Posted on 05/15/2006 2:20:53 AM PDT by mathprof
Seat belt use is reaching record levels, so just who are the holdouts who fail to buckle up? Often they are young men who live in rural areas and drive pickups, the government says.
About 48 million people do not regularly put on seat belts when they are on the road, a figure the government's highway safety agency hopes to lower with an annual public education campaign ahead of the summer driving season.
The "Click It or Ticket" campaign involves checkpoints, patrols and advertisements to help enforce seat belt laws. It runs from May 22 through June 4.
The latest report on seat belt use by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says men account for 65 percent of the more than 31,000 people killed each year in passenger vehicles.
The report being released Monday found:
_58 percent of those killed who were not wearing a seat belt crashed along rural roads.
_in crashes involving pickup trucks, about seven in 10 people who died were unbelted.
_more than six in 10 people age 8-44 who were killed inside a passenger vehicle were not buckled up.
The agency said that lap and shoulder safety belts reduce the risk of death for those in the front seat of passenger cars by 45 percent and the risk of moderate-to-critical injuries by 50 percent.
The fatality risk for front-seat motorists in sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks and vans who wear seat belts is reduced by 60 percent; moderate-to-critical injuries by 65 percent.
The public education campaign is using $31 million in state and federal grants for national and state ads that seek to attract young drivers who watch sporting events such as NASCAR and baseball.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
nannystate ping
Hmmmm...
I wonder what a law enforcement officer would say if he pulled me over...
http://public.fotki.com/VictorySpeedway/1/57_pontiac-
There is one seatbelt in the car - it's in the middle of the back seat. I put it there for our son's baby seat.
He's 14 now, and will ride up front when I take the car out for its first shakedown cruise in 12 years. That'll happen in a month or so...
(Sorry 'bout the poor picture quality. I need to work on my photo editing skills. They're awful.)
(Pete's Wife's Husband)
****sigh****
I need to work on a few other skills, too.
Just click on the "'57 Pontiac" link thingie.
Cool car, but the link to the picture was slightly wrong. It should be:
http://public.fotki.com/VictorySpeedway/1/57_pontiac-1/petespontiac.html
Nice! My first car was a 57 Starchief. Lots of great tales about that 347!
Just drape it over your left shoulder.
Lately the idiot cops are using any excuse (like 2 MPH over the speed limit) to stop you because they can't stop you for not wearing a seatbelt.
Stop the seatbelt Nazis !
BUMP
I've done alot of reading about that early Pontiac V-8. In those days, they built bulletproof engines, especially the valve train.
My '57 has only 60,000 (or so) original miles. When I bought it, it had been idle for 11 years. It started, but it belched white smoke. Some Marvel Mystery Oil cured the smoke and the clattering of the hydraulic lifters.
It's coming out of yet another 11-year hibernation, and I'm hoping for the same results.
It should hit the road in another month or so. It'll have new brakes from the drums to the pedal, a rebuilt carburetor, and a fresh coat of satin black primer.
It's no show car, but it sure is fun on Friday and Saturday nights, and Sunday afternoons!
Hmmm... premium fuel runs about $3.25 / gal.
Well, it'll be fun on Friday nights, anyway.
Thank you!
We'll also be checking for cholesterol levels, secondary smoke ( or its residue ), scales and tape measures to log your childrens stats and make sure they have a proper safety seat & as a complimentary service will check to make sure your socks match too.
You see as law enforcement officers we really have nothing better to do.
Wheres my Nanny?....oh here she comes ...its the state.
The "Click It or Ticket" campaign involves checkpoints, patrols and advertisements to help enforce seat belt laws. It runs from May 22 through June 4.Leaving aside the question of whether or not the government has any business requiring seat-belt use, the checkpoints are a classic case of wasting time and money by appearing to be "doing something".
Once the word gets out people will avoid the are like they do "DUI checkpoints", the locations of which are known in every bar within a five mile radius within fifteen minutes of their setup.
Meanwhile, all the other roads in town are unpatrolled.
-Eric
I think seatbelts are good to wear because I almost flew out of the drivers seat when I was younger and had to make a quick stop at a bad driveway.
But no way should the cops or the government tell me I have to wear one.
Here in PA they have to stop you for something else to ticket you for the belt, but down south in Maryland I hear "click it or ticket" spots on radio stations. They have a more Soviet tradition down there (Nanny state).
Partly, this is also about insurance companies that pay off politicians to make us get auto insurance and use seat belts to avoid high costs to them (insurance companies) from damage, death and injuries.
I believe they, among the other nanny groups, lobbied for those laws.
I think seatbelts are good to wear because I almost flew out of the drivers seat when I was younger and had to make a quick stop at a bad driveway.
But no way should the cops or the government tell me I have to wear one.
Here in PA they have to stop you for something else to ticket you for the belt, but down south in Maryland I hear "click it or ticket" spots on radio stations. They have a more Soviet tradition down there (Nanny state).
Partly, this is also about insurance companies that pay off politicians to make us get auto insurance and use seat belts to avoid high costs to them (insurance companies) from damage, death and injuries.
I believe they, among the other nanny groups, lobbied for those laws.
The proven solution for a host of lubricating issues!
Wow! Deja Vue time. Used to read about Marvel Mystery Oil in comic books.
Some Marvel Mystery Oil cured the smoke and the clattering of the hydraulic lifters.
Anyone who knows about, and uses, MM oil is A-OK in my book... that's "good stuff!"
Now ( donning firesuit ), on to seatbelts?
Besides driving Newman's wrecker ( a 1952 Ford boom truck with a sling ) back in the seventies, I ran John's Wrecker Service here from 1991-1999.
Seatbelts improve your odds in most wrecks- but they aren't a cure all. In roughly 3 out of 4 wrecks, wearing a seatbelt will either save your life, or lessen the extent of injury.
Note when you read that, they don't say you will survive those injuries- just that you will be mangled less. In a minority of crashes, you may have better odds if you are thrown clear. But you still might get killed.
What I'd really like to see is the Left's magic choice word applied-- give the driver the facts, and let them decide which side of the risk equation, belted vs. unbelted, they want to try their luck at.
IMO, seatbelt laws are about intimidation, and revenue, and have little to do with safety.
If the cop that pulls us over isn't wearing his seat belt, do we get to write a ticket for him or does it just cancel out our ticker.
I haven't worn my belt since the 'click it or ticket' program came to PA. I heard the commercial 'warning' us and undid the belt and haven't put it on since.
Screw them.
Here you see law enforcement in action. We have 25 million illegal hispanics invading us and the armed bureaucrats in law enforcement are concentrating on seat belt enforcement. Anyone who believes that the government represents them is living in a dream world (or is part of the 30+ million government employees at all levels of government)
Henry county GA has a gang problem or at least so it would seem when they indite 18 "young men" for a shooting that killed a 3 yeal old. Driving through Henry county last week I was lasered twice and radared twice to check my speed. It's easy to see the leos are concentrating on what their real role is - rasing revenue for the government. Seat belt is the same thing - revenue for the government
They look, nod their head and wave me through.
Trying to enforce seatbelt laws are a joke, the only time they should stop a vehicle for such an infraction is when adults don't buckle up the kids.
For the most part the Insurance Industry could give a crap if you wear your seatbelt or not, they got their way by making airbags mandatory.
By far the largest costs (On average) the insurance companies had prior to airbags was the cost of cosmetic reconstruction, airbags reduced these costs considerably.
Like I said, MMO worked like magic 11 years ago! I swear by it.
About my Pontiac, and any other automobile from that era:
It has no "crush zones."
It has a non-collapsible steering column.
The dashboard is made of the same material as the rest of the car - hard steel. In fact, it's welded to the cowl assembly. (This makes working on the wiring lots of fun!)
The engine / transmission will become unwelcome guests in the passenger compartment in a front end collision.
It is a chore to drive. Remember the movies from the '30's and '40's in scenes when someone is driving? They're constantly stirring the steering wheel. They're doing that for a reason - to keep the car on the road! My car has no power steering or power brakes. It doesn't even have ball joints - it has king pins. With the old bias-belted tires, it wandered all over the place, which made stirring the steering wheel a necessity. At the end of a long drive, I was exhausted! I'll be mounting wide-whitewall radials this time, and that should improve things, a little.
In my county, the DUI checkpoints are published in the local rag a few days ahead of time.
I guess that this is one of those cases where the happy medium is the rule: if you really don't want to wear a seat belt, you can get around it.
Technically, I can't see a reason not to wear a seat belt; internally, those that don't I write off as a Stupidity Tax (like those that play the lottery).
But it's not under my jurisdiction to enforce my beliefs on others in this matter.
It's Monday..........so
Nanny State Ping!!!!!!!!!
I remember reading a Popular Mechanics article by Tom MacCahill ( sic ) years ago, when he was stunt-driving for Hollywood, about how he had to find a piece of rope to lash him behind the wheel of an old Cadillac, which, of course in those days had nary a seatbelt.
I always liked working on the old iron, because they were very simple mechanically- but they weren't a good thing to have a wreck in.
Write It and Bite It
Cram It and Jam It
Shove It and Love It
...etc., etc.
My Response to "Click It or Ticket" is...A simple "Click It or Ticket? Stick it!" works for me.
-Eric
Seat belts= more revenue. The "great" state of ohio implemented these laws quite awhile ago. I have yet to wear a seatbelt.
"Often they are young men who live in rural areas and drive pickups, the government says."
Of course, I drive an old Jeep J-10 truck, so they'll be on the lookout for me. But, hey that's profiling! Can't profile terrorists, but we can profile evil rednecks in pick-ups, you know.
The nanny state; working hard to get more revenue from you.
Yup, us evil rednecks in pickup trucks are going to destroy the world as we know...............actually thta sounds like a pretty good idea, cnsidering the state of the nanny state now-a-days.
I'm just glad that state law here in GA specifically exempts people who drive pick-up trucks from having to use seatbelts. They are a nuisance and it's nobody's business whether or not I use one(I don't).
I could not believe I saw Click It or Ticket signage behind home plate of a televised baseball game the other day. God damn big government nanny state F!!cks. It is impossible to be an american and believe in this kinda crap. Oh, they may have an address in the USA, but they aren't american. Real Americans know that click it or ticket dumbassess are inferior scum.
/rant
---
What's next? Smoking bans in/on private property?
/sarcasm
Who put you in charge of thinking for free Americans. Where is it in the Constitution is it written that the government is responsible for making people use common sense when it comes to safety?
If people want to insure their safety by wearing seat belts...they wear them. If they don't want to wear them, how does that threaten you or anyone else?
The mandatory wearing seat belts was made into a law for several reasons:
1. To insure more profits to all engaged in the manufacture and sale of seat belts.
2. To generate revenue for cities through the fines for not wearing seat belts.
3. To insure higher profits for the insurance companies so that their payouts are reduced while their premiums remain the same, or higher.
4. To generate more legal fodder for the legal establishment in litigation over whether the automobile manufacturer was liable for installation or use of the seat belt. Don't believe it...look on the sign that is attached to your windshield visor.
The bottom line is that safety belts do not have any effect on anything, or anybody, external to the vehicle. Inside the vehicle, it is common sense to use them...but only if you want to.
Freedom of choice? Where is it?
My state now allows the cops to stop you, just for a seat belt infraction...something the legislature promised would never happen.
Recently a cop lectured me on the proper use of a seatbelt....I don't like mine over the shoulder, and prefer it under my arm across the chest. Apparently that is incorrect useage....he didn't give me a ticket, just a verbal lashing, and I was pretty pissed off.
I went home and perused the legislative laws and found nothing regarding "how" the seatbelt must be worn, just a mandate that it must be worn, and have printed out a copy to carry in the car. My husband on the other hand, does not want me to argue with the police, so I'm wondering: should I bother calling the precinct the cop works for and ask them what the actual law states?
I would be dead if I hadn't been wearing my seat belt the day I got into a high speed accident.
I'm not sure what to say. Insurance companies offer the service then change the terms to affect their financial situation when things go wrong (super-size hurricanes, accidents without seatbelts, etc.).
They lobby the politicians and pour money into campaigns to get their way.
People have got to be free to make their own decisions and if politicians get in the way because of insurance company pressure then who is partly responsible for taking away our freedoms.
Simple.......have your license/reg. out when the cop approaches your window and say you JUST undid the seatbelt to get your wallet out of your back pocket.
Works everytime!
I look to the pros for advice. Driving without a seatbelt is as smart as playing football without a helmet.
"I look to the pros for advice. Driving without a seatbelt is as smart as playing football without a helmet."
I think that anyone that wants to drive without a seatbelt should have that right. However, I also think that your insurance company should have the right to refuse to pay for your injuries if you do not have a seatbelt on (or change an extra "non-seatbelt" fee for coverage). Same goes with motorcycle helmets -- any head injury that could have been avoided by wearing a helmet shouldn't be covered if you don't have a helmet on.
Freedom of choice and acceptance of responsiblity.
It reminds me of the old saying, never forget the golden rule who ever has the gold makes the rules.
I have always been a firm believer in sink or swim, take smoking, I don't smoke and I believe if you do smoke and develop a decides from smoking, if you cant pay for any treatment you shouldn't get any.
Of course in Britain you do, which is why are wards of full of those who are ill through there own actions.
"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." ('Atlas Shrugged' 1957)
I can't agree with that as long as the majority of states MANDATE insurance coverage. It would work if insurance was optional, but as long as I have to pay for it........
If they put half the effort into apprehending illegal aliens as they do seat beat violators, immigration wouldn't be an issue. I want amnesty and catch and release for seat belt violators.
"1. To insure more profits to all engaged in the manufacture and sale of seat belts."
This one is the only one I have to pick a bone with. The manufacturers of seat belts (as well as other safety equipment) didn't need government regulation to ensure their profitability. This was accomplished, regardless of the laws. The OEM's would have installed the equipment on 100% of their vehicles, regardless of the legislation that mandated the use.
The litigators have figured out how to set legislative policy, and the litigators have sued enough to ensure the OEM's make their cars as expensive as possible, to avoid lawsuits.
An interesting side note is that a couple of seat belt manufacturers have gone bankrupt. They also owned other auto parts plants that fell victim to the asbestos lawsuit industry.
Seat belts= more revenue. The "great" state of ohio implemented these laws quite awhile ago. I have yet to wear a seatbelt.If I recall correctly, Ohio only passed these laws due to federal blackmail. It took similar blackmail to force Ohio to raise its drinking age (not long after an initiative to raise it failed by a 2-1 margin) and lower its BAC limit. The state still refuses to cave in to similar blackmail and require motorcycle helmets.
-Eric
How does one prove the only reasn for the injury was because of non-seatbelt wearing?
I wear my seatbelt, it's the way I was taught to drive back in the 70s, long before these nanny state laws came into effect. I just have a very hard time with the nanny state and that is what these mandatory seatbelt and helmet laws are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.