More Gubberment Interference....
#81
01-19-2011 | 03:55 PM
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,373
Likes: 5
From: Central Texas
The driver must wear one.
Seat belt laws are not to protect YOU, they are to protect the rest of the people on the road. So when you have to swerve to avoid something, you stay in your seat and maintain controll of the vehicle. Or when you are in a minor acccident but still moving, you stay in the seat and don't go sliding into the passenger side while your car crosses the double yellow and kills someone.
Seat belt laws are not to protect YOU, they are to protect the rest of the people on the road. So when you have to swerve to avoid something, you stay in your seat and maintain controll of the vehicle. Or when you are in a minor acccident but still moving, you stay in the seat and don't go sliding into the passenger side while your car crosses the double yellow and kills someone.
#82
01-19-2011 | 03:58 PM
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,807
Likes: 2
If the seatbelt laws were to protect YOU, and not to make sure you can maintain control of your vehicle, then the law would also extent to people in the back seat. Which in NY it does not.
Go out on the highway after you are done with work, get the car up to 60, and when you are going under a bridge, take your seatbelt off, and go ahead and jerk the wheel hard to the left. as if you were avoiding an object or a person in the road. They go ahead and recover before you hit the bridge abuttment.
Good luck doing that from the passenger seat.
Go out on the highway after you are done with work, get the car up to 60, and when you are going under a bridge, take your seatbelt off, and go ahead and jerk the wheel hard to the left. as if you were avoiding an object or a person in the road. They go ahead and recover before you hit the bridge abuttment.
Good luck doing that from the passenger seat.
#83
01-19-2011 | 04:02 PM
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,373
Likes: 5
From: Central Texas
Which in Texas it does.
#84
01-19-2011 | 04:02 PM
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,608
Likes: 2
From: Bedford Co. Pa .
The driver must wear one.
Seat belt laws are not to protect YOU, they are to protect the rest of the people on the road. So when you have to swerve to avoid something, you stay in your seat and maintain controll of the vehicle. Or when you are in a minor acccident but still moving, you stay in the seat and don't go sliding into the passenger side while your car crosses the double yellow and kills someone.
In NY, busses under a certain size DO have seatbelts, btw. Don't knwo if that's the same everywhere though.
Seat belt laws are not to protect YOU, they are to protect the rest of the people on the road. So when you have to swerve to avoid something, you stay in your seat and maintain controll of the vehicle. Or when you are in a minor acccident but still moving, you stay in the seat and don't go sliding into the passenger side while your car crosses the double yellow and kills someone.
In NY, busses under a certain size DO have seatbelts, btw. Don't knwo if that's the same everywhere though.
#85
01-19-2011 | 04:02 PM
Banned
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,500
Likes: 1
if the seatbelt laws were to protect you, and not to make sure you can maintain control of your vehicle, then the law would also extent to people in the back seat. Which in ny it does not.
Go out on the highway after you are done with work, get the car up to 60, and when you are going under a bridge, take your seatbelt off, and go ahead and jerk the wheel hard to the left. As if you were avoiding an object or a person in the road. They go ahead and recover before you hit the bridge abuttment.
Good luck doing that from the passenger seat.
Go out on the highway after you are done with work, get the car up to 60, and when you are going under a bridge, take your seatbelt off, and go ahead and jerk the wheel hard to the left. As if you were avoiding an object or a person in the road. They go ahead and recover before you hit the bridge abuttment.
Good luck doing that from the passenger seat.
#88
01-19-2011 | 04:06 PM
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,807
Likes: 2
I'm talking about the children that are on the buses !!!!!!!
Don't you think that if this was a gov't attempt to controll you or to make money, they would reward a big contract to one of their friends or supporter's companies to retrofit all busses with seatbelts?
There have been serious bus accidents and they haven't passed any laws requiring seat belts on busses that I'm aware of. Maybe there's something about school bus safety that I dont' knwo, but that someone who studies this for a living does?
#89
01-19-2011 | 04:07 PM
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,807
Likes: 2
So I guess the helmet laws in New York are to protect other people from your flying brain matter?
He knows that. It just didn't fit into his argument.
#90
01-19-2011 | 04:08 PM
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 6,642
Likes: 47
From: Ogden, UT
If the seatbelt laws were to protect YOU, and not to make sure you can maintain control of your vehicle, then the law would also extent to people in the back seat. Which in NY it does not.
Go out on the highway after you are done with work, get the car up to 60, and when you are going under a bridge, take your seatbelt off, and go ahead and jerk the wheel hard to the left. as if you were avoiding an object or a person in the road. They go ahead and recover before you hit the bridge abuttment.
Good luck doing that from the passenger seat.
Go out on the highway after you are done with work, get the car up to 60, and when you are going under a bridge, take your seatbelt off, and go ahead and jerk the wheel hard to the left. as if you were avoiding an object or a person in the road. They go ahead and recover before you hit the bridge abuttment.
Good luck doing that from the passenger seat.
The first was the "I've never unbuckled a dead person" which is bullshit, as a former medic I have unbuckled dead people.
Then came the insurance angle, people were being injured that didn't have insurance and it was costing the taxpayers money to care for them, same one they have used for helmet laws BTW...
Now it is to protect others, what a load of CRAP! It is lawmakers pretending to be the all caring ones and generating revenue streams by creating new ways to fine people.