green, which is without the complications.

 

[Vibes]

Your questions highlighted in green have been answered. The government have a right to protect people from themselves when others are in danger from an individuals actions.

People not wearing seatbelts can injure others in accidents.

 

[Arya]

If one is to fuckin' lazy to pull a strap around them to save their life,
Well then they should not drive.

In a machine where laziness is promoted, your point doesn't even begin to stratch the surface of valid.

You push your foot the slightest, you turn keys, and you press buttons. I think cars have failed the test of 'laziness', and considering how they're still usable, like I said, your point isn't very valid.

The question I wanted to ask was this: Is it moral for the Government to protect people from themselves? If you want to do something like not wear a seatbelt, kill yourself, etc, do you believe the Government has a right to punish you for not taking care of yourself?

Considering the fact that in a similiar comparison, suicide is, at the LEAST, a misdemeanor, yes.

 

[K-3-V-1-N]

Considering the fact that in a similiar comparison, suicide is, at the LEAST, a misdemeanor, yes.

I see now the topic I wanted goes into another one , but that's okay.

Anyways, why should suicide be illegal? If I own myself, then how can someone else regulate how I take preserve myself?

 

[TJ]

Then the person would likely go to jail for man slaughter.

It would have to be proven that you did it on purpose. Which would mean they would have to find a reason for it, and if its a last minute decision because the guy walked out in front of them, then i doubt you will get anymore more than a repair fee and a trip to the police station.

 

[wtp]

Why mock a person that cares too much.

Controlling is making someone do something because you know you can make them do it. Caring is completely different.