Maine considering legislation that would make wearing seatbelts no longer mandatory for adults - Polidicks

Sure, I guess some people should wear a seatbelt, but for me it's just constricting. If you're an unsafe driver then you should definitely buckle up, but if you're careful there's no reason to. Putting on a seatbelt makes it such a pain for me to drink, text, and get road head at the same time. Why should the law make me do something just because other people are stupid?

What I don't understand, is why most our Americans on this forum tends to hate the regulation of anything. The government generally isn't trying to harm you, they put in legislation to protect people, idiots or not. And if you don't like what's being enacted, you guys don't really seem to protest it or vote in elections anyway.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;47234949]Because as everyone knows, car accidents are famous for involving low speeds and low amounts of energy. Cars are made out of spongecake[/QUOTE] Yes, because every single fucking car accident occurs at 80+ miles per hour. Do me a favor, Go see what speed the MAJORITY of accidents happen at. $20 says that the MAJORITY are fender benders. And yes, cars have crumple zones designed to suck energy out of an accident. [QUOTE=EcksDee;47235691]What the fuck are you talking about. The energy comes from driving the fucking car at 30-40-50 whatever miles an hour. The damage comes from the car becoming stationary after hitting an object, the bodies inside the car remaining in motion, and hitting whatever stationary object is in front of them. Then there's the people on the backseat who DO regularly kill drivers, and this shit is documented. The accidents don't transfer any energy to people, wtf[/QUOTE] You DO realize that the care doesn't suddenly just become stationary right? With all of the things cars have now including crumple zones, and other factors like your vehicle pushing whatever is in it's way, it's not a sudden stop like hitting a brick wall. All of these factors suck energy out of the crash that would otherwise be transferred to the occupant. I don't know why you guys are pretending like I'm saying people are any safer without seatbelts, because I've never said that. I'm saying it takes a LOT more energy to get a whole body through a windshield and turn it into a projectile than you're thinking. I'm not going to pretend like every accident is the worst scenario possible to try and scare people, because that's not the truth.

By the way nice job jumping into the argument late, and not even reading what people posted, good job. People can become projectiles meaning object of given mass x flying through the car at given speed hitting said "PASSENGER". Also when said car crumples said amount, after hitting said car head on, it will have come to a "COMPLETE STOP" while said person still has the same amount of "POTENTIAL ENERGY" when said had begun to crumple. I guess the one video on the 2nd page of this thread was not enough to convince you even though he clearly flew out of the window.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47233716]You are SEVERELY underestimating the amount of energy it takes to turn a person into a projectile that can go through a windshield and still injure people, and overestimating the amount of accidents which occur that can transfer that amount of energy to people.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47236820]Yes, because every single fucking car accident occurs at 80+ miles per hour. Do me a favor, Go see what speed the MAJORITY of accidents happen at. $20 says that the MAJORITY are fender benders. And yes, cars have crumple zones designed to suck energy out of an accident. You DO realize that the care doesn't suddenly just become stationary right? With all of the things cars have now including crumple zones, and other factors like your vehicle pushing whatever is in it's way, it's not a sudden stop like hitting a brick wall. All of these factors suck energy out of the crash that would otherwise be transferred to the occupant. I don't know why you guys are pretending like I'm saying people are any safer without seatbelts, because I've never said that. I'm saying it takes a LOT more energy to get a whole body through a windshield and turn it into a projectile than you're thinking. I'm not going to pretend like every accident is the worst scenario possible to try and scare people, because that's not the truth.[/QUOTE] The reason why you fly out of a car when you get into an accident isn't because the car is magically imparting energy to you, the reason you fly out of a car is because the you and the car were going at 60 mph and all of a sudden, the car isn't moving at 60 mph anymore, but you still are because of this little thing called inertia. Head, meet windscreen. Windscreen, meet head. Oops. Turns out Mr. Windscreen isn't so friendly to squishy humans after all.

I give up. You guys are right. It should be illegal to not wear a seatbelt because a 5 mph fender bender will send you flying through the windshield. How could I ever be so wrong as to say it wouldn't.....

To be fair, Maine has some of the best drivers in the whole damn country. You put the edge of your toe off of the curb and someone will brake to let you cross. Then again I'm just going by stereotypes and I think this is a horrible idea.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47237252]I give up. You guys are right. It should be illegal to not wear a seatbelt because a 5 mph fender bender will send you flying through the windshield. How could I ever be so wrong as to say it wouldn't.....[/QUOTE] What about the accidents that don't happen at 5mph? The thing about accidents is that you don't know they're going to happen before they do - that's why you wear a seatbelt. The point you're making is so unbelievably stupid I'm not sure it's a point at all.

[QUOTE=V12US;47235978]Because only an idiot would choose not to wear their seat-belt.[/QUOTE] Well, I'm not really the type of guy that wants to have a genocide on idiots as if they were some in-superior sub-human races from the depths of hell, but whatever you say.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47237252]I give up. You guys are right. It should be illegal to not wear a seatbelt because a 5 mph fender bender will send you flying through the windshield. How could I ever be so wrong as to say it wouldn't.....[/QUOTE] You are probably the most infuriatingly conservative assclown on here right now, and that's saying something, Glaber started posting again. You're not a "victim" because the government wants its population to not die every fucking time they crash high speed lumps of metal and plastic into each other. Throwing around shit like "but crashes aren't always fast!!!!" means jack shit, stop doing it. Crumple zones aren't going to save your ass in a relatively speedy collision, they aren't large enough to mitigate that much energy. When you're on the road, passengers or not, "careful driver" or not, you are risking yours and many others lives. The government telling you "hey, put this fucking thing on so you're at least a bit safer" isn't infringing on any of your rights, isn't some totalitarian bullshit, isn't some plan to revive Hitler and enact socialised healthcare. It's a small thing to actually hold assholes who make the road more dangerous accountable for their complete and utter stupidity.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47232362]I know that it's very dangerous to not wear a seatbelt. That's why I always wear one. But the government shouldn't be making that decision for me.[/QUOTE] You'd be eating those words if you crashed at speed while a passenger behind you didn't buckle up.

[QUOTE='[EG] Pepper;47237538']You'd be eating those words if you crashed at speed while a passenger behind you didn't buckle up.[/QUOTE] As well as pavement, dashboard, and glass after he was launched from the front windshield

why would i even need a seatbelt if i don't plan on crashing very fast??? how bout you fascist lefties riddle me THAT HUH

[QUOTE=Sector 7;47232155]There is only one other state in the US that allows you to drive without a belt, New Hampshire, and it has a below-average rate of vehicle fatalities despite mountainous terrain and poor winter conditions.[/QUOTE] You do have to be 18 to do so though. So fresh off the test 16 year olds can't just drive without one.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47237252]I give up. You guys are right. It should be illegal to not wear a seatbelt because a 5 mph fender bender will send you flying through the windshield. How could I ever be so wrong as to say it wouldn't.....[/QUOTE] Your over looking the fact that there are things called highways and parkways and turnpikes, where average speed limits range from 45-60 mph, and there are more 25+mph streets than there are 5mph, there would have to be a on every block for such a shitty speed limit to be enforced over such a large area.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47236820]Yes, because every single fucking car accident occurs at 80+ miles per hour. Do me a favor, Go see what speed the MAJORITY of accidents happen at. $20 says that the MAJORITY are fender benders. And yes, cars have crumple zones designed to suck energy out of an accident. You DO realize that the care doesn't suddenly just become stationary right? With all of the things cars have now including crumple zones, and other factors like your vehicle pushing whatever is in it's way, it's not a sudden stop like hitting a brick wall. All of these factors suck energy out of the crash that would otherwise be transferred to the occupant.[/QUOTE] How to physics. Seriously, you're making no sense here. I was typing up this big long physics explination, but then I found a really good video illustrating the point. This is a 30mph test of a seat, where the crumple zone is simulated by an apparatus. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek7K4LQBnfE[/media] Please tell me how that crumple zone and other factors "sucked energy" away from the occupant.

I never got to meet my grandfather because he didn't wear a seatbelt, a completely preventable death that taught a rather costly lesson to my father, and then to me. Needless to say, I'll wear a seatbelt whether or not I'm required to.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47236820] You DO realize that the care doesn't suddenly just become stationary right? With all of the things cars have now including crumple zones,[/QUOTE] Yeah, I know full well. I also know that this: [quote]All of these factors suck energy out of the crash that would otherwise be transferred to the occupant. [/quote] Is grade-a retardation. The energy is already there. Whether you like it or not, your body is moving 50 mph relative to the earth around you. When the car stops, even taking into account perfect crumple zones, your body will [B]still be moving at ~50 mph[/B] This is literally one of the first things they teach in traffic school. Momentum, inertia, physics. The difference between a seatbelt and no seatbelt is the difference between a cracked rib and a broken neck.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47232362]I know that it's very dangerous to not wear a seatbelt. That's why I always wear one. But the government shouldn't be making that decision for me.[/QUOTE] Your "freedoms" are not under threat by the government making laws to protect your fucking life. Seatbelts are something you put on and forget, it's a 2 second job and a strap that protects your life if you crash your car The government wants you alive, not another road-side statistic

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47237252]I give up. You guys are right. It should be illegal to not wear a seatbelt because a 5 mph fender bender will send you flying through the windshield. How could I ever be so wrong as to say it wouldn't.....[/QUOTE] Flying through the window isn't the main issue. It's relatively unlikely that your body would be more of a danger to whoever's outside the vehicle than your vehicle itself would be. It's not super likely for you to fly through the windshield and kill somebody, but it could still happen. Even your argument against that is flimsy, because even though it's less frequent, you're still endangering others outside the vehicle by allowing your body to potentially leave the vehicle and injure them. But that's not the main point. The main point is that an unrestrained person in a vehicle is a massive danger to anyone else inside the vehicle. Take a look at this: [video=youtube;K6tsgzFvVI0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6tsgzFvVI0[/video] Note that the child in the back would have less momentum than an adult sitting in the back. So an unrestrained adult in the back would cause much more damage to others in the vehicle than that child did. Anybody in the back seat is very, very likely to fly forward and slam into those in the front seats. There's no justification for making driving without a seatbelt legal.

It bothers me that some buses I've been on don't have seatbelts. Is there a good reason for it to be like that?

Before I graduated high school I took a road safety course because most workplaces look at it favourably here in Queensland and elsewhere The instructor got 4 of us in a standard ford sedan, without seatbelts on and he was driving at 5km/h (so really slow) he then applied the breaks really hard and we went flying, one great demonstration about how seatbelts help prevent people going at any speed from flying and becoming potential human projectiles. He did it again with our seatbelts on and nobody flew He then spun around in a circle at around 20km/h while we were not buckled up and asked us to get our seatbelts, the seatbelts were locked and we were stuck. He said that in most cases when accidents are about to occur, the driver/passenger tries helplessly to get their seatbelt on last minute but can't because of the cars mechanism to lock the seatbelt in place during the car in movement To think that the government is taking away your freedoms for not being a human projectile is the dumbest thing I've heard all day. It doesn't just affect you, if they manage to fly out of the car they have the potential of hitting a driver or passenger in the other car head first It's on the same bar as texting and driving, both put other drivers at risk and banning it helps you keep you alive

[QUOTE=NoobieWafer223;47232070]I don't even start my car without my seatbelt on or anyone else in the car.[/QUOTE] I know you technically aren't supposed to, but I always start the car, then put on my belt. I've had to get out quite a few times to check something, and in the winter it gives the engine a few more seconds of idle before you put stress on it. The car doesn't roll until all occupants are buckled up though. No exceptions. To me that seems reasonable. Anything involving movement without buckling up strikes me as asinine.

[QUOTE=Skerion;47238927]It bothers me that some buses I've been on don't have seatbelts. Is there a good reason for it to be like that?[/QUOTE] Very generally speaking, while it would be better to have seatbelts, the main reason why some don't have seatbelts deals with weight. For instance, only school buses under 10,000 pounds require seatbelts. There are several other design factors involved. On the note of school busses, there is a recent ABC article about this. [quote]But NHTSA, the government agency responsible for safety on the road, has long refrained from requiring seat belts on all school buses, saying that school buses are inherently safer than passenger cars due to their construction - even without seatbelts. In addition, the agency has maintained that mandating seatbelts would have unintended consequences. The costs involved in outfitting buses with seatbelts, NHTSA has said, could reduce the number of buses available and wind up diverting more students into passenger cars, which they say would increase fatalities and injuries on the road.[/quote] [url]http://abcnews.go.com/US/putting-seatbelts-school-buses-save-childrens-lives/story?id=28594633[/url]

[QUOTE=Govna;47232029]Hey, that's their decision. They're adults, not children-- they can make choices for themselves. If they don't want to wear a protective device that's meant to save their lives in case of an accident, fine. If they die or suffer permanent injuries as a result of deciding not to wear it, too bad. That's their problem. They'll be the ones facing the consequences of their stupidity, not me or you or any of the rest of us who have common sense.[/QUOTE] It is also their medical / hospital / funeral bills that we all get to pay with insurance premiums. If there is a non-intrusive, simple, inexpensive system that can [I]clearly[/I] save lives, then not making it required because some people "don't wanna" is the dumbest excuse ever.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;47238998]I know you technically aren't supposed to, but I always start the car, then put on my belt. I've had to get out quite a few times to check something, and in the winter it gives the engine a few more seconds of idle before you put stress on it. The car doesn't roll until all occupants are buckled up though. No exceptions. To me that seems reasonable. Anything involving movement without buckling up strikes me as asinine.[/QUOTE] Starting your car is fine, just don't move until everyone is buckled up. I don't understand conservative Americans. How the hell is a seatbelt law an assault on your freedom? It's just telling you not to be a colossal retard who endangers your own life, and the lives of those around you. [editline]2nd March 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47237252]I give up. You guys are right. It should be illegal to not wear a seatbelt because a 5 mph fender bender will send you flying through the windshield. How could I ever be so wrong as to say it wouldn't.....[/QUOTE] Literally no one in this thread has argued that a "5 mph fender bender" will result in a fatal accident that could have been prevented by wearing seatbelts. We are saying that wearing seatbelts significantly increases your chances of surviving the variety of accidents that would otherwise result in fatal consequences, such as your head meeting the steering wheel at high speeds, or the passenger behind you flying into you and smashing both of your head to little bits, or you getting ejected from the car at high speeds during a rollover.

So importing foreign cars is often illegal because they don't meet our silly safety standards, but riding without a seatbelt is a-okay? Bullshit.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;47239845]So importing foreign cars is often illegal because they don't meet our silly safety standards, but riding without a seatbelt is a-okay? Bullshit.[/QUOTE] It's straight up illegal (unless the car is more than 25 years old) because in the 1980s Mercedes got pissed that people were importing their cars from Europe - without the hideous 5mph bumpers and horsepower killing emissions equipment - and cutting into their profits, so they lobbied Congress and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_import_vehicle#United_States]banned all grey imports[/url]. You [I]can[/I] get cars approved for importing but it's an extremely expensive, red-tape nightmare. A company crash tested R32 Skylines and got them approved, but if you try to import a modified R32 or a R33, the NHTSA will show up and crush the car right there in your driveway.

You know, i may be hated or lated for this, but why not just ban beer, and drugs, and then tell people you have to drive a good 5 years before you get your driving license, and then when you do get it, they give you one more final ride along, and its across the city, and back, and if you pass without any bad safety reg's broken, you pass, if you did fuck up somewhere, even a tiny fuck up, you fail. That might just be how it would fix a lot of this hatred on seatbelts. No more high or intoxicated people on the road, and people that actually know how to drive.

[QUOTE=Alaura;47240778]You know, i may be hated or lated for this, but why not just ban beer, and drugs, and then tell people you have to drive a good 5 years before you get your driving license, and then when you do get it, they give you one more final ride along, and its across the city, and back, and if you pass without any bad safety reg's broken, you pass, if you did fuck up somewhere, even a tiny fuck up, you fail. That might just be how it would fix a lot of this hatred on seatbelts. No more high or intoxicated people on the road, and people that actually know how to drive.[/QUOTE] Well drugs in a lot of places are already banned, does that stop anyone? Also, that makes it way too hard to get a licence, having to drive for 5 years. More places should have proper driver training like Germany. Where they teach you how to handle a car, teach you the risks of what happens when things go wrong etc.