Hey. I wanna drive in my new fancy look at my dumb ass car without a seat belt on and WITHOUT hearing the ding ding ding of the seat belt reminder man inside the dashboard.
Insert the FSBClips and your troubles are through. You simply order the clip for your model of car, and we send you the necessary extra clips that you use to ward off the robotic car signaling weirdness.
No strings attached.-- daseva, Feb 14 2010 I'm in favor... http://www.queenofw...net/d/20031208.html [MechE, Feb 15 2010] Okay, but can't you just set the seatbelt, then sit on it?-- phoenix, Feb 14 2010 Anyone here remember the faux seatbelt idea?-- MikeD, Feb 14 2010 Darwin, please save us.-- WcW, Feb 14 2010 I've gota say, there have been so many seatbelt-caused fatalities, three that I know of personally, that make me wonder, should an adult not be able to make up their own minds about whether to wear them or not?The choice could always factor into insurance claims if it came to that, but I still think it should be a choice, once you are old enough to make it for yourself.
Go Darwin!-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Feb 14 2010 Just one example: My wife's brother was killed at eighteen because he was the only one in the vehicle wearing a seatbelt. He was asleep at the time and snapped his neck because he was belted. There are numerous other examples, and although I know that seatbelts save more lives than they take, the burgeoning nanny state picks my ass.If you've made it to adulthood without being a Darwin award candidate you deserve the choice to opt in... or out.
Just my opinion.-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Feb 14 2010 I think the notion that stupidity leads to death is somewhat incomplete. Sure, if you can't see up from down then you're fucked, but a little risk taking goes a long way in this life. That is, I think I disagree (with the darwin awardists).
Also, [21], regarding the soloist driver: they can still fly out of the window and hit other people, so the middle ground you make there may still be unstable. hm?-- daseva, Feb 14 2010 Hmm. I am strongly in favour of seatbelts, and (thinking about it) strongly opposed to legislation that enforces their wearing. The world is too full of "you can't do this because it poses a marginal risk to others and because the consequences of it are expensive to society" ers.
Daseva, you have my permission to be stupid. [+]-- MaxwellBuchanan, Feb 14 2010 what [MB] said.-- MikeD, Feb 15 2010 People might drive more safely without them (the steering wheel spike theory), however, someone else's error might result in another's death.-- rcarty, Feb 15 2010 "you can't do this because it poses a marginal risk to others and because the consequences of it are expensive to society" ers. Really? So you don't mind my standing in front of your house, blindfolded, whirling around and shooting a pistol randomly then?-- phoenix, Feb 15 2010 Double plus good for the above ano ;-)-- normzone, Feb 15 2010 "Your right to [[stand] in front of [a] house, blindfolded, whirling around and shooting a pistol randomly] ends where your neighbours nose begins".
Or, at least, where it began.-- rcarty, Feb 15 2010 //standing in front of your house, blindfolded, whirling around and shooting a pistol randomly then?//
The chances of you hitting anyone would, as a guesstimate, be in the 1 in 1,000 order of magnitude. (assuming you're not standing in the middle of a crowd.)
The chances of an unrestrained body clearing the dash, penetrating a windshield, then penetrating another windshield with enough KE left over to impart injury is next to nothing. When exactly was the last time you've heard of a documented case of this happening?
If you really see this as a legislation-worthy risk, then x-rays and fast-food will be illegal long before seatbelt use for single occupants.-- MikeD, Feb 15 2010 No no no, we already covered the legislation for prohibiting use of this device with passengers. If what was said a few back annos is true then I feel a real go can be had with this (provided the device can disengage with weight distributions from passengers).-- daseva, Feb 15 2010 What [Daseva] said, [21Quest].
<pokes [21Quest] with [21Quest] poking stick>-- MikeD, Feb 15 2010 //Really? So you don't mind my standing in front of your house, blindfolded, whirling around and shooting a pistol randomly then?//
Well, what you're doing there is really rather silly, isn't it? (I mean, posing the question, not the gun-shooting business.)
I am happy for you to do as you please, as long as the risk and cost to me are both extremely small. I'm happy to let you drive a car (which, statistically, has a small chance of killing me). I'm even happier to let you not wear a seatbelt in your car (which has an infinitesimally small chance of killing me). I'm also happy for you to skydive, go microlighting, climb mountains and smoke in any combination you wish - even though all of these activities stand quite a good chance of costing me (as a taxpayer) money.
What annoys me is when people say "there is a one in [insert very large number] chance that this person's fun will cost me some money or injure or kill me. Therefore, regardless of how large the number is, I don't think they should be allowed to do it."-- MaxwellBuchanan, Feb 15 2010 Now you know better than that - it isn't that the odds are small I'll hit you, it's that the odds are good I'll hit *somebody*. Eventually.
Improving the odds I survive reduces the overall burden on society (I don't have to cover the driver's medical costs, take care of the family the driver left behind, etc). The cost of airbags and seatbelts are already rolled up into the cost of the vehicle. Using them is free so the burden on the driver is nominal and not, in my opinion, intrusive.
Now if you want to propose "unbelted driver insurance" to cover this driver's demise, I'm good with that (but it's really just another seat belt in disguise).-- phoenix, Feb 16 2010 [Pheonix], What you are reffering to is called liability insurance. It is the least amount of coverage you can get and still legally drive. You don't have to survive, for me to take out a claim against your insurance.-- MikeD, Feb 16 2010 Yes, but by the same reasoning, you should pay extra taxes if you do anything which poses any risk to others or to yourself. How about a burger tax, a skiing tax, a mountaineering tax, a salt-tax, a living-in-a -dangerous-part-of-town tax, a not- going-for-regular-checkups tax......the list is endless and the costs are real.
Live and let live a bit is all I'm saying, n'k?-- MaxwellBuchanan, Feb 16 2010 "burger tax, a skiing tax, a mountaineering tax, a salt-tax, a living-in-a -dangerous-part-of-town tax, a not- going-for-regular-checkups tax" Those things all exist, m'kay? Sometimes literally - my city has a fast food tax - and sometimes vicariously - one pays higher insurance rates for living in the dangerous part of town. My point is these things are a reality of life and, while we can't eliminate risk we can reduce it. Making people get drivers licenses doesn't eliminate accidents, but it makes sure people know what they're getting in to. Don't wear a seatbelt if you don't want, but don't pass the costs on to me. M'kay?-- phoenix, Feb 16 2010 //don't pass the costs on to me//
[Pheonix], I hope you do not indulge in fattening foods, pre-marital sex, changing radio stations while driving, listening to the radio at all while driving, driving while sleepy, working while sleepy, staying up too late and being sleepy the next day, watching t.v., wasting food, using disposable packaging, using air conditioning, doing anything that emits carbon monoxide or other poisonous/green house gasses, swimming without a life vest, coughing around others while sick, being around others while sick, anything short of completely quarantining yourself while sick, not getting enough fiber, not eating enough vegetables, eating more than you need to ... etc, etc, ad nauseum.
Else you would be a HUGE hypocrite.-- MikeD, Feb 16 2010 This thread is decidedly bringing out my cold blooded side, but as far as insurance costs, isn't there some evidence that its cheaper for the insurance company to pay out a death benefit (for the non-belted individual), then to pay out persistent injury claims (whiplash, etc for the belted individual).-- MechE, Feb 16 2010 I dunno. I figure either way if Daseva is happier driving without a seatbelt now and again, I won't begrudge the 0.05p or whatever it is that it might cost me. Of course, if I were a miserly killjoy, I might.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Feb 16 2010 This seems like a small point after all the above, but, the idea is baked, in Spain at least, for taxi drivers, who are not obliged to where seatbelts in urban areas. So, the don't. The simple solution is to use an empty clip, to stop the pinging.
The argument goes that they need to get in and out of the car often, I've been told. They do have to put their belt on outside town.-- VaquitaTim, Feb 16 2010 //Max, aren't you from a country with a television tax? //
I am (actually it's a charge levied for TV viewing to support, allegedly, non-commercial broadcasting). Your point being?-- MaxwellBuchanan, Feb 16 2010 [MikeD] - I enjoy many of those things, and I pay for them all in one way or another. (I'm also a hypocrite and I pay for that, too.)
To be clear, I'm all for letting this hypothetical person drive without a seatbelt - he or she just might need to pay a slightly higher insurance premium. Or not, if the insurance companies decide he's saving them money.-- phoenix, Feb 16 2010 way back when metal dinosaurs roamed the Earth, seatbelt laws had to overcome cultural inertia; today there's really no excuse.
(does anybody have a link to an old PS or PM article which featured the conception of a highway-car that had an open-air patio at the back ?)-- FlyingToaster, Feb 17 2010 You can come to drive in New Hampshire! They mean it when they say "Live Free or Die". (seat belt law currently only applies to children under 12) There are always 2 sides to this. Whilst I love driving without a seat belt, I've worn one ever since I was in a car accident in 2000. On the other hand, my son-in-law would have been decapitated if he was wearing one in his car accident, as he was thrown from the car and then the roof caved it...-- xandram, Feb 17 2010 //To be clear, I'm all for letting this hypothetical person drive without a seatbelt //
Ah. I see.
<sounds trumpets to cancel the call to arms>
Apologies. I get worked up about percieved infringments upon rights.-- MikeD, Feb 17 2010 hey, back when we were kids, we road on the open tailgate of my Dad's station wagon!! and then there is the pick up truck bed, and oh in Mexico I saw a huge flat bed truck that picked up people that just stood up for the whole ride.-- xandram, Feb 17 2010 Two words: "Darwin Award".-- 8th of 7, Feb 17 2010 I would use this in circumstances where I don't necessarily need a seat belt. Like when I am re-arranging cars in the driveway or I am doing some sort of repair or other procedure on my car that requires the engine to be running with the door open. I use my seat belt, however, it gets to be very annoying when I am I just moving the car to the other end of the lot or tuning up the engine.-- Jscotty, Feb 18 2010 I think I read that the Russians routinely cut the seat belt and then clip the amputated end into the helder to keep the alarms quiet. This works if you do not ever intend to use the belt. Alternatively one could harvest belt clips from junked cars and use them, keeping your own belt intact should you wish to use it.-- bungston, Feb 18 2010 I will allow you to not wear a seatbelt just as soon as your family promises not to sue me for wrongful death when you die after I have a minor accident with you.
Yeah, living in a litigation state sucks just like living in a nanny state sucks, but the truth is, in a we live in a state of both.
People are unwilling to accept the consequences of doing stupid things, and therefore they can't be allowed to do stupid things. I want YOU to wear a seatbelt for MY safety.-- 5th Earth, Feb 20 2010 Many people are killed by idiots who don't wear seat belts. This is because they become fast moving projectiles during a high-speed impact. Back seat passengers often kill those sitting in the front. This is NOT a matter of choice, any more than it is in a plane. Not wearing a belt is selfish, stupid, irresponsible and dangerous.-- xenzag, Feb 20 2010 [xenzag] - we did that argument about two screenfulls ago.
Here's to selfishness, stupidity, irresponsibility and dangerousness.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Feb 20 2010 random, halfbakery