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 08:39:02 PM  
Looks like 90% of posters didn't even read the article. He's arguing th....oh nevermind.
 
2012-05-09 08:39:36 PM  

Eccentric Fixation: 2011 was a record low in traffic deaths. I wonder if seatbelt laws had anything to do with that. Hmmmmmm.


Nope. It was conceal carry laws.

Jesus lived in a world without the FDA and other government nannnyisms, and he turned out okay.
 
2012-05-09 08:40:13 PM  
upload.wikimedia.org

Dear John, read this, it explains all about free market American auto safety innovation the government curbed.

/Did any of these Randian anarchists make it through 10th grade?
 
2012-05-09 08:41:31 PM  

Rapmaster2000: 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.


I agree with you and all, but...psst, Thalidomide is used to treat breast cancer.
 
2012-05-09 08:41:45 PM  

AlgaeRancher: driving a car is not a fundamental right, follow the rules or take the bus.


static6.businessinsider.com

Stossel on Public Transportation:
Why These Lumbering Behemoths of Antiquity
Belong in a Scrapyard
Instead of crowding our Proud Highways
 
2012-05-09 08:44:04 PM  

Euell Gibbons: Looks like 90% of posters didn't even read the article. He's arguing th....oh nevermind.


Don't get stage fright now, for heaven's sake. Out with it.
 
2012-05-09 08:44:29 PM  

lockers: The silliest part of this is riding in a car is the single most dangerous thing a person can do. It is not a right in any sense of the word. If the government shouldn't regulate safety in the deadliest activity it's citizens do, what kind of safety regulation would be more justifiable. Yeah let's dump the FDA, OSHA, SEC, EPA and any other safety body out there. We can just return to an agrarian society, reverse the industrial society and live an idyllic personal responsibilty nirvana. Me personally, i like all the perks that come with the system we have.


Most dangerous thing a person could do...challenge accepted.

/I think a "spike mounted on the steering wheel - pointed right at the driver's chest " would be more dangerous...and perfect for prom night
 
2012-05-09 08:45:08 PM  

kbronsito: 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?


Why stop there? If two people get together that are genetically predisposed to cancer and have a kid with cancer, let the little bastard die.
 
2012-05-09 08:47:10 PM  

Janusdog: Rapmaster2000: 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.

I agree with you and all, but...psst, Thalidomide is used to treat breast cancer.


Which dovetails neatly into why abortion should maintain its place between a women and her doctor. The choice should never be i live and have a deformed child or both of us die because i have a treatable life threatening illness. How can you possibly be for deformed or dead children.
 
2012-05-09 08:50:56 PM  

New Farkin User Name: lockers: The silliest part of this is riding in a car is the single most dangerous thing a person can do. It is not a right in any sense of the word. If the government shouldn't regulate safety in the deadliest activity it's citizens do, what kind of safety regulation would be more justifiable. Yeah let's dump the FDA, OSHA, SEC, EPA and any other safety body out there. We can just return to an agrarian society, reverse the industrial society and live an idyllic personal responsibilty nirvana. Me personally, i like all the perks that come with the system we have.

Most dangerous thing a person could do...challenge accepted.

/I think a "spike mounted on the steering wheel - pointed right at the driver's chest " would be more dangerous...and perfect for prom night


Fair enough, stupidity is the single most dangerous activity people do. But you can't stop people for doing stupid things, you can just encourage them not to.
 
2012-05-09 08:51:30 PM  
Thanks A Lot Beltbama
 
2012-05-09 08:52:47 PM  

cmunic8r99: 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.


Fark that, their treatment will be socialized via the "go to ER, don't pay bill" method, not to mention the extra medical care wasted on them will drive up the price for the rest of us via supply&demand.
 
2012-05-09 08:53:24 PM  
People who complain about seat belts sound fat.
 
2012-05-09 08:54:01 PM  

Yakk: [upload.wikimedia.org image 139x221]

Dear John, read this, it explains all about free market American auto safety innovation the government curbed.

/Did any of these Randian anarchists make it through 10th grade?


10th grade? In some socialist indoctrination center run by the evil autocratic state?
 
2012-05-09 08:54:32 PM  

Janusdog: Rapmaster2000: 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.

I agree with you and all, but...psst, Thalidomide is used to treat breast cancer.


I know it has valid applications now, but there was considerable controversy at the time revolving around what was seen as the FDA's intransigence in the face of a drug that clearly helped women with morning sickness. The argument was that Germans were reaping the benefits of this miracle drug while American bureaucrats are dragging their heels.

Bureaucracies aren't created for efficiency and speed, they're created for accuracy. They may not always succeed at that goal, but drug safety is not necessarily something that would be approved by speed to market. This is a case where we've shown through past example that accuracy is more important.
 
2012-05-09 08:55:07 PM  

indylaw: Really? We're fighting about seat belts? Seat belts are a big liberal co-co-conspiracy?

A child leaving home alone for the first time takes a risk. So does the entrepreneur who opens a new business.

And that's the analogy you came up with?


I'm still curious how seatbelt laws are liberal.
 
2012-05-09 08:57:50 PM  

TheBigJerk: indylaw: Really? We're fighting about seat belts? Seat belts are a big liberal co-co-conspiracy?

A child leaving home alone for the first time takes a risk. So does the entrepreneur who opens a new business.

And that's the analogy you came up with?

I'm still curious how seatbelt laws are liberal.


Because england is the nanny state, england is socialist, liberals are socialists therefore safety laws are liberal. TADA!
 
2012-05-09 08:58:47 PM  

New Farkin User Name: lockers: The silliest part of this is riding in a car is the single most dangerous thing a person can do. It is not a right in any sense of the word. If the government shouldn't regulate safety in the deadliest activity it's citizens do, what kind of safety regulation would be more justifiable. Yeah let's dump the FDA, OSHA, SEC, EPA and any other safety body out there. We can just return to an agrarian society, reverse the industrial society and live an idyllic personal responsibilty nirvana. Me personally, i like all the perks that come with the system we have.

Most dangerous thing a person could do...challenge accepted.

/I think a "spike mounted on the steering wheel - pointed right at the driver's chest " would be more dangerous...and perfect for prom night


Before the advent of the collapsible steering column, that's about what we had. Thank you Robert McNamara.
 
2012-05-09 08:59:03 PM  

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


It would have been much more funny if he wrote the article about space travel.

"Sure we landed on the moon, but if the government hadn't intervened the private sector might have landed on six competing planets by now!"

Speaking of which, when the Hell is the first private-sector moon landing going to happen? It's one thing being beaten to the punch by the big bad incompetent government, but it's been over 40 years already and they're barely off the ground. Not even an unmanned drone, nothing? How fast is this bootstrappiness thing supposed to work?
 
2012-05-09 08:59:54 PM  
Same thing as no-fault insurance. CORPORATIONS wanted seat-belt laws (less medical costs) and no-fault insurance (avoids litigation, less cost) so they could save/make money. The politicians wanted them so you rabble would shut your yaps about raising auto insurance costs. And they could say they did something about the costs and also for your physical benefit.

/of course all that eventually leads back to the same cost to the consumer, once you massage the intangible variables
 
2012-05-09 09:00:45 PM  
It really really annoys me when semi-sensible people use sensible arguments to make irrational arguments.

The Peltzman Effect is demonstrably true, at least over the short-term: Increased safety features do tend to have the effect of causing people to behave more recklessly, at least at first. You drive faster in a new car and run faster in new shoes, and are more careless in brightly-lit areas. Then, after you settle down, you become more careful. The reverse is true too: You are more careless in your own neighborhood than in a strange one.

But that's NOT an excuse to repeal seatbelt laws! Just because you're going to drive faster wearing a seatbelt is hardly a rationale to not wear a seatbelt and hope people will slow down. Hitting a pole at 55 without a seatbelt is not safer than hitting it with one at 65.

Same way with his lame drug example. Yes, doctors are wary about prescribing painkillers, and it's unconscionable. But the REASONS for it are not because of overregulation in testing or delays in approval (as he implies with his reference to Vioxx). The reasons are related to the War On Drugs and the fallout from that. Not because people might overdose on their pills, but because doctors are afraid of being arrested as dealers.

The only thing worse than a stupid person making a stupid argument is a smart person making the same argument. Because they almost sound reasonable.
 
2012-05-09 09:00:49 PM  
*facepalm*

I guess they don't call it World Nut Daily for nothing.
 
2012-05-09 09:02:07 PM  
This was precious. FTFC:

"I don't think I have ever been as angry about anything as I was about the seat belt crap. I still become angered every time I hear some moron state that seat belts saved x lives this year. This is yet another bare-faced lie since no one can possibly know how many are supposed to die within x time frame. The jacka^^es in Congress cannot prepare a budget. They cannot secure the borders. They can, however, jack around with steroids in baseball, worry about cupcakes, fret about football players, stick their snouts into the business of states such as Arizona and Florida, allow TSA perverts to molest the public, build internment camps for our veterans, and squander our tax dollars on Sandra Flake and other dead beats. Feed our enemies and sell our nation down the drain to the NWO. I wish to hell that they would stay out of my business, and everyone elses. Folks, we need to get rid of these goons."


You can almost see the spittle on her monitor as she typed this.
 
2012-05-09 09:04:04 PM  

cc_rider: This was precious. FTFC:

"I don't think I have ever been as angry about anything as I was about the seat belt crap. I still become angered every time I hear some moron state that seat belts saved x lives this year. This is yet another bare-faced lie since no one can possibly know how many are supposed to die within x time frame. The jacka^^es in Congress cannot prepare a budget. They cannot secure the borders. They can, however, jack around with steroids in baseball, worry about cupcakes, fret about football players, stick their snouts into the business of states such as Arizona and Florida, allow TSA perverts to molest the public, build internment camps for our veterans, and squander our tax dollars on Sandra Flake and other dead beats. Feed our enemies and sell our nation down the drain to the NWO. I wish to hell that they would stay out of my business, and everyone elses. Folks, we need to get rid of these goons."


You can almost see the spittle on her monitor as she typed this.


To think that otherwise ordinary people might have this sort of internal dialogue churning through their brainpan. It's just---yeah.
 
2012-05-09 09:06:05 PM  

cc_rider: This was precious. FTFC:

"I don't think I have ever been as angry about anything as I was about the seat belt crap. I still become angered every time I hear some moron state that seat belts saved x lives this year. This is yet another bare-faced lie since no one can possibly know how many are supposed to die within x time frame. The jacka^^es in Congress cannot prepare a budget. They cannot secure the borders. They can, however, jack around with steroids in baseball, worry about cupcakes, fret about football players, stick their snouts into the business of states such as Arizona and Florida, allow TSA perverts to molest the public, build internment camps for our veterans, and squander our tax dollars on Sandra Flake and other dead beats. Feed our enemies and sell our nation down the drain to the NWO. I wish to hell that they would stay out of my business, and everyone elses. Folks, we need to get rid of these goons."


You can almost see the spittle on her monitor as she typed this.


If you assume the bolded parts are true, why do the seatbelts make you the angriest?
 
2012-05-09 09:08:41 PM  
"We don't know what good things we might have if the heavy foot of government didn't step in to limit our options"

...but I'll just make shiat up and tell you "this is what would happen" anyway.

Anyway, I agree from a social Darwinian standpoint: stupid people will remove themselves from the gene pool more rapidly.
 
2012-05-09 09:08:54 PM  

Gyrfalcon: run faster in new shoes


Not if you know anything about breaking in new shoes. ymmv, but running even equally fast in new shoes is a mistake I'll never make again :)
 
2012-05-09 09:10:47 PM  

cc_rider: This was precious. FTFC:

"I don't think I have ever been as angry about anything as I was about the seat belt crap. I still become angered every time I hear some moron state that seat belts saved x lives this year. This is yet another bare-faced lie since no one can possibly know how many are supposed to die within x time frame. The jacka^^es in Congress cannot prepare a budget. They cannot secure the borders. They can, however, jack around with steroids in baseball, worry about cupcakes, fret about football players, stick their snouts into the business of states such as Arizona and Florida, allow TSA perverts to molest the public, build internment camps for our veterans, and squander our tax dollars on Sandra Flake and other dead beats. Feed our enemies and sell our nation down the drain to the NWO. I wish to hell that they would stay out of my business, and everyone elses. Folks, we need to get rid of these goons."


You can almost see the spittle on her monitor as she typed this.


Farking statistcs, how do they work?!?
 
2012-05-09 09:20:21 PM  
I was a passenger in a car that went off the road going probably 50 or 60 at the time and the fact that the driver and I were both wearing seat belts definitely kept both of us in the car and her in the driver's seat long enough to bring the car to a halt. Had she not been wearing a seat belt the car would have rolled over and she probably would have been killed and had neither of us been wearing one we both probably would have been killed. A tow and a minor repair job later we were back in business instead of both being dead.

If you don't want to wear a seat belt that is fine but I'll keep wearing mine because I dig this whole being alive thing.
 
2012-05-09 09:23:04 PM  
Oddly enough the top link on the Sports tab right now is about someone dying in a car accident. No mention of whether or not he was wearing a seat belt but the timing is definitely a little odd.
 
2012-05-09 09:26:33 PM  
Fine, don't wear your seatbelt.

Get ejected (lovely thought) and smash your head on the ground killing you instantly (ouch) so that the coroner (tax payer money) has to come out and cordon off the road (lost revenue due to lost man hours of people being delayed going to work) do a $2000+ autopsy, labs to make sure you weren't high or drunk (more wasted tax payer dollars) and make sure the fire department (more tax revenue) shows up to assist in moving your car out of the open road.
 
2012-05-09 09:27:27 PM  

orangehat: I was a passenger in a car that went off the road going probably 50 or 60 at the time and the fact that the driver and I were both wearing seat belts definitely kept both of us in the car and her in the driver's seat long enough to bring the car to a halt. Had she not been wearing a seat belt the car would have rolled over and she probably would have been killed and had neither of us been wearing one we both probably would have been killed. A tow and a minor repair job later we were back in business instead of both being dead.

If you don't want to wear a seat belt that is fine but I'll keep wearing mine because I dig this whole being alive thing.


Like vaccines, seat belts are useful when BOTH drivers in an accident are wearing them. It's that whole "shared responsibility" thing. I wear my seat belt because it's the law, and it is just plain good sense. I'm going to be right pissed if I die anyway because the bootstrappy derper who crashes into my vehicle because she just hates that whole liberal speed limit law isn;t wearing hers. OK well maybe it won't matter because I'll be dead, but still, my ghost will kick her ass.
 
2012-05-09 09:33:31 PM  
wiki.urbandead.com
Don't hate the playa, hate the game. Biotches!

//GIS "john stossel douchebag"
 
2012-05-09 09:44:04 PM  
So, can we end these oppressive helmet laws too? And the controls on meat and meat by products? And those child labor laws too. Really, any regulation that keeps people from extinguishing themselves and their kin folks in record numbers. The excess population must be curbed and this oppressive government keeps them out of debtors prison and workhouses for cheap labor that is killing us with the Chinese market...
 
2012-05-09 09:46:12 PM  

lockers: New Farkin User Name: lockers: The silliest part of this is riding in a car is the single most dangerous thing a person can do. It is not a right in any sense of the word. If the government shouldn't regulate safety in the deadliest activity it's citizens do, what kind of safety regulation would be more justifiable. Yeah let's dump the FDA, OSHA, SEC, EPA and any other safety body out there. We can just return to an agrarian society, reverse the industrial society and live an idyllic personal responsibilty nirvana. Me personally, i like all the perks that come with the system we have.

Most dangerous thing a person could do...challenge accepted.

/I think a "spike mounted on the steering wheel - pointed right at the driver's chest " would be more dangerous...and perfect for prom night

Fair enough, stupidity is the single most dangerous activity people do. But you can't stop people for doing stupid things, you can just encourage them not to.


I did like the idea of a spike mounted on the steering wheel.

Here's my compromise: Make it like a reverse air bag. If you HAVE a seatbelt on, the spike doesn't deploy, but if you're NOT wearing one, the spike springs out of the steering column as you hurtle towards it at 85 mph, thus ending your government-defying, freedom-loving stupidity forever. Also, the paramedics are automatically free of any liability for having to save you if they find you anywhere near still alive if you're impaled on the spike.

Then we'll see how many people refuse to wear their seatbelt.
 
2012-05-09 09:47:25 PM  

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



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.


...who was Rand originally for?
 
2012-05-09 09:47:58 PM  

kbronsito: 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?


...it's time to end the insurance scam altogether. If Paygo is good enough for Congress, it's good enough for all patients! You don't pay, you don't get treatment! If you can't pay, don't get sick or injured! It's just that simple!
 
M-G
2012-05-09 09:48:09 PM  

I_Am_Weasel: Less money spent scraping body parts off the road.


And a crash with no fatalities or body parts all over the place is a lot quicker to clean up, thus avoiding a lot of additional traffic problems.
 
2012-05-09 09:54:12 PM  
As someone old enough to have driven and crashed big ol' cars: Ya'll are dumbasses if you think those things were somehow "safe" in a crash.
 
2012-05-09 09:54:13 PM  
I was actually completely against seatbelt mandates until someone finally made an argument that convinced me.

By wearing a seatbelt, if you are getting into some sort of accident you will have a better chance of maintaining control of the vehicle if you aren't thrown through the windshield, which could lead to saving someone ELSE's life, not just your own.

So yes, I have seen the light!

Now, helmet laws... still not for those.
 
2012-05-09 09:55:20 PM  
I learned the importance of wearing a seat belt when the car I was riding in almost got hit. My face smashing against a headrest is not a pleasant experience and one that would have been prevented had I been wearing a seat belt.
 
2012-05-09 09:57:29 PM  

ghare: As someone old enough to have driven and crashed big ol' cars: Ya'll are dumbasses if you think those things were somehow "safe" in a crash.


It's a shame they had to waste this perfectly good '59 Bel Air, but it's impressive how a 2009 Malibu slices through it like butter.

Bonus: the seatbelt on the Bel Air snaps.

Link
 
2012-05-09 10:00:35 PM  
"Seatbelts save 15,000 lives a year. So Screw em!
 
2012-05-09 10:00:44 PM  

El_Perro: 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.


The current three-point seat belt was designed and patented by Volvo. Who licensed the patent to the world for free. Because they felt that people's safety was that important.
 
2012-05-09 10:07:57 PM  

stoli n coke: Balrog: I may be wrong, but if I recall correctly, most of the initial seatbelt laws were passed by states at the request of the (free market) insurance companies.

True. They were sick of paying off death claims, and that was back when cars were made of materials that could sustain a crash.


Sure, the car lived through the accident just fine. Too bad you got killed bouncing around that rigid and pointy interior because your car had no crumple zones to reduce the strength of the impact.
 
2012-05-09 10:11:36 PM  

Primum: 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.


Added irony. UofN was responsible for creating the SAFER barrier along with IMS. Vehicular safety was kinda their thing.
 
2012-05-09 10:14:58 PM  
Can we get David Schultz to give it another go?
 
2012-05-09 10:21:58 PM  
I'm okay with this, and I'm a lib. Think it's pretty damn silly to have self protection laws.
 
2012-05-09 10:26:30 PM  

Primum: 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.


L. O. L.

I'm going to H. E. L. L.
 
2012-05-09 10:30:38 PM  
FTFA: Let's start treating people as though their bodies belong to them, not to a controlling and "protective" government.

... Except women, of course. *wink*
 
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


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report