It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are seat belt laws apart of the NWO plot for world Domination?

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 26 2007 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Here is what was passed next:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Scary.




posted on Oct, 26 2007 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Do attempt to step up and step out of the box you are in. Just because the government says it good doesn’t mean it is. Just because they say it’s for your own good and protection, doesn’t mean it’s their motivation.


1. Seat belt laws represent unabated tyranny on the march as each year law enforcement is expanded. Such laws infringe on a person’s rights as guaranteed in the Fourth, Fifth, and the Ninth Amendments, and the Civil Rights section of the Fourteenth Amendment.


It’s just a G-D piece of paper, yes??


2. Seat belt laws are an unwarranted intrusion by government into the personal lives of citizens; they deny through prior restraint the right to determine a person’s own safety and health standards for his own body, the ultimate private property. Not using a seat belt is a victimless, state-created crime that does not hurt or threaten anyone.
FACTS ABOUT MANDATORY SEAT BELT HARNESS LAWS


The right to choose regarding your own personal safety in the case of seatbelts has been taken away from you.

Here is a another good opinion:


This is not to say that safety belts are wrong; rather, the state is wrong in forcing its apparently law-abiding citizens to do anything by coercion. Whether this is a gun carried on the hip of a peace officer, or fines and citations, it makes no difference. Citizens have a natural, human right to be free from coercion by the state unless they infringe on the rights of other citizens. But choosing not to wear a safety belt violates no one's rights.

It is profoundly irrational to choose not to wear a safety belt. The person who does not wear one is potentially giving up his or her own life. However, Texas has no right to force anyone to wear one. An individual has the right to his or her own life, including the choice to recklessly dispose of it. State robs citizens with seat belt law


And yet another:


Who's the bigger threat to your safety, a murderer or someone who attempts suicide? The answer is obvious, and we'd certainly jeer any mayor who suggested lowering a city's death toll by cracking down on suicides. Yet something strange happens when death comes to the highway. Politicians lock arms with law enforcement, and come up with campaigns like "Click It or Ticket," which began Monday and aims to reduce highway fatalities through stricter seat belt law enforcement. Suddenly, the murder-suicide distinction vanishes, and it's perfectly acceptable to reduce deaths by punishing those who put only themselves at risk.

Like other do-gooder efforts that plead with us to turn off our TVs or put down our cigarettes, Click It or Ticket rolls around once every year (May 24 to June 6). But unlike many other campaigns, CIOT doesn't stop with pleading. Cops from over 12,000 law enforcement agencies scope out violators, set up checkpoints and mete out fines as high as $200. In order to emphasize the seriousness of their intentions, they've even adopted the hallmark of all ham-fisted safety crusades—zero tolerance. As one police chief put it: "America should be on notice—Click It or Ticket. No exceptions. No excuses. No warnings." Strapped


I have more information about this if you need it.



posted on Oct, 26 2007 @ 09:26 PM
link   
But that newswithviews article is clearly wrong. Like I believe uberarcanist and RRConservative pointed out, driving is a privilege, not a right - I remember that exact line being on the first page of the driver's license test booklet for my state. There simply is no constitutional issue. Your state government can pass a law requiring you to wear a clown nose and bowtie while driving if they wanted to - even though it makes no sense it still wouldn't be unconstitutional.

I think there are many better places for one to make their stand concerning the revocation of "rights" than seat-belt laws.



posted on Oct, 27 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Say what you will, it does not matter.

The thesis of the title of the thread is the seat belt law and the NWO. It does not matter what your argument is, the fact is, the seat belt law is a states rights issue. The NWO can not effectively work at a state level.

If you chose a different manner of presenting your argument I would whole heartedly agree with you.

I am just saying.....PICK ANOTHER TOPIC. THIS ONE IS MOOT!!!!



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by traderonwallst
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Say what you will, it does not matter.


Well thats nice, this is a discussion board after all, it would be boring if we all shared the same views, yes?


The thesis of the title of the thread is the seat belt law and the NWO. It does not matter what your argument is, the fact is, the seat belt law is a states rights issue. The NWO can not effectively work at a state level.


The NWO needs to condition people to obey there agenda, to fall in line. The states really don't have any rights over the federal government, for example, Speed limit laws, states must conform to what the federal government says the speed limits should be, or they will lose all highway funding. Truthfully the state rights issue vs the federal government could be a thread unto itself. The states lost there rights over the federal government during the civil war in America. This was not the design of the Constitution. To think that the NWO can't work at the state level is very much wishful thinking, considering the federal government trumps all state right issues.


If you chose a different manner of presenting your argument I would whole heartedly agree with you.

I am just saying.....PICK ANOTHER TOPIC. THIS ONE IS MOOT!!!!


I'm comfortable in the manner I have chosen to present this argument. I really don't expect most people to agree with me, because the conditioning is in full effect, it is established, it is here, and will not go away.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by DiabolusFireDragon

IMO, seatbelt laws are to increase municipal revenue, an excuse to pull someone over and search for something else, all under the guise of "safety."


there it is right there. agree 100%
the same is true about redlight cameras. nobody in government cares about lives, they care about finding a problem and implimenting a solution that generates profit for the local government.



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 04:46 AM
link   
well I found this and thought I would share it here:

Regardless, apparently seatbelts are due to be the new big thing. Much as with the popular stereotypes of the good smoker and the bad nonsmoker, one has to imagine that we are on the verge of a society where "good people" will be shown buckling up while the sign of "evil" shall be an unbuckled driver.
The Tyranny of Seat Belts


We are being labeled as good or bad, if a person chooses not to wear a seat belt does that make them Evil or just a Bad person.


Never mind, of course, that wearing a seatbelt -- while it may save your life -- has never actually prevented an actual accident. Certainly, a pedestrian will take little comfort in the fact that the car that ran him over was being driven by a guy wearing a seatbelt. Unlike second hand smoke, you not buckling up will not increase the chances of the guy sitting one car over getting killed in an accident. And, for all the current seat belt love that seems to be sweeping this country, it's hardly a guarantee that you won't be killed in a car accident.


This should be a choice or a personal decision not rule of law.


In short, mandatory seat belt laws are a perfect example of the government trying to save us from ourselves whether we need them to or not. In the end, all they really are is just another way to squeeze more money out of traffic court.


Do you really want your government making these decisions for you?



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 04:26 PM
link   
The government has an interest in protecting us with these types of laws..

We are all employees of the government. The more people who are alive and working... the more money in GDP and taxes are produced for the government.

~S



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Actually, it has been proven that you are just as safe without seatbelts as you are with them.

I have seen accidents where seatbelts that were worn decapitated the person. I have seen accidents where they have broken necks.

The fact is, just like smoking, it should be the choice of the person as to whether they wish to use them or not.

Personally, I think it is the government trying to control more and more aspects of our lives and taking more and more choices away from us.

VV



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ValhallasValkyrie
 


That is the purpose of this thread, my little attempt to open some eyes, that the government should not be the parent to adults in this county.

We should have the Right to make our own decisions.

We should have the Right to make Bad decisions.

It should not be the government or the medias role to daemonize people who do not where seatbelts or people that smoke, or people that eat trans fat, or people that lay out in the sun.



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by LDragonFire
We should have the Right to make our own decisions.

We should have the Right to make Bad decisions.



another way of looking at this problem
if you have a head-on crash and are not wearing seat belts you are going to slap your face off the windscreen, crush your chest against the steering wheel and more than likely break arms and legs.

if there is passengers back/front they will also travel after the accident doing more damage.

this is if you are lucky

you then spend months in hospital, all them different people looking after you and trying to get you back into a normal life, nurses, doctors, surgeons and the list goes on and on.

in the mean time, people who are very sick or dying from an illness become second best because all the hospital staff or running after some muppet who did not wear his/hers seatbelt because he /she was TOLD they have to wear it.

if you are unlucky and dont survive and it happens way to often, some lucky cop has to go and explain your death to your family, JEEZ


but if that said muppet had worn the seatbelt, they would have a very good chance of walking away from the same accident..

so it is never JUST YOUR bad decision.
does it matter who made the law about seatbelts, they save lives, plain and simple. plus, all of the hospital staff who end up running after muppets who refuse to wear belts could be looking after sick people.


seatbelts came from motor racing and were then invented for the public...
for the simple fact of helping people survive accidents..

to who ever made this law



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 06:25 AM
link   
How hard is it to put on a seatbelt. When i get in a car i don't even have to think about it is just do. Putting a helmet on in the shower is hard and would be annoying. It takes 2 seconds to put on a seatbelt. I say the government is doing you a favour for trying to make those of you who are to arrogant to put a seatbelt on. Not doing something just because your meant to isn't stupid (in this case).



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 06:38 AM
link   
I always liked the Bill Cosby take on seat belts. So the paramedics didn't have hunt around for your hide after the fact. Now we have airbags, vss, smart brakes, radar control. The more the better as far as I'm concerned. I used to drive a 440 kaw in college till I started working in the ER. Motordonors all of them.

[edit on 25-3-2008 by jpm1602]



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by donotdoit
How hard is it to put on a seatbelt. When i get in a car i don't even have to think about it is just do. Putting a helmet on in the shower is hard and would be annoying. It takes 2 seconds to put on a seatbelt. I say the government is doing you a favour for trying to make those of you who are to arrogant to put a seatbelt on. Not doing something just because your meant to isn't stupid (in this case).


I always wear a seatbelt.

My opinion is it is a ridiculous reason to add another law regarding personal choices that should be left to adults. It would be like the government making wearing a helmet in the shower a law because you could slip and bump your head. It turns the government to Big Daddy for us adults is this necessary? It is a attempt, and a successful one to force the population in line, do this because we say it's good for you

The purpose of this thread was never about whether or not it is smart to wear a seatbelt, of course seat belts save lives. It was about the government taking a decision that should be made by adults, and making it a law, thus taking away that right of adults to make a decision.

The government should make a law that you should wear a helmet walking down the street, you might trip and fall.

The government should outlaw steak knives because you could cut yourself.

The government should make a law stating that you should goto bed at a certain time, and you should sleep x amount of hours.

The government should make a law that you should wear safety glasses while popping popcorn, because well you just never can tell.

I don't like seatbelt laws and I don't like mandatory insurance laws because it take the decision regarding safety and financial responsibility out of our hands and into the government father figure hands.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 10:13 AM
link   
I think the gov is beset by duality. Protect us to the fullest or make the economic floor fall out so you can join up and get your azz blown off. Governmental mental.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 10:17 AM
link   
It represents a system of control through incrementalization. This is the Socialist method of taking control. Slowly gradually, whereas the Fascists are immediate.

You slowly raise the temperature of the water in the pot and the frog boils to death.

First its seat belt laws, then your first amendment and before you know it you are disarmed. From relatively harmless chipping away at the Constitution to a full blown attack and total destruction of said document.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by bigbert81
 


Wearing a seat belt does impact other people. When you crash your car and go flying out the windshield, you're impacting other people (sometimes literally). The local authority has to spend the time, money, and resources in scraping your twitching carcass off the road. Why should other people pay for some idiot's right to cause havoc for other people? Not to mention the fact that people ejected from cars in crashes can cause even more crashes, causing innocent people (who were wearing seat belts) to be involved in an accident.

Why should people be able to endanger other folks for no good reason other than their ignorance?

I'm sure if a member of your family was killed (or even hurt) in an accident by someone flying out of their car, you'd change your tune.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Have to agree on one point...it just gives law enforcement one more reason to pull yo over and check you out. It should be a persons choice whether or not to wear them, its not hurting anyone but yourself if you dont. They just always look for more reasons to impose their will upon the people...



posted on Apr, 12 2008 @ 12:34 AM
link   

.

By not wearing a seatbelt, you are only endangering yourself. Therefore it should be your choice.



I dont know about that- maybe you are endangering your children by setting a poor example. You may not have any kids, but the idea that many adults who do have children are not wearing the seatbelts is very disturbing. You have to think about how others are affected by your actions. You being killed by not wearing your seatbelt will affect someone, too. Statistics prove without a shadow of a doubt that wearing seatbelts will save lives. You get tickets for speeding because you could get yourself killed speeding so why not ticket for the seatbelts, too?



posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 06:45 AM
link   
After reading through the posts in this topic, I am feeling a bit nauseous.

A large number of the posts demonstrate very socialist attitudes.

That is not good people, not if you wish to remain free.

Socialism was created by the Rothschild's and friends for the purpose of controlling their chattel.

Trust me, you do not want to become slaves.

As for the OP's question, seat-belt laws have nothing at all to do with your safety.

Puerto Rico was the first to impose a belt law in 1975.

New York was next in 1984.

The federal government first started requiring federal employees to wear seat-belts in the 1980's. Next they began threatening to withhold Federal transportation and highway funds from the states unless they adopted mandatory seat-belt and helmet laws.

In 1998, Congress passed the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), which includes grant money for states to initiate new seat belt laws, traffic enforcement programs, and child passenger protection and training activities.

In each state where mandatory laws have been imposed (no votes, just mandates) the penalties are first around $20 and police are not allowed to stop anyone for not wearing a belt. After the first couple of years, they impose "primary seat belt laws" which they claim are more effective because they allow police to stop drivers and ticket them for not wearing a seat belt. In order to "discourage violators" the fines are also increased to $100 or more.

Depending on the state, the law may also allow:

A) Police officers to stop cars at random and perform seat-belt checks.

B) Police check points to be established.

C) Funding for additional police officers.

Once everything is in place the "Crack Downs" begin.
*Police are "cracking Down" in areas where more than 90% of drivers are wearing seat-belts.

After some searching, I found that the culprit behind this violation of our rights is the United Nations. If you have any doubt, try searching for "United Nations seat-belt".

You see, the UN has a base in Puerto Rico which served as their test run, then they moved on to New York.

The United Nations has not only been pushing seat-belt laws in the US, they have been doing so all around the world. It seems they are attempting to standardize several other laws as well. According to Congressman Ron Paul, the UN is also the origin of many gun control laws in the US.

Note that the UN is not exactly an independent organization, it was created by members of the privately owned Federal Reserve.
Also note that on Sept. 4, 2009, the UN proposed creating a "One World currency" which they would control.







 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join