DISQUS

Paula Rhoads · 7 months ago

A good percent of people seriously injured in motor vehicle accidents are people not wearing seatbelts, some of whom are thrown from the vehicle during the accident, but who survive. Their medical bills sometimes exceed what their auto insurance covers. The result is either that the public picks up the tab or these people end up in the "oasis room," where people evidently get no more rehab, even though medical advances could return them to an active life or to an occupation or to meaningful contributions to society despite a disability. In the long run, they cost us all.

Besides the avoidable human tragedy, the cost to society gives society a right to dictate that you must wear a seat belt.

The unfortunate result will be that now police can pull you over to check on your seat belt, which means the cop can also probably find something else to get you for.

I don't like either scenario. But I have met many people disabled in motor vehicle accidents in the support groups for people disabled by brain injuries. Though rehab today can overcome many elements of these disabilities, many of these disabled people are permanently disabled, some in wheelchairs, others blind.

Why do you consider it so important to not wear a seatbelt? In this day and age? Really? Why?

cheryl · 7 months ago

Hey, George...what happens if you are not wearing your seatbelt and you cause an accident that injuries you,making you unable to work and possibly in a nursing home. Insurance has limits. Guess who may pick up the tab if you don't have the assets for your care the rest of your life...the taxpayer! Buckle up.

cheryl · 7 months ago

or God forbid that your actions in not requiring your passengers leave them injured. You are not thinking about the cause and effect of your actions

Romulus · 7 months ago

"Nanny state" is the latest buzzword for conservatives who like them because they are such a convenient substitute for actual thought. Instead of addressing the merits of an issue, it's so much easier to invoke the buzzword and choke off all debate. "Who is at risk if the driver and passengers are not belted in?" How about the taxpayers who have to shell out for lifetime medical care for those beltless passengers ejected from cars and turned into vegetables?

Chris, Cheyenne · 7 months ago

Not only does talking on the phone while driving create hazardous conditions for all drivers, the use of cell phones while driving is increasingly dangerous with the amount of younger people that receive a driver's license (dependent upon driving restrictions by city/state law, etc.), as well as the age that children are receiving cell phones. It isn't uncommon anymore for a middle school student to be checking their voice mail between classes, texting during class, etc. Why would it be any different when they begin to drive? "Responsible adults" text/call and drive constantly, and create a need for cell phone laws for driving.

I could not agree more wholeheartedly, however, that seat belt laws should not be enforced upon people who choose not to wear one. Seat belts do not prevent your ability to drive, they may just create some mild discomfort.

When your parents told you "Buckle up," it was in an attempt to protect you and make you aware of how to safely ride in a vehicle. YES - it was for your own good.

If you are so adamant about not wearing a seat belt, FINE don't wear one. There should not be a law simply stating that the majority of citizens cannot take care of themselves and need some kind of governmental nurturance to "show them the way." You should buckle up in order to possibly save your life. Make the choice.

Mark · 7 months ago

Now the cops are doing FALSE ads about this. I called them and was told that the cannot pull you over for just not wearing your seat belt. The ads saying so are LIES!

Mike D. · 7 months ago

Mark, you are incorrect, they pull people over all the time for not wearing a seat belt. They have spotters several blocks down from a police car, they tell the officer up ahead which car you are in, they step out make you pull over and issue you a ticket....

David M. Weatherell · 7 months ago

"Nanny state" is not a buzzword, but a convenient term for a government that violates the rights of its citizens for the alleged purpose of protecting them. The fact that the government has already violated our property rights by forcing us to pay for the medical care of others does not then give them the right to limit our behavior to prevent injury.
This issue sheds light on why "single-payer" health insurance is so important to the power-lusters in government.

Zivo24 · 7 months ago

When I was in my early 20's I became a statistic.

I had just gotten home from work and was stepping out of my car when I realized I was supposed to stop at the grocery store on the way home. I got back in my car and headed off to the grocery store just a few blocks away. I didn't bother to put on my seat belt because I wasn't going that far.

I was approaching a stoplight a couple blocks away and my foot slipped off the clutch and became lodged under the brake pedal. Unable to push the brake pedal down to slow or stop my car, I slammed into the back of a car at the light and was thrown into the windshield.

My foot being lodged under the brake pedal is probably the only thing that kept me from being thrown all the way through the windshield but it resulted in a broken leg.

It took four separate procedures to remove all the shards of glassfrom my forehead followed by some minor plastic surgery to deal with the roadmap of scars that were left.

I have never ridden in a car since without a seatbelt and nobody rides in my vehicle unless they buckle up. If I had been wearing a seatbelt that day, I probably would have had nothing more than whiplash. Seatbelts don't just save lives. They can also prevent life-altering injuries.

And to David Weatherell, "nanny state" IS just buzzword rhetoric - just like "activist judges", et al.

David M. Weatherell · 7 months ago

The advisability of seat-belt use is not the issue. Government should not prevent behavior in the name of protecting people from the consequences of their own decisions.
The term "nanny state" is not meant to impress listeners and does not make sentences difficult to understand. It is not a vague term and has not become nonsense through endless repetition. It is not a technical term that has a special meaning to a small group of people. It is an easily understood term, usually used by opponents of the "nanny state", that names a fact of reality.

dale · 7 months ago

I never agreed to pay for someone's rehab. Oh yeah, wait, I never had a choice did I?

Kevin · 6 months ago

I agree 100%! Just wait until we get this new government provided health care. The government will be telling you what to eat and drink, and how much you're allowed. It will be illegal to be overweight and unhealthy. When in the world did health care become a God given right in this country? One more thing check out the US communist Party's web site, you'll have a hard time distinguishing between the Democrat's goals and the communist.