- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: seat belts - should this be considered a person's choice to wear one or not?
Posted on 11/14/14 at 4:36 pm to Artie Rome
Posted on 11/14/14 at 4:36 pm to Artie Rome
quote:
That is like saying we should not enforce any laws until there are no murders.
This makes absolutely no sense in the context of what I said.
quote:
What do you think is a quicker and easier fix...ticketing people for something as simple and noticeable as wearing a seat belt...or making sure people aren't eating ice cream at night before bed?
Obviously the seat belt is easier to monitor. So ease of enforcement is your sticking point? It sounds like if monitoring everyone's eating habits was easy then you'd be in favor of regulating them.
0
Posted on 11/14/14 at 4:38 pm to TulaneUVA
You don't have to wear it, just don't have the cops arrest me for "failure to render aid" when your arse flies out the windshield and I keep driving...
Posted on 11/14/14 at 4:39 pm to LSUvegasbombed
You are right it should not be required...I'd rather not interfere with natural selection...could definitely clean up the gene pool
Posted on 11/14/14 at 4:43 pm to LSUvegasbombed
The only thing I can think of is body's ejected from a crashing vehicle could be a hazard to others as well. Also, if your car starts spinning out/losing control, it's harder to maintain control of that vehicle if you're bouncing around in the cabin instead of firmly strapped in your seat to regain control.
Posted on 11/14/14 at 5:41 pm to LSUvegasbombed
And that's somehow better than having a vehicle rolling with no control?
Posted on 11/14/14 at 6:03 pm to LSUvegasbombed
Was much worse back in the Foster era when a person riding a motorcycle did not have to wear a helmet. 
Posted on 11/14/14 at 6:44 pm to LSUvegasbombed
About 50,000 people die each year in the US from car crashes. It is the leading cause of death for people under 35 years old. About 40% of the fatalities are unrestrained drivers.
Posted on 11/14/14 at 6:55 pm to LSUvegasbombed
Personally I'm against laws that prevent the culling of the herd. If idiots want to weed themselves out, I'm all for their freedom to do so.
Posted on 11/14/14 at 11:21 pm to TigerStripes06
It gives the haters a reason to pull you over and invade your privacy. Of course you should wear one. I think it's total bs and America is a communist country where the government continues to pass laws that invade our privacy, take our $, and our freedom. The rules and regulations that are being pushed down our throats by our "elected" officials is not why this country was founded, its total bs and I'm ashamed to live in this "politically" correct country and era.
Posted on 11/15/14 at 4:39 am to blue_morrison
quote:
Let's say you flip your car and your window is down. Sure, you should be able to have that choice to off yourself if you want, but you getting flung from your car in a wreck puts other drivers in danger of crashing themselves due to circumstances out of their control.
Plus you have a better chance of keeping control of your vehicle if you're still...you know, actually sitting in the seat.
so then lets ban motorcycles , no way to control yourself or the bike in an accident ......
I just started wearing my seatbelt in the past few years , but I believe , except children it should be your personal choice ....
Posted on 11/15/14 at 5:02 am to LSUvegasbombed
I wear my seatbelt 100% and require it of anybody in my car with me.
I think you shouldn't have to, though... but if you are involved in an accident where you are injured - Insurance should not have to cover as much of your medical if you weren't wearing one.
I think you shouldn't have to, though... but if you are involved in an accident where you are injured - Insurance should not have to cover as much of your medical if you weren't wearing one.
Posted on 11/15/14 at 7:10 am to LSUvegasbombed
One of the dumber conversations ever started on the internet.
Posted on 11/15/14 at 7:42 am to LSUvegasbombed
quote:
The most pressing issue: if you get in to an accident and aren't properly restrained, the chances of you being able to control your vehicle afterwards are close to zero, which could easily lead to you causing more damage.
Agreed. You being all "Billy Badass" with your choices could get me hurt or worse - culled from the herd.
Posted on 11/15/14 at 8:12 am to VermilionTiger
quote:
It shouldn't be required, and this is coming from someone who wears a seat belt 100% of the time.
I was in a bad wreck in 1998, but had no injuries. After that I always buckled up.
Posted on 11/15/14 at 8:46 am to Napoleon
Same here. Flipped a Ford Bronco II and thought I was a goner while being thrown all around.
Have always worn a seatbelt since then.
Have always worn a seatbelt since then.
Posted on 11/15/14 at 9:42 am to RealityTiger
No seatbelt laws would lead to a higher percentage of accident victims being permanently disabled which would lead to more people on SSI for the rest of their lives.
Posted on 11/15/14 at 9:47 am to LSUvegasbombed
Sure, if hospitals don't have to treat you unbelted idiots.
Same for motorcycle helmets. If the public is not forced to bear the costs of your bad choices, do what you want.
Same for motorcycle helmets. If the public is not forced to bear the costs of your bad choices, do what you want.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News