Seat Belts Shouldn't Be Mandatory

[Twilight Imperium]

Because "are seat belts a good idea?" isn't the question. It's "should seat belts be mandatory?". That's a fairly crucial distinction, and while we come down on the same side of it, let's be honest about it.

What makes you think what I said reflected the former and not the latter? Protecting people from themselves is not why seat belts are mandatory, protecting people from other people, directly or indirectly, is.

That's still not really the topic though. That's an answer to the question "why are seatbelts currently mandatory?" The OP disagrees with that being enough, hence the discussion. It's admittedly a rather large logical hurdle, but it's still what the topic is.

EDIT: Clarifying what I'm saying a little. "Protecting people from themselves is not why seat belts are mandatory, protecting people from other people, directly or indirectly, is." That's an argument for using seatbelts, as well as for them being mandatory. it's only natural that someone who disagrees with the premise would present a different one.

[AiliailiA]

I believe that a majority of traffic laws (Seat belt, speed, etc., etc.) serve only as revenue for the state. These laws are either unnecessary or counterproductive, in my opinion, and should be repealed as their only true benefit to society (*cough* *cough*, the government) is that it brings in a ton revenue from traffic tickets.

If you have a better idea to enforce a speed limit, traffic signals and road etiquette without a fine-based system, I'd love to hear it.

I'm not Comalander, but I have a better idea to enforce road rules than imposing fines.

Impose community service.

Not everone values their time equally, but it's a lot more equal than how they value a sum of money. We all have the same number of hours in a year, but we don't at all have the same number of dollars to pay a fine. The disparity in how people value their time is surely less than the disparity in ability to pay.

Slightly over the speed limit, first offence? That's four hours community service (instead of $30 fine ... four hours at minimum wage). That'll make them think twice about saving ten minutes to get somewhere.

[Costa Fierro]

Ever heard of a thing called "premiums"?

Yes.

The reckless driving of others raises the amount of risk to insurers in insuring vehicles, and premiums payments rise to offset this perceived risk.

Except that vehicle insurance premiums haven't been increasing though. In fact, the only vehicle expense that's been increasing over the past 12 months is the petrol tax the government enacts to cover vehicle related ACC claims.

All accidents are preventable and predictable.

That's a bit of a leap.

If people actually paid attention when driving, four point six million people wouldn't be treated in emergency rooms for vehicle crashes.

All the best driving attention in the world and people will still end up in accidents. Some things are unavoidable.

[Costa Fierro]

If you have a better idea to enforce a speed limit, traffic signals and road etiquette without a fine-based system, I'd love to hear it.

I'm not Comalander, but I have a better idea to enforce road rules than imposing fines.

Impose community service.

Not everone values their time equally, but it's a lot more equal than how they value a sum of money. We all have the same number of hours in a year, but we don't at all have the same number of dollars to pay a fine. The disparity in how people value their time is surely less than the disparity in ability to pay.

Slightly over the speed limit, first offence? That's four hours community service (instead of $30 fine ... four hours at minimum wage). That'll make them think twice about saving ten minutes to get somewhere.

Community service for first time offenders is a bit of a stretch. Most police where I live simply give you a warning rather than fine you.

[Comalander]

In short:

It isn't the government's job to protect people from themselves. Forcing someone to wear a seat belt is like forcing someone to wash their hands after they go to the restroom. YES, it is a good idea and I support both the use of seat belts and soap, I just don't think the government should be tasked with upholding it.

How have you managed, this far into the thread, managed to ignore every other reason of why we have seat belts to settle with "protecting people from themselves"?

Furthermore, there are many instances where a seat belt can pose a threat or be harmful to the person wearing it (speaking from personal experience), so then the state becomes liable for any injuries acquired from wearing a seat belt.

I'm tempted to make you list them, but it's unnecessary as there's overwhelming evidence that seat belts ultimately detract from the road toll, not increase it.

I believe that a majority of traffic laws (Seat belt, speed, etc., etc.) serve only as revenue for the state. These laws are either unnecessary or counterproductive, in my opinion, and should be repealed as their only true benefit to society (*cough* *cough*, the government) is that it brings in a ton revenue from traffic tickets.

If you have a better idea to enforce a speed limit, traffic signals and road etiquette without a fine-based system, I'd love to hear it.

1. Because that is the only credible argument that has been presented. If you give me a credible statistic as to how many people die annually due to someone else not wearing a seat belt, I will consider that argument as well.



2. A friend of my fathers drowned because he was suspended upside down in a body of water, while he was wearing his seat belt. Had he not been wearing a seat belt, he would have probably survived. Therefore, the state is liable for his death because of the mandatory seat belt law.

for the 3,000th time: I am not arguing against seat belts., but the many cases where a seat belt has caused a death in turn makes the state liable because of mandatory seat belt legislation



3. Here is my shocking and unearthly idea: Don't enforce them.


Here is my shocking and unearthly reason: It isn't the government's job

[Comalander]

If you have a better idea to enforce a speed limit, traffic signals and road etiquette without a fine-based system, I'd love to hear it.

I'm not Comalander, but I have a better idea to enforce road rules than imposing fines.

Impose community service.

Not everone values their time equally, but it's a lot more equal than how they value a sum of money. We all have the same number of hours in a year, but we don't at all have the same number of dollars to pay a fine. The disparity in how people value their time is surely less than the disparity in ability to pay.

Slightly over the speed limit, first offence? That's four hours community service (instead of $30 fine ... four hours at minimum wage). That'll make them think twice about saving ten minutes to get somewhere.

So temporary debt slavery is your answer to minor traffic infractions? Ok, got it.

[AiliailiA]

What makes you think what I said reflected the former and not the latter? Protecting people from themselves is not why seat belts are mandatory, protecting people from other people, directly or indirectly, is.

That's still not really the topic though. That's an answer to the question "why are seatbelts currently mandatory?" The OP disagrees with that being enough, hence the discussion. It's admittedly a rather large logical hurdle, but it's still what the topic is.

EDIT: Clarifying what I'm saying a little. "Protecting people from themselves is not why seat belts are mandatory, protecting people from other people, directly or indirectly, is." That's an argument for using seatbelts, as well as for them being mandatory. it's only natural that someone who disagrees with the premise would present a different one.

Seatbelts aren't that mandatory. It's just a fine (in the US; in the UK it's points off the license and with repeat offenses can lead to being denied the legal opportunity to drive at all). In two fifths of the US states, you can't be fined for it at all unless you commit some other traffic offense.

The UK has half the rate of fatalities per vehicle-kilometer. Though of course there may be some other reason for that.

[Comalander]

Because "are seat belts a good idea?" isn't the question. It's "should seat belts be mandatory?". That's a fairly crucial distinction, and while we come down on the same side of it, let's be honest about it.

What makes you think what I said reflected the former and not the latter? Protecting people from themselves is not why seat belts are mandatory, protecting people from other people, directly or indirectly, is.

Once again, please provide me with a source that says people flying through their windshields, striking, and killing bystanders, is a common occurrence.

[Costa Fierro]

I'm not Comalander, but I have a better idea to enforce road rules than imposing fines.

Impose community service.

Not everone values their time equally, but it's a lot more equal than how they value a sum of money. We all have the same number of hours in a year, but we don't at all have the same number of dollars to pay a fine. The disparity in how people value their time is surely less than the disparity in ability to pay.

Slightly over the speed limit, first offence? That's four hours community service (instead of $30 fine ... four hours at minimum wage). That'll make them think twice about saving ten minutes to get somewhere.

So temporary debt slavery is your answer to minor traffic infractions? Ok, got it.

Slavery? What kind of asinine bullshit did are you trying to pull?

[Twilight Imperium]

What makes you think what I said reflected the former and not the latter? Protecting people from themselves is not why seat belts are mandatory, protecting people from other people, directly or indirectly, is.

Once again, please provide me with a source that says people flying through their windshields, striking, and killing bystanders, is a common occurrence.

If I recall correctly from previous posts, it's less the "human cannonball" thing and more about being thrown away from controls/into passengers. And some people mention the increased cost of cleaning up your corpse, which is silly and disgusting.

[Comalander]

Once again, please provide me with a source that says people flying through their windshields, striking, and killing bystanders, is a common occurrence.

If I recall correctly from previous posts, it's less the "human cannonball" thing and more about being thrown away from controls/into passengers. And some people mention the increased cost of cleaning up your corpse, which is silly and disgusting.

Well I would appreciate a source on that too.

Also, the cost of cleaning up a corpse (Picking it up and putting in the ambulance) goes into the wage of the EMT, so that money was going to be spent anyway.

[Comalander]

So temporary debt slavery is your answer to minor traffic infractions? Ok, got it.

Slavery? What kind of asinine bullshit did are you trying to pull?

I could swear I put some words in front of that...

[Costa Fierro]

Slavery? What kind of asinine bullshit did are you trying to pull?

I could swear I put some words in front of that...

So you think fines are the equivalent to slavery?

[Comalander]

I could swear I put some words in front of that...

So you think fines are the equivalent to slavery?

I am referring to civil service. AKA forced labor for not following arbitrary rules.

[AiliailiA]

I'm not Comalander, but I have a better idea to enforce road rules than imposing fines.

Impose community service.

Not everone values their time equally, but it's a lot more equal than how they value a sum of money. We all have the same number of hours in a year, but we don't at all have the same number of dollars to pay a fine. The disparity in how people value their time is surely less than the disparity in ability to pay.

Slightly over the speed limit, first offence? That's four hours community service (instead of $30 fine ... four hours at minimum wage). That'll make them think twice about saving ten minutes to get somewhere.

So temporary debt slavery is your answer to minor traffic infractions? Ok, got it.

You can have prison if you prefer.

You take these "minor traffic infractions" far too lightly. Motor accidents are the leading cause up death up into the mid twenties for people in the US. Including children, who obviously don't have the option to get out of their parent's unsafe care and drive their own.

The bitterest irony is that the people who stand to gain most by being required to wear seat belts are the same ones who complain most bitterly about it being an infraction of their rights.

If you want to risk your life for fun, go base jumping or horse riding. Go somewhere remote, where your risk taking does not endanger others. Instead of screwing up the publicly owned infrastructure that so many productive citizens rely on.

Tragedy of the commons really. We wouldn't need speed limits or even traffic lights, but for a minority of dicks who think they own the road.

[Comalander]

So temporary debt slavery is your answer to minor traffic infractions? Ok, got it.

You can have prison if you prefer.

You take these "minor traffic infractions" far too lightly. Motor accidents are the leading cause up death up into the mid twenties for people in the US. Including children, who obviously don't have the option to get out of their parent's unsafe care and drive their own.

The bitterest irony is that the people who stand to gain most by being required to wear seat belts are the same ones who complain most bitterly about it being an infraction of their rights.

If you want to risk your life for fun, go base jumping or horse riding. Go somewhere remote, where your risk taking does not endanger others. Instead of screwing up the publicly owned infrastructure that so many productive citizens rely on.

Tragedy of the commons really. We wouldn't need speed limits or even traffic lights, but for a minority of dicks who think they own the road.

Please provide me with a credible source of how many people die annually due to someone else not wearing a seat belt.

[AiliailiA]

So you think fines are the equivalent to slavery?

I am referring to civil service. AKA forced labor for not following arbitrary rules.

You find that so offensive, compared to cash fines? Why?

[Comalander]

I am referring to civil service. AKA forced labor for not following arbitrary rules.

You find that so offensive, compared to cash fines? Why?

Because cash is the fruit of someones labor, and can usually be replaced or re-earned.

You can't replace someones time. Multiple hours of forced labor definitely isn't the answer to traffic infractions.

[Costa Fierro]

So you think fines are the equivalent to slavery?

I am referring to civil service. AKA forced labor for not following arbitrary rules.

Arbitrary rules? Listen, I don't believe that community service is right for traffic violations. But it isn't "slavery". Community service is simply you making amends to the damage to society. If you sprayed graffiti, you should be made to clean it up. That's how it works.

Simple fines and even license suspensions for repeat offenders work fine. If fines are overdue, just crush their car. If that fails, prison. In an ideal world, those who rack up more than $10,000 in fines should have property seized to that value and sold by the government.

[AiliailiA]

You can have prison if you prefer.

You take these "minor traffic infractions" far too lightly. Motor accidents are the leading cause up death up into the mid twenties for people in the US. Including children, who obviously don't have the option to get out of their parent's unsafe care and drive their own.

The bitterest irony is that the people who stand to gain most by being required to wear seat belts are the same ones who complain most bitterly about it being an infraction of their rights.

If you want to risk your life for fun, go base jumping or horse riding. Go somewhere remote, where your risk taking does not endanger others. Instead of screwing up the publicly owned infrastructure that so many productive citizens rely on.

Tragedy of the commons really. We wouldn't need speed limits or even traffic lights, but for a minority of dicks who think they own the road.

Please provide me with a credible source of how many people die annually due to someone else not wearing a seat belt.

You? The poster who misquoted a dictionary, and called it an "official" source?

You? The poster who attacked an 1981 article from the NYT for not having hyperlinks in it?

You? The poster who brought just one source to whole thread, a one-page pdf which you didn't read closely enough yourself and misrepresented by a factor of ONE THOUSAND TIMES?

No. You don't deserve a source. Reply to my post, or don't reply to my post. I won't play you silly game.

[Comalander]

I am referring to civil service. AKA forced labor for not following arbitrary rules.

Arbitrary rules? Listen, I don't believe that community service is right for traffic violations. But it isn't "slavery". Community service is simply you making amends to the damage to society. If you sprayed graffiti, you should be made to clean it up. That's how it works.

Simple fines and even license suspensions for repeat offenders work fine. If fines are overdue, just crush their car. If that fails, prison. In an ideal world, those who rack up more than $10,000 in fines should have property seized to that value and sold by the government.

So if someone forgets to wear their seat belt too many times, their car should be destroyed, their property seized, and they should be imprisoned. All for a "crime" that has no victim. How can you possibly see that as just?

There is no such thing as a victimless crime.

[Comalander]

Please provide me with a credible source of how many people die annually due to someone else not wearing a seat belt.

You? The poster who misquoted a dictionary, and called it an "official" source?

You? The poster who attacked an 1981 article from the NYT for not having hyperlinks in it?

You? The poster who brought just one source to whole thread, a one-page pdf which you didn't read closely enough yourself and misrepresented by a factor of ONE THOUSAND TIMES?

No. You don't deserve a source. Reply to my post, or don't reply to my post. I won't play you silly game.

1. Oh please for God's sake tell me how I misquoted this http://lmgtfy.com/?q=war+definition

2. Where did I say hyperlinks? Are you implying it was impossible to cite things before the internet existed?

3. I misread, yes. Did that at all change what I said? no.

4. Did you seriously just say "I don't have to prove myself because you aren't worthy."?

[AiliailiA]

You find that so offensive, compared to cash fines? Why?

Because cash is the fruit of someones labor, and can usually be replaced or re-earned.

You can't replace someones time. Multiple hours of forced labor definitely isn't the answer to traffic infractions.

Not all traffic infractions I should say.

A parking offense for instance (like leaving your car for three hours in a two hour parking zone) doesn't deserve that kind of punishment. I'd apply inconvenience: eg, wheel-locking the car for an hour after the infringing driver arrives to drive it away.

Yep, impound their property. Inconvience them to the exact same extent they inconvenienced others.

You'd much rather pay the fine wouldn't you?

Working for minimum wage at some job you don't have much choice in, that's horrible punishment isn't it?

Well that's just why I say that a cash fine is unfair punishment. Because some people don't have much choice in their employment, and they can't get more than minimum wage. They're going to have to do four hours work (and probably less pleasant work than community service) to pay off that fine which you shrug off as no big deal.

So let's change the equation. I'll give you a choice of an hour's community service, or pay the $35 dollar fine. OK?

[Costa Fierro]

So if someone forgets to wear their seat belt too many times, their car should be destroyed, their property seized, and they should be imprisoned. All for a "crime" that has no victim. How can you possibly see that as just?

The whole point of fines is that people don't. And who said it was just? You break the law, you should be punished. If you're "forgetful" enough to rack up over $1,000 worth of fines, should you really be driving?

Seat belts are a common sense thing. The laws are there simply to remind people of this. Yes, it's a fine. Most people get a warning though.

[Comalander]

Sorry everybody, I let my inner anarchist and pre-coffee pissy attitude get the best of me.

However, I've now had my coffee

Now, back to business. I feel that this thread has gone around in circles over and over again, therefore the only logical thing to do is to agree to disagree. If you desperately want my input or reply to anything you said, feel free to TG me, because I am now removing myself from the thread.

I thank all of you for your intelligent debate and discussion, and I also thank everyone for remaining mature (for the most part).

Have a wonderful day, ladies and gentlemen, and don't let anyone silence your vociferous opinions.

Damn, coffee puts me in a good mood