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  
•       •       •

2996 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 10:33:46 PM
You know I just noticed this, but is there a male writer for WND who doesn't have a gay porn 'stache?
 
2012-05-09 10:34:10 PM

Raoul Eaton: 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.

Having cars "made of materials that could sustain a crash" was a safety hazard. Having cars that crumple at predeterined points to absorb crash energy is better than having the occupants absorb that energy.


Also, a car made of of some magic solid steel that can never be crushed is not the issue. Physics is the issue. An object in motion bla bla bla

If the car stops suddenly all loose objects inside the car will continue their forward (or sideways) velocity until they encounter enough friction or mass to stop them. If you are wearing a seat belt you may of course die, or you may only encounter some really, really bad bruises as the seat belt keeps you from going through the windshield and over the hood and onto the pavement. Well, unless you just became a big, broken bag of goo by splattering across the unbreakable magic solid steel car.

Also, I was an English major so not only is my explanation of physics wrong but my poor writing, bad spelling, and incorrect grammar should be lulzy.
 
2012-05-09 10:38:02 PM
Wait - seatbelt laws are oppressive, but anti-gay marriage laws are not? How does that work, exactly?
 
2012-05-09 10:42:22 PM
Seat belt laws aren't so save you.

They're to save the first responders.

Flung bodies and crushed heads are extreme sights, cops and paramedics shouldn't have to see them every day. In addition there's a pile of paperwork with a fatal crash.

An increase in these factors would grind away at the people.
 
2012-05-09 10:46:43 PM
So...John Stossel is pro-choice?

"In what sense are we free if we can't decide such things for ourselves?"

"Don't we own our own bodies? Why, in a supposedly free country, do Americans, even when dying, meekly stand aside and let the state limit our choices?"

Good to know...
 
2012-05-09 11:13:14 PM
There are auto insurers that will differentiate their limits for medical payments (payments made to your passengers essentially) based on whether they were wearing a seatbelt or not. This might only be applicable in comparative negligence states, though.

/Comparative vs. contributory negligence is another example why an overarching federal insurance body is nigh on impossible to set up
 
2012-05-09 11:41:52 PM
It's not just leftists - authoritarians of all political groups want to keep you "safe" from things they don't like.

Well, not really.

They want to gain and maintain *power*, so they find some "issue" to grab hold of, get statistical data to confirm their biases, then set about enacting laws and regulations that keep them in their petty bureaucratic jobs rather than be forced by reality to work in legitimate professions requiring marketable skills.
 
2012-05-09 11:57:44 PM

Sumding Wong: I wouldn't have had a problem with mandatory seat belt laws if my insurance rates had gone down matching the insurance company risks.


FREE MARKET
 
2012-05-10 12:29:50 AM
I farking hate WND.

That said. I hate seat-belt laws. If you are stupid enough to not wear one, you should be removed from the gene pool. And taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for your idiotic ass either.

Now, if more WND's would not wear their seat belts. Life would be better... So long as I don't have to pay for them.
 
2012-05-10 12:32:04 AM
Ed Finnerty
AND DON'T GET ME STARTED ON THOSE LIBTARDS' PROPERLY INFLATED TIRES!!1!

I wonder how many people went out and let air out of their tires in order to 'show' Obama that they didn't have to do what he suggested...

Spite- how does it work?

/ it doesn't, actually...
 
2012-05-10 12:40:23 AM

TsukasaK: I'm okay with this, and I'm a lib. Think it's pretty damn silly to have self protection laws.


In other words you prefer the honor system no matter how many people get killed in accidents. Darwin awards, right? Who cares about 'em?

More of a rose-colored libertarian tint than liberal.
 
2012-05-10 12:41:24 AM

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.


Totally agree here.

Also, this begs the question - do any neighborhoods we know of have the school bus force kids into seat belts? As far as I know all kids on a school bus never wear any seat belts and many of them don't even have functional ones in all the seats. There seems to be a rather large double standard there, unless this has changed around the country recently. Mandatory seat belts "save lives", but screw the children?
 
2012-05-10 12:48:48 AM

Deftoons: Mandatory seat belts "save lives", but screw the children?


LOL how long did it take you to bring up the school bus non-comparison?
 
2012-05-10 12:56:18 AM
Yeah. Those dang seat belt laws are why cars don't have airbags, don't accordian crumple to absorb impact, have anti-lock breaks or windshields made of safety glass that doesn't cut flesh.

Oh wait. They do have those things. And car makers tout the safety features of cars.

I used to be lackadaisical about wearing my seat belt. Then I spent an evening with a group of head-injury patients (helping out my roommate who worked at the rehab facility). Most of them had been injured in car accidents and were not wearing seat belts. One was paralyzed because she was thrown from the car. I saw the reality of what can happen in an accident and it's farking terrifying.

Now I don't drive around the corner without my seat belt.

A few years ago there was an accident near my apartment. Two minivans collided, each going about 35 mph, both of them had 5 or 6 passengers. The people in one minivan walked away, the worst injury was a broken arm. The people in the other minivan were all either dead or in comas. Guess what the difference was.
 
2012-05-10 12:57:32 AM
1) Fine by me. You don't want to wear a seatbelt, go for it. That's a self-correcting thing.
2) This is what you're frothing at the mouth over today? Really? This?
 
2012-05-10 01:02:42 AM

Phins: Guess what the difference was.


I'm still pretty sure people aren't going to wear them unless compelled by law. I know that makes a lot of folks mad here.
 
2012-05-10 01:02:42 AM

Phins: Guess what the difference was.


I'm still pretty sure people aren't going to wear seat belts unless compelled by law. I know that makes a lot of folks mad here.

I mean, maybe some disgruntled seat belt wearer will come up with the technology for vehicle inertial dampeners, who know?
 
2012-05-10 01:02:42 AM

Phins: Guess what the difference was.


I'm still pretty sure people aren't going to wear seat belts unless compelled by law. I know that makes a lot of folks mad here.

But hey, maybe some disgruntled seat belt wearer will come up with the technology for vehicle inertial dampeners, who knows?
 
2012-05-10 01:07:17 AM
Whoa double post freakout. With edits.
 
2012-05-10 01:07:58 AM
*backs away slowly*
 
2012-05-10 01:44:49 AM

Dadoo: Wait - seatbelt laws are oppressive, but anti-gay marriage laws are not? How does that work, exactly?


Because Jesus.

/NGTRTFA
 
2012-05-10 01:45:08 AM

I_Am_Weasel: 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.


They can repair decapitations now?
 
2012-05-10 01:55:14 AM
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.

Really, even Nascar retards that are the republican base know what 6 point harnesses are. You know why they aren't in every car, because companies aren't forced to put them in.
 
2012-05-10 02:18:44 AM
At risk of sounding sympathetic to a WorldNutDaily article, I agree that seat belt laws should be abolished. Helmet laws too.

I think it is stupid to not wear these things, and will continue to do them myself no matter the law. But I think it comes down to the proper role of government. Government should -
1. Protect me from the harmful actions of other people.
2. Protect other people from MY harmful actions.

It should NOT protect me from my own choices. Government has many important and useful functions. Being a nanny is not one of them. I am an ADULT and I can make my own damn choices(for better or worse), thank you very much.

Someone who does not understand that, simply does not understand the base concept of freedom.
 
2012-05-10 02:21:15 AM
Seatbelt law threads really bring out the nutters.

Some people are just really stubborn assholes.
 
2012-05-10 02:26:07 AM

bk3k: the proper role of government. Government should


Says who?
 
2012-05-10 02:38:19 AM

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?


The reason we have seat belts is because people demanded that cars be made safe. The power of the people is expressed via state laws.

Car makers were originally AGAINST seat belts because they cost more. Sure, now car makers realize safety can increase the bottom line, but before that it took the PEOPLE demanding safety.

I'm pretty sure it is why Ralph Nader is Ralph Nader.
 
2012-05-10 03:33:21 AM
Michigan pays for all medical bills after the first $250k caused by an traffic accident. For life. If they want to stop wearing their seatbelt and waive their catastrophic injury insurance payouts when they get into an accident and get hurt, be my guest. I just don't want to hear about their financial and health problems after their decision cost them their livelihoods, insurability, and a forced them to bankruptcy.
 
2012-05-10 05:41:03 AM
I'm sick of government oppression regarding drunk driving. I drive better after a few drinks. And don't get me started on speed limits in school zones. America is a lie. We are never truly free.
 
2012-05-10 05:45:06 AM

Rapmaster2000: It sells though. Pandering works.


Other examples of government failures:
earthobservatory.nasa.gov
Space program
www.history.navy.mil
US Military
img3.imageshack.us
Highway System

www.healthsentinel.com


Disease control

Hey Stossel:
www.tabloidprodigy.com
 
2012-05-10 06:14:08 AM
I will never understand why wearing a seatbelt or using a more efficient light bulb is tyranical government oppresion yet legislating who people can marry or use a person's tax dollars to support a religious institution they are not part of is freedom to some people. It makes no sense.
 
2012-05-10 06:17:32 AM

that bosnian sniper: You know I just noticed this, but is there a male writer for WND who doesn't have a gay porn 'stache?


I'm thinking it might be one of the only two prerequisites for a job there.

First, be an batshiat insane, pants-on-head rtard.

Second, have an excellent porn 'stache.

I see he's plugging his new book "Government never does anything good, so vote Republican".

That's nice.

Why the fark would anyone ever vote for a party who thinks government is always a problem and never a solution?

Bit of a death wish mentality if you ask me.
 
2012-05-10 07:13:26 AM

Heraclitus: "Seatbelts save 15,000 lives a year. So Screw em!


To be fair, some of those are libs that probably deserve to die.
 
2012-05-10 07:26:37 AM

quatchi: that bosnian sniper: You know I just noticed this, but is there a male writer for WND who doesn't have a gay porn 'stache?

I'm thinking it might be one of the only two prerequisites for a job there.

First, be an batshiat insane, pants-on-head rtard.

Second, have an excellent porn 'stache.

I see he's plugging his new book "Government never does anything good, so vote Republican".

That's nice.

Why the fark would anyone ever vote for a party who thinks government is always a problem and never a solution?

Bit of a death wish mentality if you ask me.


I agree. Why put in power to fix the problems of our nation those who feel that the government is incapable of fixing those problems?
 
2012-05-10 07:31:40 AM
FINE

Let all the "rightists" who want to not wear their seatbelt pay extra on their insurance and let them fall where they may in an accident.
 
2012-05-10 07:33:38 AM

Bill_Wick's_Friend: I wonder if these WND jack holes think the "best before" date on their milk is government trying to force oppressive regulation.

I suspect a lot of them choke down chunky spoiled milk on their cereal in the spirit of "freeeedom!".


Hey - I get their point - and as soon as the righties stop trying to make laws that restrict access to abortion and birth control, I'll be willing to discuss the "intrusive" and "oppressive" nature of seat belt laws.
Until then, STFU and GBTW.
 
2012-05-10 07:35:09 AM

Crunch61: Heraclitus: "Seatbelts save 15,000 lives a year. So Screw em!

To be fair, some of those are libs that probably deserve to die.


Well, everybody "deserves" to die, when you think about it.
 
2012-05-10 07:40:02 AM
Although libertarianism is quite idealistic and unrealistic, and humans are doubtlessly far too emotional, unintelligent and un-evolved NOT to be HIGHLY regulated by the government, he did make one good point about the absurdity with government enforcement of drug laws. Incarcerating recreational drug users is insane, and frightening doctors for prescribing drugs and trying to relieve patients' pain is villainous.
 
2012-05-10 07:58:08 AM
was in a major accident. am in severe permanent disabling pain. use a wheelchair or mobility scooter.
but thanks to a seatbelt, i am alive to read my beloved snarky fark.

but hey, just make sure you libertarian anti government free the people from the terrible regime of seat belt types remember to have your organ donor card signed up, ok? should reduce the waiting lists in NOOOOO time:)
 
2012-05-10 07:58:45 AM

heavymetal: quatchi: that bosnian sniper: You know I just noticed this, but is there a male writer for WND who doesn't have a gay porn 'stache?

I'm thinking it might be one of the only two prerequisites for a job there.

First, be an batshiat insane, pants-on-head rtard.

Second, have an excellent porn 'stache.

I see he's plugging his new book "Government never does anything good, so vote Republican".

That's nice.

Why the fark would anyone ever vote for a party who thinks government is always a problem and never a solution?

Bit of a death wish mentality if you ask me.


I agree. Why put in power to fix the problems of our nation those who feel that the government is incapable of fixing those problems?


Yup. Seems a bit counter-intuitive, doesn't it?

I kinda expect my government to do their jobs and to achieve desirable (or at least defensible) outcomes.

I sorta get pissed at them when they don't.

The GOP have lowered expectations for government to a ridiculous degree IMHO.
 
2012-05-10 08:47:41 AM

Foxxinnia: What is going on? What is with people? Seatbelts saves people's farking lives. People are saved by them all the damn time. This isn't an opinion. Why don't people wear them? I don't know. They're stupid? That's the only rational reason I can come up with. So we have a lot of idiots endangering themselves therefore we need laws to force them to use them. Then they say shiat like, "Oh it's okay if I'm a danger to myself. It's like I'm going to hurt anybody. If I die because I'm not wearing a seatbelt then the only person I'm harming is myself." Yo dog, we're living in a farking society here. What one person does has impacts beyond the physical. There are both psychological and economic damages being rendered when someone dies in a car accident as opposed to simply being injured or emerging unharmed thanks to wearing a seatbelt. And yeah, the police fine you money for it. Stop crying about it. That's how you encourage people to stop being farking morons because evidently being safe isn't a good enough incentive.


Next up, Government madated Condom Laws!
 
2012-05-10 09:50:07 AM
My brother got t-boned several years ago by a drunk driver in a Suburban, hit him on the drivers' side door doing an estimated 60. The seatbelt saved his life, though it was a contributing factor to him having a flailed chest (to me, it was a worthy tradeoff, broke 11 ribs and his center chest bone instead of being killed instantly).

I also wear a seatbelt without a second thought.

The only problem I have is the revenue thing. Maybe revenues collected should go directly to the state instead of the municipality writing the fines, so it mostly takes the monetary incentive away from these "safety checks" in neighborhoods, etc.

Here in TX, they passed a law several years back that only a small (~30% iirc) percentage of a towns' budget could come from traffic fines. A number of smaller towns (Patton Village, Premont, Kendleton, Manvel) had to disincorporate as a result. The LOL thing about it was that one of these speed traps had caught a state senator and this was why the law got introduced.

No one can tell me that there is a motivation to write tickets for revenue, if you think differently, you are deluding yourself.

In my own town where I live, they recently fired the police chief because he accidentialy let their ticket quote become a documented fact.

/also wears full gear when I ride the motorcycle, because I like my skin on my body instead of on IH-45
 
2012-05-10 10:20:21 AM
There is no Federal law requiring you to wear a seat belt (only requiring that all cars have then and regulating their design). Laws requiring set belt usage are left to the states.

The only state that does not currently mandate seat belt use is New Hampshire (surprise, surprise). Do the math (carry the one...) and that means all those Southern Red States have laws on the books requiring seat belt use.

So why don't you idiots start close to home? With all the derp in Republican-controlled legislatures these days, I'm sure you could get MS and GA, at least, to ban the use of seat belts.
 
2012-05-10 11:15:44 AM
seatbelts!?
 
2012-05-10 12:36:03 PM

whidbey: Deftoons: Mandatory seat belts "save lives", but screw the children?

LOL how long did it take you to bring up the school bus non-comparison?


It's a non-comparison? Yeah, would love to hear you explain that one.
 
2012-05-10 02:09:06 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

Unavailable for comment.

Link
 
2012-05-10 04:52:09 PM

whidbey: In other words you prefer the honor system no matter how many people get killed in accidents. Darwin awards, right? Who cares about 'em?


Pretty much. It's not the government's job to protect people from themselves.

In other words, if I don't want to wear a seatbelt, fark you, I paid for everything involved, I'm not gonna wear the damn seatbelt.
 
2012-05-10 05:45:58 PM
Hey, let's do away with OSHA while we're at it.
 
2012-05-10 06:06:32 PM

ultraholland: Hey, let's do away with OSHA while we're at it.


Because requiring employers to provide a safe work environment for people they employ is exactly the same farking thing as something which affects me and only me. Yup. Completely identical.
 
2012-05-10 07:14:19 PM

TsukasaK: ultraholland: Hey, let's do away with OSHA while we're at it.

Because requiring employers to provide a safe work environment for people they employ is exactly the same farking thing as something which affects me and only me. Yup. Completely identical.


Okay, fine, if you're ever in an accident and you're thrown from your car, just promise that you'll land safely somewhere on the side of the road, because if you land on the road, and there's oncoming traffic, your blood-streaked corpse might cause another accident. But hey, as long as you're absolutely sure it won't affect anyone else, it's all good.

/The EMTs could use some extra practice when they try to rescucitate you; that kinda thing keeps them sharp, so they can help other people with a higher chance of surviving, so in way, you're doing society a favor.

//And yeah, the OSHA comparison is a touch over-the-top.
 
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 »





Report