You can start the car. You can run the car, but you will not be able to shift into drive or reverse(whether from neutral or park) without the seat belt engaged.
-- sin, Mar 19 2003

(?) Safety interlocks in cars http://www.safetyforum.com/interlock/
Quoting: "Brakes are automatically applied if the driver’s seat is not occupied by an adult or if its seat belt is not fastened; or, the clutch is automatically disengaged and the power train shifted into neutral when the starter is activated. (A seat-activated system invented in the 1920s is used in forklifts and some other special-use vehicles.)" [krelnik, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]

And if you pull out the seat belt afterwards? (So as to be able to look behind when you're reversing, for example.)
-- DrCurry, Mar 19 2003


Easy to defeat by always leaving the seat belt engaged & sitting on it while driving.
-- snarfyguy, Mar 19 2003


Exceptionally baked, dating back as early as the 1920's for certain types of vehicles. See link.
-- krelnik, Mar 19 2003


snarfy: or snipping the seat belt, and plugging in the loose end.
-- DrCurry, Mar 19 2003


Fishbone, for the somewhat irritating assumption that I'm going to drive an automatic.
-- yamahito, Mar 19 2003


krel, the way I read that, the seat occupational technology was baked way back then but the belt interlock didn't come around for quite some time.
-- RayfordSteele, Mar 19 2003


The "Safety Interlocks in Cars" article cited says little about seatbelts (though such systems have been used for a long time) but instead discusses interlocks to avoid having the transmission lever shift from park into reverse. Frankly, I don't know why the brake/shift interlock isn't standard in all automatic transmission vehicles; since the idea was first used a long time ago, I'd think any patent on the basic concept should have long since lapsed.
-- supercat, Mar 19 2003


Baked. Me. If someone's not belted up, I don't move the car. <Sits back, arms folded, waiting to see if waugs takes exception to draconically patriarchal attitude>
-- egbert, Mar 19 2003


I like the Volvo approach of having a truly annoying noise when the engine is running but the seatbelt not on for the occupied front seats.
-- oneoffdave, Mar 20 2003


//I like the Volvo approach of having a truly annoying noise when the engine is running but the seatbelt not on for the occupied front seats.//

When the seat switch breaks it's hell.

It so annoyed my uncle that he cut seat belt fastener-shaped tabs out of formica samples.
-- FloridaManatee, Mar 20 2003


//When the seat switch breaks it's hell.//
Which is precisely why the American car manufacturers who did have this feature for a while dropped it quickly in favor of a dashboard light and/or buzzer.
-- krelnik, Mar 20 2003


I’m always in favor of big brother. Perhaps we could arrange for the seat belt to be an integral part of the controls. To shift into reverse, you’d have to unbuckle the belt (ostensibly so that you can easily make a full 180, not trusting the rearview), and then click it home twice. To go forward, you have to buckle up, then stretch forward, that’s it, a little more, actuating a tension transducer, which prevents cheating…(you see, we know you’ve been sitting on it)…
-- pluterday, Mar 20 2003


dude no! no! no! no! NO! they alredy have them !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-- lumpysausage007, Jan 06 2005



random, halfbakery