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

[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] or you know people could just wear their fucking seatbelts, a safe, easy, and highly effective measure at saving lives and increasing general safety on the roads.

[QUOTE=Saber15;47240720]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].[/QUOTE] I had a feeling it was all vehicles, but I didn't want to say all without being certain.

[QUOTE=Thlis;47231821]For what possible reason would this seem like a good idea?[/QUOTE] Natural selection.

calm your titties people this is just to cut down on the cash scheme that traffic tickets are

[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;47246142]calm your titties people this is just to cut down on the cash scheme that traffic tickets are[/QUOTE] What?

To all of you who want no seat belt law. Enjoy the manslaughter charges when the other person in the car accident wasn't wearing theirs and is now busy melding brains and pavement.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;47239680]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.[/QUOTE] I don't think Silence I Kill You ever suggested that a high speed crash won't result in your death if you're not wearing a seatbelt, or that anyone else was saying a 5mph fender bender = windshield cannon, just that most collisions do occur at low speed, and that modern safety features reduce the impulse of that forcible deceleration, which can and does turn broken bones into bruises in a collision. Somehow people blithely skipped on by what I thought were pretty obvious, but trite points, and proceeded to shitpost that he was actually saying you should just always crash at low speed or that crumple zones magically make you avoid all injury or whatever. I don't have any problem with seatbelt laws but he's right in saying that in modern cars, seatbelts are really the last line of defense and don't make a significant difference in low-speed accidents. That's still a fucking stupid reason not to wear one.

[QUOTE=catbarf;47247657]I don't think Silence I Kill You ever suggested that a high speed crash won't result in your death if you're not wearing a seatbelt, or that anyone else was saying a 5mph fender bender = windshield cannon, just that most collisions do occur at low speed, and that modern safety features reduce the impulse of that forcible deceleration, which can and does turn broken bones into bruises in a collision. Somehow people blithely skipped on by what I thought were pretty obvious, but trite points, and proceeded to shitpost that he was actually saying you should just always crash at low speed or that crumple zones magically make you avoid all injury or whatever. I don't have any problem with seatbelt laws but he's right in saying that in modern cars, seatbelts are really the last line of defense and don't make a significant difference in low-speed accidents. That's still a fucking stupid reason not to wear one.[/QUOTE] seatbelts are the first line of defense. You rattle around the inside of the car no matter HOW good the crumple zones function.

[QUOTE=catbarf;47247657]I don't think Silence I Kill You ever suggested that a high speed crash won't result in your death if you're not wearing a seatbelt, or that anyone else was saying a 5mph fender bender = windshield cannon, just that most collisions do occur at low speed, and that modern safety features reduce the impulse of that forcible deceleration, which can and does turn broken bones into bruises in a collision. Somehow people blithely skipped on by what I thought were pretty obvious, but trite points, and proceeded to shitpost that he was actually saying you should just always crash at low speed or that crumple zones magically make you avoid all injury or whatever. I don't have any problem with seatbelt laws but he's right in saying that in modern cars, seatbelts are really the last line of defense and don't make a significant difference in low-speed accidents. That's still a fucking stupid reason not to wear one.[/QUOTE] he was also advocating for the freedom of people to make that decision for themselves regardless of low or high speed, even though, high speed car crashes could easily result in a freely moving body causing damage to other people. I know you're criticizing FP like you normally do, which is good, keeps people sharp, but seriously, there's good reason to criticize his point, which was formally and initially, that people should make their own decisions on this, regardless of speed, he never indicated he was only advocating for that freedom at low speeds. [editline]2nd March 2015[/editline] [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] just in case you felt like disputing me, that was his initial point really.

Hah, look at you fucking idiots wearing your government-designated neck-breaking laces. I just wear this. [IMG]http://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uuuploads/creative-t-shirts/creative-t-shirts-8.jpg[/IMG] Fuckers don't know what hit 'em. Suck it, big brother! You ain't breaking my neck with your death-straps.

First they make you wear seatbelts in the name of "safety", then they take away your guns in the name of "safety", then before you know it you're living under COMMUNISM

I'm probably late, but has nobody in Maine played the newer GTA's? Like, when you hit a tree full speed, your character gets thrown out of the car. Now imagine that happening IRL but then YOU fly out of your windshield into the windshield of a schoolbus and hit the busdriver and the bus spins out of control and 30 kids fly out of the bus because no seatbelts; and then a group of 10 mothers with their babystrollers get hit by the 30 flying kids and everybody DIES. If anything, schoolbusses should get seatbelts. [editline]3rd March 2015[/editline] THINK OF THE KIIEEDS.

[QUOTE=MyAlt91;47248614]I'm probably late, but has nobody in Maine played the newer GTA's? Like, when you hit a tree full speed, your character gets thrown out of the car. Now imagine that happening IRL but then YOU fly out of your windshield into the windshield of a schoolbus and hit the busdriver and the bus spins out of control and 30 kids fly out of the bus because no seatbelts; and then a group of 10 mothers with their babystrollers get hit by the 30 flying kids and everybody DIES. If anything, schoolbusses should get seatbelts. [editline]3rd March 2015[/editline] THINK OF THE KIIEEDS.[/QUOTE] Yeah man fuck other people, lets just let other people potentially endanger other peoples lives for absolutely no reason what so ever other than "muh freedums" There is literally zero benefit to society in any way, shape or form by getting rid of seatbelt laws, you're just making everything more dangerous.

[QUOTE=Superwafflez;47234941]I wouldn't recommend partaking in a vehicle rollover without a seatbelt... [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hh0tnuWScKU[/media][/QUOTE] Pretty conclusively demonstrates it. Everyone not buckled in would have died, everyone who was buckled in would have literally walked away unscathed. [QUOTE=Saber15;47236714]I'd rather not have to swerve wildly to avoid splattering someone's head when they get flung from their car in a collision because they didn't wear a belt, thank you very much.[/QUOTE] Or in my case, since I drive a vehicle that is too topheavy for shit like that, having to clean bits of idiots out of my suspension and deal with the cops asking me why someone's brain matter is splattered all over my frame rails.[QUOTE=NO ONE;47237620]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] Two years of driving to and from high school is not gonna magically make them any more mature behind the wheel. Most people don't truly mature until they're almost 25. 18 year olds are still just as dumb and reckless as 16 year olds 95% of the time. [QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;47238914]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. [/QUOTE] There's another point that so far hasn't been touched on. Even when you [i]aren't[/i] in a crash seatbelts are still doing a HUGE favor to ya. Say there's someone else being stupid and bumping into something ahead of you. Or pulling out without looking. Whatever. Doesn't matter what, what matters is that you have to do something sudden and evasive. IF you're buckled in your arse stays in the seat, which means your limbs stay on the controls. You successfully avoid the obstacle, regain control and trundle on as normal. If you're not buckled in that first sharp swerve throws you out of the seat. This means you're no longer at the controls. Your car is now completely out of control, likely heading into oncoming traffic, and there's nothing your unbuckled arse can do about that. You're going to crash, and worse still, you're unbuckled [i]in an awkward position where the airbags cannot try to save you[/i]. Ded. It's even more pronounced in older vehicles. I am perfectly okay with the fact that if I crash my truck I am dead. It's a 1985 F150, it doesn't have any safety features to speak of. No electronic nanny bullshit, no airbags, no crumple zones, nada. Doesn't even have a rollover safe cabin or bucket seats. Anything over a fender bender is gonna be a hospital visit on the best of days. And I'm okay with that. But it [i]does[/i] have shoulder strap seatbelts, which I always wear when I'm driving it. Those belts have made the difference between me crashing and me avoiding a crash twice since I bought the truck in 2007, by keeping me in the driver's position on the bench seat while I pulled an evasive maneuver. Because I was buckled in, I stayed where I was supposed to be, which meant I was able to maintain control over a vehicle that by all accounts didn't want to be under control anymore.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47248016]he was also advocating for the freedom of people to make that decision for themselves regardless of low or high speed, even though, high speed car crashes could easily result in a freely moving body causing damage to other people. I know you're criticizing FP like you normally do, which is good, keeps people sharp, but seriously, there's good reason to criticize his point, which was formally and initially, that people should make their own decisions on this, regardless of speed, he never indicated he was only advocating for that freedom at low speeds. [editline]2nd March 2015[/editline] just in case you felt like disputing me, that was his initial point really.[/QUOTE] No, you're right, Silence I Kill You is being pretty stupid about what he's advocating, since as you point out it stops being a personal decision with personal consequences the instant your soon-to-be corpse goes flying out into traffic. Just curious, do anyone know where the backlash against seatbelts comes from? Do people really think they're more likely to hurt than help, or is it all 'my life, my choice', or holdouts from before they were legally required?

[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] Yeah, I've always been surprised by how few major vehicular incidents we have, seeing as this is quite arguably the worst state to drive in during the winter.