It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Motorhead
Whatever your Constitutional views, seat belts save lives. That's all that should matter.
This is the 21st Century, think realistically. There's more traffic on the roads than ever before, more powerful and faster traffic than ever before, more people driving under the influence of drink or drugs than ever before, more road rage and anti-social/inconsiderate driving than ever before.
And all often taking places on roads that were designed during a much more sedate, polite and traffic free era.
That alone is enough to justfy seatbelt use under simple common sense.
Originally posted by dubiousone
Originally posted by nixie_nox
Why do you have to wear a seatbelt? For one, as others have mentioned, driving is a privelage, not a right and you are driving on government roads.
When there is an accident requring an ambulance service, on average it costs your municipality 50,000 for that incident.
When there is a fatality, it is almost a million dollars.
Just the stupid 20 percent who don't wear sealtbelts cost the nations billions a year.
But seatbelts save about 15,000 people per year. The number of fataltiies is also dropping due to increased safety measures in cars.
Now, it is silly to compare sending people to war, as they volunteered.
4700 soldiers have died in Iraq. That means in the 9 years since the Iraq war was started, 4700 soldiers have died, but 135,000 people have been saved by seatbelts.
Money flows both ways and so does extortion.
I will not pay for your stupidity.
Originally posted by ronnieray123
reply to post by nixie_nox
OK, so you got to choose something that I like and make it a crime. Will you allow me to choose something you like and make it a criminal act?
Would you agree to me passing a law making it is a crime to be gay? Gay men rape little boys and I find that a lot more offensive than a person not wearing a seat belt.
You obviously agree to error on the side of caution and if there is a chance of saving someone by passing a seat belt law, then using that same logic it is acceptable to save a child from being raped by passing a law making homosexuality a crime.
Now you just go ahead and tell me how "it's different". Tell me how I am comparing apples and oranges and you are most assuredly the superior person,