Are seat belt laws a violation of our personal rights, does the government have the constitutional right to make us wear them, or on a related note do you think the government has the right to make motorcyclist wear a helmet while riding? What do you think? Please discus.
I have always felt that if you don't wear a seat belt you are only hurting yourself. You are not hurting anyone around you, if you get in an accident you don't hurt the other person by not wearing a seat belt. I think it is ridiculous and just another way of getting our hard earned money. With all this said I wear my seat belt every time I drive.
Even though wearing a seat-belt/helmet is for our better good. I do think it is un-constitutional and violates our rights as a U.S. Citizen. Here are the laws in my state: All vehicle occupants must be properly restrained in all seating positions; The driver is responsible for properly securing all children under the age of 16. Passengers 16 years of age and older are responsible for themselves. They may receive their own citation if they are not properly restrained. and also... even though im not sure if this is relavent... Children up to their 8th birthday, unless they are 4'9" tall (which ever comes first), must ride in a child restraint. (For example a child car seat, booster seat, vest, or other restraint that is federally approved for use in the car.) I can understand normal seatbelt to some extent but that booster seat thing is a little much. I'd say it's an okay law but they kind of over due it in my State. Click It Or Ticket': 201$ Fine (per person) if not restrained. I live on an island with no cops on it so i dont really have to worry about this much... but I still think this is a little much.
I think seat belts should be more of a suggestion instead of a law. I do of course wear a seat belt when I drive, though. I'm not an idiot. Also, in Illinois, helmets are not required when riding a motorcycle, which again, I think is more of a suggestion
The fact that there is a law forcing people to wear seat belts is ridiculous. While it may be safer to wear a seat belt, the government should have no say in our personal decisions. Motorcyclists don't have to wear helmets because there have been instances where wearing a helmet has actually killed a rider. They have a few lobbyists on their side as well..... I think the governments control over the American people has increased far too much lately. The Patriot Act is the worst of them all. Oddly enough, we almost lost the right to own fire arms a few days ago. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that it was constitutional to own a hand gun. 5-4? That close? It says right in the constitution that we the people, have the right to bear arms. We were one vote away from losing our 2nd amendment right! When we lose our right to own weapons, we lose our ability to fight against an unjust government (extreme case). How did that almost happen? If the American people don't realize what is slowly happening, then we will soon have lost all of our freedoms our forefathers fought so hard to achieve.
This is just stupid, YES you should have to wear a seatbelt, it in no way hinders you and only serves to protect you. If I want to kill someone based on their differences, should the government be able to stop you? Yes they should, it is for the greater good.
I honestly do agree. I think it's pretty damn high and mighty of any government to be able to enforce something like this upon you. Sure it might save your life, but that's your choice isn't it? Though governments make suicide illegal. Why? Because people = money. Less people = less money. Each person alive and paying taxes is money for the government, if you're not alive then that's less money they get. Laws like these are far less about helping us and far more about helping themselves.
I have to say that if your waering a seatbelt you just get hurt more in a crash. The belt rubs aganist you really fast and just sliced you. I've seen it before it happened to my freind and he had to go to the the hospital. But I do say the bikers sould wear a helment because it's not like your riding on piloows your riding on hard ground with rocks. And remeber thow you have like a 1/10 that your going to hit your head. Foundry lovers: Foundry Designer
It really isn't just about you though, two people are usually involved in an car accident. Causing the death of another person is emotionally devastating, even if the driver not wearing a seatbelt doesn't care about his or her life the other driver shouldn't have to experience all that unnecessary trauma.
But how many people commit suicide a year? About (in the US) 30,000 people commit suicide a year. Tragic yes, but how much money will the US government earn from those people? The average person earns about 50,000 dollars a year, 28% of that goes to the government, but with deductions maybe about 20 % will actually go. So thats10,000 dollars a year that 1 person pays to the governemt. Multiply that by 30,000 for the people who die from self inflicted causes, 300,000,000 (three hundred million). 300,000,000 a year that they're not earning. What is that compared to the rest of the budget? The governments budget is trillons of dollars, so, nothing. So they wont be able to fix up 300 miles of road in Illinois, or buy new land for roads, or construct them. That may have sounded extremely insensitive, and I apologize for that. But also, if you dont have that seatbelt you could fly into the steering wheel just as the airbag comes out, theres a bad case of whiplash for you, or worse. I think its right for the governent to enforce that law: Lets say that the father of 2 children is driving home. His wife is unemployed and stays home with the kids. If that father dies because he wasnt wearing a seatbelt, then whats going to happen to his family? The government isnt completely wound up in its own personal being. Although I do agree strongly that some things they do are ridiculouse and self centered. Sources: Yahoo Answers Me My Dad Sorry I got off topic, and sorry that things I said may have sounded harsh and insensitive, but im not trying to be that way. I just needed to get my opinion out. And thanks for the rep.
The reason they are there is because a mother who doesnt wear a seatbelt isn't likely to make their child wear one either. Its hardly a breach of personal rights. I bet the government does 100 worse things than making you wear a strap around your chest that can stop you hitting the steering wheel at 40+mph.
The argument that a seatbelt cuts into you isn't going to fly. While in some cases, the seatbelt could be the thing that killed the person, if they WEREN'T wearing one, the end result would be the same, death-especially in crashes when cars run into stationary objects (trees, poles). When the car hits it, the back end flies up, creating a sort of launch pad. If a person isn't wearing a belt, they would be sent through the windshield and have a meeting with the pavement. If they are, they stay where they are, with maybe minor bruises or cuts from the belt. source So, the choice is yours, do you want a few cuts and bruises or fly through the windshield? Now, since that is cleared up, I'll move on to the law of it. I don't really think the law is necessary, its not really easy to tell for the back passengers if they are wearing it or not, and if the police officer is going in the opposite direction, it would be almost impossible to tell at all. If people don't want to wear a seatbelt, then let them. It's dumb not to and will most likely be the cause of your death in an accident. But, there isn't a great way to enforce the law. Most children grow up wearing seat belts, and are used to it by the time they drive, and then pass it on to their children, and so on. Really, when I drive with older people, they are the ones that don't wear a belt, as they didn't grow up wearing one.
Insurance Companies The cause of the seatbelt law is obvious: Insurance lobbyists in Washington. If you die the insurance companies have to pay out a hell of a lot more than if you are just injured. They are protecting their money by lobbying successfully for this law. The "you're only hurting yourself argument" is not valid here, the same way it isn't valid for committing suicide by jumping off a large building. Your body can be a projectile. Hopefully their is no one walking on the street below when you jump off the roof and hopefully your body does not fly through the winshield and collide with another person. Unlikely, but very possible. That is how the law was justified. Potential danger to others.
I agree with it on that stage, as many people die from a person not wearing a seatbelt and their body gets flung into another person, even if they are wearing a belt.
Well seatbelts are proven to save lives and protect you. So it all comes down to people just want to argue abpot something. So te hell what if the government tells you to do something that common sense would tell you to do anyway? WOw, who cares, if you dont do it anyways, then go die in a car crash.
i think that front saet people should, but since damage to car is less in back, the back shouldnt be enforced
I think its a choice. Its your personal choice and when you get injured its your fault and sucks for you. I mean sure they are doing it for safety's sake but it feels like they are taking away free will to some extent.
there are seat belt laws because the government doesnt want you to die. simple as that. Im not sure if its anywhere else but in Australia the driver is fined quite a bit of money if one of the passengers isnt wearing a seat belt.