If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WorldNetDaily)   Leftists' oppressive seatbelt laws must end now   (wnd.com) divider line 214
    More: Hero, Patrick Henry, second mortgages, seat belts, mandates, moral hazard, free country, Occupational Safety and Health, Association of American Physicians  
•       •       •

2997 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 May 2012 at 7:44 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



214 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-09 04:16:49 PM  
I'm fine with that.

Just deny medical treatment for anyone whose injuries would have been prevented by wearing a seat belt.

FREEDOM!
 
2012-05-09 04:18:11 PM  
John Stossel- king of fake outrage. Really? Seat belts?
 
2012-05-09 04:19:56 PM  
Yes please.

Then tell idiots that read WND that Fartbongo is about to ban people from parking on highways with the driver door facing fast moving traffic.
 
2012-05-09 04:20:12 PM  
As I document in my new book, "No, They Can't: Why Government Fails - but Individuals Succeed,"

static.ddmcdn.com

Hmmm. I get the feeling that all of these platitudes about government failure are just providing excuses to nobodies so that their failure to reach their goal is because no one respects them as individuals. If only government would get out of the way then I would be highly successful. It sounds like repackaged Ayn Rand for frustrated middle-aged men.

It sells though. Pandering works.
 
2012-05-09 04:20:59 PM  

downstairs: John Stossel- king of fake outrage. Really? Seat belts?


...and controls on prescribing Oxy. WTF, dude.
 
2012-05-09 04:22:22 PM  

Aarontology: I'm fine with that.

Just deny medical treatment for anyone whose injuries would have been prevented by wearing a seat belt.

FREEDOM!


Oh, and I'm 100% fine with that.

I'm opposed to seat belt laws, helmet laws, drug laws. Just understand that when you become a vegetable, we're pulling the plug. Your personal freedom over your body doesn't extend to my wallet.
 
2012-05-09 04:24:44 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Aarontology: I'm fine with that.

Just deny medical treatment for anyone whose injuries would have been prevented by wearing a seat belt.

FREEDOM!

Oh, and I'm 100% fine with that.

I'm opposed to seat belt laws, helmet laws, drug laws. Just understand that when you become a vegetable, we're pulling the plug. Your personal freedom over your body doesn't extend to my wallet.


Those laws aren't about safety... they're about revenue. If the government couldn't make money off ticketing you for not wearing a seatbelt, do you think they would give a fark if you wore a seatbelt?
 
2012-05-09 04:26:48 PM  
Hah, what does he think this is, the 70's? Companies haven't been willingly doing things that increase consumer safety in decades. Bean-counter mentality all but killed that off as they ever-futilely race toward zero.
 
2012-05-09 04:27:23 PM  

Sgt Otter: downstairs: John Stossel- king of fake outrage. Really? Seat belts?

...and controls on prescribing Oxy. WTF, dude.


DADDY NEEDS HIS MEDICINE
i.imgur.com
 
2012-05-09 04:27:56 PM  

Rapmaster2000: As I document in my new book, "No, They Can't: Why Government Fails - but Individuals Succeed,"

[static.ddmcdn.com image 400x300]

Hmmm. I get the feeling that all of these platitudes about government failure are just providing excuses to nobodies so that their failure to reach their goal is because no one respects them as individuals. If only government would get out of the way then I would be highly successful. It sounds like repackaged Ayn Rand for frustrated middle-aged men.

It sells though. Pandering works.


Not to mention he's writing this outrage on the government-created Internet.
 
2012-05-09 04:29:25 PM  
www.newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com
 
2012-05-09 04:29:52 PM  
What about bootstraps? Are they still mandatory?
 
2012-05-09 04:29:58 PM  
I like the comment that says making him wear seatbelts is the same thing has making him a slave.
Some people have no farking clue. They really do think they are being treated like slaves of old.


The problem with not making people wear seatbelts is multi-fold. First is medical concerns and ER treatments.

Second is insurance. If a bunch of 'rugged real Americans' stop wearing seat belts and get in accidents, my insurance will go up in order for the insurance company to pay the increased bills because of it. I have zero desire to pay higher bills because idiots who receive the chain email about how not wearing a seatbelt saved some drivers life.
 
2012-05-09 04:31:48 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Rapmaster2000: Aarontology: I'm fine with that.

Just deny medical treatment for anyone whose injuries would have been prevented by wearing a seat belt.

FREEDOM!

Oh, and I'm 100% fine with that.

I'm opposed to seat belt laws, helmet laws, drug laws. Just understand that when you become a vegetable, we're pulling the plug. Your personal freedom over your body doesn't extend to my wallet.

Those laws aren't about safety... they're about revenue. If the government couldn't make money off ticketing you for not wearing a seatbelt, do you think they would give a fark if you wore a seatbelt?


They make more money off living seatbelt wearers than dead non-seatbelt wearers.

Less money spent scraping body parts off the road.

Less money spent on repairing decapitations in the ER.
 
2012-05-09 04:31:58 PM  
Jesus, John. This is such GD claptrap:

Here's my reasoning: The first government mandate created a standard for seat belts. That relieved auto companies of the need to compete on seat belt safety and comfort. Drivers and passengers haven't benefitted from improvements competitive carmakers might have made.

Yes, because auto safety and seat belt technology advanced so quickly before mandates. Why is your memory so soft here?

University of Chicago economist Sam Peltzman argues that increased safety features on cars have the ironic effect of encouraging people to drive more recklessly. It's called the Peltzman Effect - a variation on what insurance experts call "moral hazard." Studies show that people drive faster when they are snugly enclosed in seat belts.

And many economists argue that this is flawed. It's only a hypothesis. That's why it's called an "effect" and not a "theory". To go further, this is all related to the reason why the Nobel Prize for Economics is worthless.

Through the Food and Drug Administration, the government claims to protect us. But some people suffer because of that protection: Some die waiting for drugs to be approved.

So approve Thalidomide.

This article is a fantasy. It's all "I think I think" over and over again masquerading as a theory. We know it doesn't work, John. We already did it your way.

Libertarianism: as unrealistic as communism, but at least the communist on your dorm floor had weed to share and not to mooch.
 
2012-05-09 04:34:28 PM  

gameshowhost: [www.newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com image 327x240]


Came for the slap. Thank you sir.
 
2012-05-09 04:34:41 PM  
Wear your seatbelt or don't, I don't really care. What I am tired of is car companies feeling the need to install alerts for when you aren't wearing your seatbelt. I know I'm not wearing my seatbelt, I don't need a constant beeping noise every 3 seconds reminding me of that fact. Even worse when you're on rural roads or on a lease/ranch where seatbelts are completely unnecesary.
 
2012-05-09 04:37:18 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Those laws aren't about safety... they're about revenue. If the government couldn't make money off ticketing you for not wearing a seatbelt, do you think they would give a fark if you wore a seatbelt?


This right here.

The police used to run a seatbelt checkpoint on the corner of my old place. They'd have officers standing at the intersection, shining flashlights into peoples cars at a 4 way stop. Both streets were 25mph limits, in a quiet suburban neighborhood.

That's not safety, that's a cash grab. If you want to give someone an extra ticket for not having a seatbelt on when you pull them over for speeding on the highway, fine. But peering into people's cars in a residential neighborhood has nothing to do with safety.
 
2012-05-09 04:38:14 PM  
I've only unbuckled one corpse and he was wrapped around the tree so tight it took over an hour to extricate him.
I've seen a lot more who would have walked away if they had been belted in.
 
2012-05-09 04:40:39 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Those laws aren't about safety... they're about revenue. If the government couldn't make money off ticketing you for not wearing a seatbelt, do you think they would give a fark if you wore a seatbelt?


And when Billy Bob gets ejected in a rollover and he's stuck on life support for months, I have to pay for it out of my taxes once his insurance runs out which steals money from more responsible citizens for medicaid and from SS and food stamps to pay for his kids because the kinds of people who are too irresponsible to wear a seat belt to be their for their children aren't generally the kinds of people responsible enough to get life insurance.

I elected this government and I want the government to force irresponsible people to be responsible as long as I have to pay for irresponsibility.

Let's have an opt out policy. I'll let people sign away the regulations that require them to wear a seatbelt. They tattoo "DO NOT RESUSCITATE" on their chests. Everybody wins.
 
2012-05-09 04:47:15 PM  
If every auto company were trying to invent a better belt, today, instead of one seat belt, I bet there'd be six, and all would be better and more comfortable than today's standard.

That's sort of the point. There is value to standardization of safety devices. They're compatible with other devices (e.g., infant/child seats), there's no learning curve, emergency responders know what they're dealing with, etc. So, without a single standard, there may well be six different seat belts, but that would not necessarily be a good thing.
 
2012-05-09 04:49:37 PM  

Aarontology: I'm fine with that.

Just deny medical treatment for anyone whose injuries would have been prevented by wearing a seat belt.

FREEDOM!


I'm ok with them getting treated. As long as the insurance companies or government don't have to shell out for it. If they want to pay it out-of-pocket, hold a bake fruit basket sale, or otherwise rely on the charity of other people, more power to them.
 
2012-05-09 04:51:12 PM  

Rapmaster2000: FirstNationalBastard: Those laws aren't about safety... they're about revenue. If the government couldn't make money off ticketing you for not wearing a seatbelt, do you think they would give a fark if you wore a seatbelt?

And when Billy Bob gets ejected in a rollover and he's stuck on life support for months, I have to pay for it out of my taxes once his insurance runs out which steals money from more responsible citizens for medicaid and from SS and food stamps to pay for his kids because the kinds of people who are too irresponsible to wear a seat belt to be their for their children aren't generally the kinds of people responsible enough to get life insurance.

I elected this government and I want the government to force irresponsible people to be responsible as long as I have to pay for irresponsibility.

Let's have an opt out policy. I'll let people sign away the regulations that require them to wear a seatbelt. They tattoo "DO NOT RESUSCITATE" on their chests. Everybody wins.


Nice try commie. Like I'll support paying for someone else's tattoo! Let the market determine how many idiots get branded with the stupid.
 
2012-05-09 04:59:37 PM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Rapmaster2000: FirstNationalBastard: Those laws aren't about safety... they're about revenue. If the government couldn't make money off ticketing you for not wearing a seatbelt, do you think they would give a fark if you wore a seatbelt?

And when Billy Bob gets ejected in a rollover and he's stuck on life support for months, I have to pay for it out of my taxes once his insurance runs out which steals money from more responsible citizens for medicaid and from SS and food stamps to pay for his kids because the kinds of people who are too irresponsible to wear a seat belt to be their for their children aren't generally the kinds of people responsible enough to get life insurance.

I elected this government and I want the government to force irresponsible people to be responsible as long as I have to pay for irresponsibility.

Let's have an opt out policy. I'll let people sign away the regulations that require them to wear a seatbelt. They tattoo "DO NOT RESUSCITATE" on their chests. Everybody wins.

Nice try commie. Like I'll support paying for someone else's tattoo! Let the market determine how many idiots get branded with the stupid.


Next, they'll be requiring us to pay for those annoying roadside crosses with their teddy bears and plastic flowers!
 
2012-05-09 05:18:10 PM  
AND DON'T GET ME STARTED ON THOSE LIBTARDS' PROPERLY INFLATED TIRES!!1!
 
2012-05-09 05:19:30 PM  
I'm being oppressed by my anti-lock brakes.
 
2012-05-09 05:20:55 PM  
www.lpstuff.com
eet's a good book.
 
2012-05-09 05:21:49 PM  

Aarontology: I'm fine with that.

Just deny medical treatment for anyone whose injuries would have been prevented by wearing a seat belt.

FREEDOM!


Can we also stop paying for medical treatment for health problems that could have been prevented by diet and exercise?
 
2012-05-09 05:22:52 PM  
Patrick Henry was an abrasive asshole who actively tried to prevent the creation and ratification of the Constitution.
 
2012-05-09 05:41:19 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Aarontology: I'm fine with that.

Just deny medical treatment for anyone whose injuries would have been prevented by wearing a seat belt.

FREEDOM!

Oh, and I'm 100% fine with that.

I'm opposed to seat belt laws, helmet laws, drug laws. Just understand that when you become a vegetable, we're pulling the plug. Your personal freedom over your body doesn't extend to my wallet.


Works for me.
 
2012-05-09 05:43:08 PM  
I had a friend die after getting in a head-on collision and being thrown threw the windshield, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies.
 
2012-05-09 06:41:00 PM  

Diogenes: Patrick Henry was an abrasive asshole who actively tried to prevent the creation and ratification of the Constitution.


Pfft! Patrick Henry was always frontin' for The Man.

Thomas Paine was the real shizz.
 
2012-05-09 06:47:19 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: gameshowhost: [www.newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com image 327x240]

Came for the slap. Thank you sir.


*nods in acknowledgement; walks taller than dewey cox*
 
2012-05-09 06:52:15 PM  

TsarTom: [www.lpstuff.com image 282x450]
eet's a good book.


There's nothing consensual about forcing me to share your burden of the risk while you enjoy all of the benefits.

/free riding: how the fark does it work?
 
2012-05-09 06:59:09 PM  
If toddlers really don't want to be raped, they can simply fight back.
 
2012-05-09 07:14:20 PM  

Rapmaster2000: So approve Thalidomide.


HELL NO!

Do you realize how farking dangerous that drug is?
 
2012-05-09 07:20:59 PM  
Isn't John Stossel the "no one in America starved during the Great Depression" guy?
 
2012-05-09 07:25:30 PM  

Rapmaster2000: I'm opposed to seat belt laws, helmet laws, drug laws. Just understand that when you become a vegetable, we're pulling the plug. Your personal freedom over your body doesn't extend to my wallet.


Wrong. An unbelted driver can be thrown from the driver's seat in even a minor collision, causing them to lose control of their car and potentially worsening the accident.
 
2012-05-09 07:46:54 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Rapmaster2000: Aarontology: I'm fine with that.

Just deny medical treatment for anyone whose injuries would have been prevented by wearing a seat belt.

FREEDOM!

Oh, and I'm 100% fine with that.

I'm opposed to seat belt laws, helmet laws, drug laws. Just understand that when you become a vegetable, we're pulling the plug. Your personal freedom over your body doesn't extend to my wallet.

Those laws aren't about safety... they're about revenue. If the government couldn't make money off ticketing you for not wearing a seatbelt, do you think they would give a fark if you wore a seatbelt?


Yes, they would. Believe it or not, there are people in the government who don't want you to die because of stupidity. However for you, they might make an exception.
 
2012-05-09 07:46:56 PM  
Why won't the government deregulate murder already?
 
2012-05-09 07:47:45 PM  
If conservatives want to lift their trucks, then drive really really fast around turns without their seatbelts on, then I am all for it. Just please do it before November.
 
2012-05-09 07:49:14 PM  

spiderpaz: If conservatives want to lift their trucks, then drive really really fast around turns without their seatbelts on, then I am all for it. Just please do it before November.


preferably on an icy morning, far far away from the nearest hospital
 
2012-05-09 07:49:36 PM  
All that said, though, you could make a legit argument that airbag mandates are unnecessary, though at this point the free market pretty much makes it's own mandates, as evidenced by the new cars that have the entire passenger cabin explode with bags in a fender bender.
 
2012-05-09 07:49:52 PM  
please, please, PLEASE, conservatives - take off your oppressive liberal seatbelts!
 
2012-05-09 07:50:12 PM  
University of Nebraska at Lincoln student pens anti-seatbelt editorial, dies in horrible crash without his seatbelt on a couple months later.

Snopes

One of my favorite true Snopes.
 
2012-05-09 07:50:13 PM  

gameshowhost: [www.newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com image 327x240]


I do believe it drove him insane.
 
2012-05-09 07:53:57 PM  
Is it the 80's again?
 
2012-05-09 07:53:59 PM  

Jubeebee: FirstNationalBastard: Those laws aren't about safety... they're about revenue. If the government couldn't make money off ticketing you for not wearing a seatbelt, do you think they would give a fark if you wore a seatbelt?

This right here.

The police used to run a seatbelt checkpoint on the corner of my old place. They'd have officers standing at the intersection, shining flashlights into peoples cars at a 4 way stop. Both streets were 25mph limits, in a quiet suburban neighborhood.

That's not safety, that's a cash grab. If you want to give someone an extra ticket for not having a seatbelt on when you pull them over for speeding on the highway, fine. But peering into people's cars in a residential neighborhood has nothing to do with safety.


Sounds like you lived in a neighborhood full of idiots.
 
2012-05-09 07:54:29 PM  

Jubeebee: FirstNationalBastard: Those laws aren't about safety... they're about revenue. If the government couldn't make money off ticketing you for not wearing a seatbelt, do you think they would give a fark if you wore a seatbelt?

This right here.

The police used to run a seatbelt checkpoint on the corner of my old place. They'd have officers standing at the intersection, shining flashlights into peoples cars at a 4 way stop. Both streets were 25mph limits, in a quiet suburban neighborhood.

That's not safety, that's a cash grab. If you want to give someone an extra ticket for not having a seatbelt on when you pull them over for speeding on the highway, fine. But peering into people's cars in a residential neighborhood has nothing to do with safety.


Ever hit your head against a hard object at 25 m.p.h.? Did it feel slow then?
 
2012-05-09 07:55:17 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Oh, and I'm 100% fine with that.

I'm opposed to seat belt laws, helmet laws, drug laws. Just understand that when you become a vegetable, we're pulling the plug. Your personal freedom over your body doesn't extend to my wallet.


OK lets change the 2nd part of that first then before we are only concerned about the first part. Deal?
 
Displayed 50 of 214 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report