These two sentences are unrelated. If someone died while operating a vehicle it doesn’t prove or disprove their argument that laws regarding how you operate your property erode civil liberties.
Agree. Completely unrelated. If you want to be safe and maximize your chances of survival, wear a seatbelt. Don't smoke (anything), drink, take drugs, travel unless necessary. Eat only healthy food and exercise regularly. Blah blah. Not everyone does everything they should to ensure their safety and prosperity, simply because for whatever reason they don't want to. That's life. If you understand the decision you're making and the risks, that's your business. I recommend wearing seat belts though.
The driver can be held responsible if someone in their passenger seat refuses to wear a seatbelt and dies in a wreck though. Also, say you're driving and have a head on collision with someone at 70 mph... you're going through your windshield and possibly theirs, potentially killing them as well. Or say you are t-boned and you aren't wearing a seatbelt and you crush whoever is in the passenger seat...
Seatbelts are about more than just your life.
Fact and fiction combine here. In some jurisdictions a driver is responsible, and in California the driver can get a ticket just for a passenger not wearing a belt. As for flying through the windshield it is possible, but unlikely. Most cars on the road have airbags, and the newer the car the less likely this is due to safety improvements to the cockpit design. Smashing into a passenger is a wash. In a side impact the inertial tensioners in most cars won't help. My good friend has a titanium face from where the head of another passenger (both with belts) hit him. These are all fringe cases, like people who get in bad wrecks and live because they weren't wearing a seatbelt, it's possible but statistically unlikely. There are exceptional situations, but generally, eliminating very specific and unlikely cases- you are safer wearing a seatbelt and everyone else is just as safe if you don't.
Want to go to a train since you believe the bus won? they didn't feel any "Impact"
deleted
· 7 years ago
A. That's a rare type of crash might as well say someone launched a rocket at them. B. Unless the driver is the dumbest bus driver to ever walk the face of the planet they're not going to drive their bus on the train tracks when a train is coming. It is an outlier that's not to be considered because it just doesn't happen
Ok- so busses are basically the safest way to travel. Especially school busses. In BILLIONS of miles traveled each year in the US alone an average of 8 deaths occur from crash related causes, way lower than kids killed while walking. A bus is about 40x less likely to get in an accident than a car to begin with. They are designed to protect occupants without seat belts in a crash. Their high mass and COG is a factor. Also- cost. Retrofitting busses would be very expensive. It would reduce the number of people able to fit, and standing on busses would still be the same unless it was banned. So looking at the costs and benefits it's usually deemed not required.
As to the other arguments over train vs bus etc: why do planes have seat belts, but not most large boats? Why do Semi tractors have seat belts, but not busses? It comes down to the specifics of a vehicles velocity, the terrain it travels on, its mass, layout of design, likely accidents and outcomes, real world crash data on injuries and fatalities, and political, economic, and practical concerns. Mass is a factor in crash safety but not the only factor. Forces acting on an object increase at squares to things like speed and mass, then direction and physical characteristics of layout and structure factor in too. It's overly simplistic to look at only the mass of an object on a crash. Body builders and the obese may both weigh 250lbs, but they will perform differently, and 250lbs is somewhat meaningless without at least a height for context.
I was once in a head-on collision at highway speed without a seatbelt or airbags. Not only did I live through it, I suffered not a single broken bone, only a mild concussion, and a total of 8 stitches. I still do not wear a seatbelt. My body my choice. (If it works for the abortion argument it damn well works here)
The use of a seatbelt is not only to protect you in the case of a crash, but to protect others in the event of a crash, the incident of being thrown into the others vehicle is unlikely but, if you are driving with passengers you do have the possibility to be thrown around in your car killing them, and if you survive the crash you are done with endangerment of life causing death. which not only comes with a hefty prison sentence, but also the guilt of killing those in your vehicle due to your "choice"
Everyone here saying they refuse to wear a seatbelt, listen to this. My father was called out to a slow speed collision at a residential area while he was in the police. One vehicle had no survivors, due to the rear passenger not wearing a seatbelt and killing the others. Wearing a seatbelt is not a choice you get to make, by not wearing one you are generally committing a crime or felony (depends on place)
To leave, here's a link: https://youtu.be/NxH8GtSF7-A
Seatbelts are about more than just your life.
Everyone here saying they refuse to wear a seatbelt, listen to this. My father was called out to a slow speed collision at a residential area while he was in the police. One vehicle had no survivors, due to the rear passenger not wearing a seatbelt and killing the others. Wearing a seatbelt is not a choice you get to make, by not wearing one you are generally committing a crime or felony (depends on place)
To leave, here's a link: https://youtu.be/NxH8GtSF7-A