Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

It is the law, but the big question is, should it be the law for everyone?? This story my husband told me, I just couldn't hardly believe. In a County in Oklahoma, a guy that my husbands works with, was pulled over fined $250 for NO seat belt and taken to jail for 30 days, for NO seat belt, that is the law in that county. To me, that is utterly ridiculous I can't believe that they can legally fine you that much and take you to jail. I can understand that little kids shld be buckled up, I can't stand seeing little toddlers being held by there mother while driving or running around in the car while there mother is driving. Anyway, what do ya'll think?

Well it is to keep people safe but I once heard a story about a mother who was driving and she got pulled over and actly got arrested for not wearing a seatbelt.
She was in a rush to pick her kids from soccor pratise and forgot to put it on.Can you belive this?I don't remember what state it was through.
I think that is going alittle over board through don't you?JM

yeah, wayyyy overboard.

Yes it should be the law, there is NO good reason not to wear a seatbelt, other then laziness or idiocy. Take the extra 2 seconds and buckle the damn belt. Problem solved.

I do agree that that's a bit overboard if it's true, but I'm not sure I fully believe that story, sounds exagerated. I've never heard of anyone going to jail AND getting fined for not wearing a seat belt.

I think it should be the law for people under 18. I don't know why, but it just doesn't seem quite right for that to be illegal

In any case though, as long as it is the law, it's ridiculous to be arresting people for not wearing seatbelts. I've never thought that the stupid things people do harm their own bodies should be illegal. It's not the government's responsibility to try to regulate that kind of thing.

I agree with everything Backfire said.

There are times I'm late for class, but I always put on a seat belt no matter how rushed I feel. There's no excuse not to wear a seat belt.

Common sense dictates that you should wear one.

But do you know why laws were passed to force people to wear them?
Not your safety; $$$$.

Yup, in the mid 80s states were loosing money because of rising insurance premiums, they had to initiate seat belt laws to curb rising rates and collect extra revenue from tickets.

Yes, Finti it does seem very outrageous for it to happen, I kept asking my husband, Are you sure?? Are you sure?? Thats what the guy told hiim out work, he went to jail and was fined. Now they are always fined, but not that much, it's usually around $25.
When me and my brother were kids he was in an accident and was thrown out of the pick-up, had he NOT been thrown out, it could have killed him, SO ever since then I just feel it shld be the persons choice to wear it or not, but kids I do think shld be buckled up.

When you were kids...
Thats the point, Now it much safer if you stay in teh vehicle, they have been engineered that way. Yes Seat belts are nessacary, There are MUCH more accident related injurys prevented with them than they have caused.

It did happen guys this storly is not fake,But it is your choice to belive it or not.JM

Really? I've never thought about that before

It dosnt matter Ill wear one regardless of the law

I don't ever wear a seat belt, unless I see a cop.

Ummmm seat belts keep you inside the car - and not fly out the window~!

Yup Cars today are made so that if hit they break apart, The car absorbs the impact and in energy is vented to the pieces that are coming off, So if you stay in the car you can survive worse crashes, yet if you fly out fo the car you could not only crack you head on pavement, but het hit by the pieces of the car...

well, I never thought of it that way at all. Very good point you have made. For years i've been a rebel against seat belts, except I make my kids wear them, and now i'll need to rethink it all.

O come on - 30 days in jail for no seat belt!!!!! there has to be more to the story than that!

Thats what I kept saying too, some new thing they are trying in that county, well the $250 ticket got me too, thats HIGH

Not only that, but the seat belt worn correctly diagonal, can protect your heart from being crushed and punctured by your rib cage when you are hit head on. The way they are made, they withstand a very large amount of force, so they don't just prevent you from flying out, they are in fact useful.

Well...I have never ever studied about this at all, i'm very impressed with the information, silver tears and Tp. Thxx

Amazing what you learn in Drivers ed....

lol well, I didn't learn that in drivers ed. Good thing you're listening and paying attention hehe

I learned mine from Popular Mechanics for Kids

FE... I hate to break it to you, but not wearing a seatbelt yourself and insisting that your kids do is hardly good parenting.

hehe Thats cool, you had that in high school?

No no, it's a T.V. show, it's actually quite educational

No, I just think that if you want to teach a kid something at a young age, it helps to do what we call setting a good example. Telling your kid to wear a seatbelt but not doing it yourself is akin to telling your kids to never do drugs, then going out and getting stoned, or maybe a prostitute telling her daughter to wait until she's married. I take back what I said originally, this isn't even a parenting skill, this is a basic social skill. People who look up to you and respect you (especially young kids) will to some extent want to be like you.

EDIT: Crappity crap, I thought FE was talking to me

Oh god Nivek, I love you hysterical

I wuv you too

Being a good parent is making sure your kids are safe, right? I do see your point on your next post on setting the example, but...in another thread: the lying about santa you said: Obviously it's lying, because you're telling them something that's not true. But it was always fun as a young'n So, to me lying to your kids is a bad parenting skil, not keeping them safe, although I do see your point on setting the example and I agree w/you, but if you had read my other post you would see why i've never wore a seat belt.

Crush all the iron cages, turn all the roads into dirt roads and make riding a 250cc Kawasaki THE LAW!

There's one aspect I noticed no one has touched upon. Fiery Eyes, say you were driving down the road, your family is wearing their seatbelts, though you are not. Suddenly you get into a little fender bender. The jolt is enough to render you unconcious. Your family, because they are wearing their seatbelts, is COMPLETELY concious. Their knocked out dad is now behind the wheel, and the car goes off a cliff. Everyone dies.

A seatbelt can allow you to continue operating your vehicle after an impact, depending on many variables.

I buckle up without even thinking about it. In fact, I'm buckled up right now.

$250 is a fair amount if you ask me. Ive heard about people in head on crashes who because they werent wearing a seatbelt flew through their windscreen into the other car. By not wearing a seatbelt your not only endangering your own life but other peoples as well. I agree being arrested for it is a little extreme but i think the fine should stand.

I can't understand why anyone would not want to wear a seatbelt, but I don't get why an adult who is in the car by themselves driving around should be fined for not wearing a seatbelt. It's like wearing a helmet on a motorcycle, it's just something you should do out of common sense, not out of law.

so the government gets money

A friend of mine was severely injured in a road accident when the other driver, who wasn't wearing a seat belt, flew through the windscreen of my friend's car.... the man's head collided with my friend's, killing the man, and breaking my friend's neck... so yeah, you're right... why should a guy in the car on his own have to wear a seat belt... in this country everyone has to wear a belt... if any kids don't, the driver of the car gets fined and can get points on his licence... any adults not wearing them get the fine themselves... and as for getting your kids to wear them, but not wearing one yourself... why not put your kids in care now... that's where they'll end up after seeing daddy crash through the screen and get mangled by the truck...

Sorry to hear that kirk.. yeah I guess it is best that everyone should be forced to wear seat belts.

Well, look at it this way:
It's cost alot more than $250 to pay for medical bills because you got in an accident, and got severe injuries because you werent wear a seatbelt which would have secured you to your seat. You instead flew through the windsheild.
You would also be in the hospital/unable to carry out normal activies for much more longer than 30 days if you were to get in such an accident where you would be injured that badly from not wearing your seatbelt.

No you should not have to wear a seatbelt if you dont want to

not unless you want to die when you fly out of your seat through the windshield

k how do some of you people think that it should be a choice? and think only kids should wear seat belts? You donut think kids look up to there parents and do everything they do. you smoke your kids have a higher chance of doing it, you drink your kids have a higher chance of doing it before the legal age, you donut wear your seat belt your kids wont want to. Even if u make them what about when they grow up and drive on there own? they probably wont think its a big deal. Then your teen can get into an accident and die won't you wish u would have pushed them to wear one. Also say you buckle up your kids and donut buckle up yourself....do u really want to get into a accident fly through the windshield and smash against the pavement leaving your kids in the car. The poor kids will see there mommy die and lay there in a bloody mess on the pavement and now they donut have a mommy to take care of them. Why risk having your kids see that? i know if i had kids i wouldn't want my kids to go through that. I think its a great idea to put people in jail for not wearing a seat belt because if you get fined $50 or something u will just pay it off and then jump in your vehicle not wearing a seat belt again.

^thats supposed to be "Don't" must of clicked the wrong one on spellcheck

of course it should be the law, whats the problem with taking a minute to put it on? it can save your life, to me it seems kinda odd that someone wouldn't wear one...

it'd be great if it was a choice, but there are always idiots who will do something stupid and get good drivers killed.

Most of the time you just forget to put it on

yeah i know, i'm guilty of it myself... but think of how many people would be saved if they made sure they remembered...

Of course they should! it saves lives!

Yes, it's only common sense to wear a seat belt.....It definetly saves lives...

I say it should be law, one can never tell when they might have an accident, and really, if someone is rushing to the point where they forget to put it on the chance of an accident could be very well increased. Here in Australia it is law, and you get a fine, and lose points off your license (if you can't pay the fine, then you can pay it off in prison) and at certain times the number of points one loses of the license increases, so that it has been known for people to completely loose their licenses. But that is deserved, I think, its the law, its there to protect, it should be followed.

If the driver cooperated with the officer, which he probably diddnt, but if he did. That sounds like the officer abusing his authority. I owuldnt blame the law on this one, but the officer instead.

Indeed. Surely if the punishment was unjust he could appeal against it, but then there has to be some reason for it, after all police can't sentance a person to jail time, every crime has a limit on possible punishment, and that sounds like the most servere available for driving without a seat bealt...

I'm sure I've been to more car accidents than anyone here. Seriously, if you are concerned about whether or not you should wear your seatbelt, think no more. Wear it. But most importantly, don't speed.

Basically, I think im you're dumb enough not to wear a seat-belt, you deserve to die.

Excellent point you have made there!! Thanks alot, I must say reading everyone's view points on this had made me re-think the seat belt situation. Thanks alot Everyone.

If you dont wear a seatbelf your to stupid to live.

wow, such a profound statement!!! what are you 10? This is a discussion, not to put someone down for doing something YOU don't believe in.

He may be blunt, but he's right in essence. There is no good reason NOT to wear a seat belt. It takes a whole half a second to buckle up, and it takes less then that to unbuckle.

blunt and rude are two diff things, and yes they both can come together at times. Not reason to be rude though

Okay, he may be RUDE but he's still right, the only reasons not to wear a seat belt are stupid ones.

It's not that big of a deal

yes, after reading everyone's points of views, My thoughts are changing towards seatbelts, although the ticket of $250 is still too high i think

I guess the penalty has to be tough, otherwise nobody would obey the law. Even with the penalty there are still those who don't buckle up.

True, just seems a bit steep for me, I think people shld have that choice.

Personally I think many penalties are way too low. Plus, if it's the law, obey it, and you won't pay.

(I really think the littering penalties should soar )

I believe that it should be illegal not to buckle up. The seat belt is not only there to protect your childrens' lives but your lives as well. If you get into a terrible accident that seat belt could save your life.

Yes, it should. It's not like it's that hard to put the seatbelt on anyways, if you don't, you're just a lazy idiot.

No, it shouldn't.

It is a lot like the "riding a bike and wearing a helmet" law. It should be manditory until a certain age. I am personally more comfortable in a car without a seatbelt on. If a person wants to take the risk of dying, let them. It is their own stupid fault.

My father was in an accident around 6 or so years ago, and if he WAS wearing his seatbelt, he would have died. I know seatbelts save more lives then they end, but even so. It should be optional, just like wearing a helmet whilst riding a bike is.

I think that seat belts should be a personal thing, it's a fact that just as many people die from wearing seat belts. It also depends on the person whether they wear one or not. Personally I don't, I would never let a child (under 16) or baby go without one.

Nobody could convince me that they'd still be alive today if they hadn't been wearing a seatbelt....

Like I say, in my country its illegal not to wear a seat belt.... hardly anyone "forgets" to put it on... unless you are grossly overweight it is not uncomfortable... it may be a bit strange at first, but after a very short time you don'yt even notice it.... when I was a child, most cars in this country didn't even have seatbelts, but my parents always paid the extra for them... and my life has been saved on at least two occasions by the belt... also remember, its not just your life you're protecting... I've already mentioned my friend, whose neck was broken by the driver of another vehicle coming throufgh her windscreen... but if you are in the back of a car, you can kill the person in front of you as you fly forwards... they become a sort of human airbag, and save your life... which is also what happens if you ride with a child on your knee in a car...

Seat belts are safe.....wear them while driving.

theres one simple reason it should not be a law. It is unconstitutional to make a law about wearing a seat belt. This is because it does not harm anyone but yourself by not wearing it.. its the same with wearing a helmet on a motorcycle. According to the constitution they can not make a law requiring things like this (thats why some states do not require either)

i always wear my seatbelt and im a licensed motorcyclist and i always wear a helmet.. but this is my choice and it should be everyones choice a law forcing it while it has good intention is not right and it sets a bad precident which can allow further laws that take away more rights

Thank you thank you forumcrew!!! I was waiting for someone to say that. I've been in lots of topics in KMC and lots say on diff topics that WE shld have the CHOICE (like abortion for instance), but you come to this topic and they say it shld be the law, therefore taking your rights away, right? hmmmmmmmmmm
I do feel that kids shld always be buckled up, but i also feel that parents shld have the choice to buckle up or not to buckle. I fully see the reasons why a person shld buckle up, I just feel that WE shld have that choice.

I'm calling you on that.
Where? find it I'd like to see.

where what?

im assuming you mean what state?

I know a lot of places have started the seat belt thing recently
And there is no helmet law in Utah and stupidly enough tons of people dont wear helmets there..

like i said i think its a good idea to wear a helmet and your seat belt but it is simply unconstitutional to force people to do so thats the bottom line

No the constitutional thingy that you mentioned. I'd like to see it.

it doesnt say in the constituion that they can not make a seat belt law..it is not specific like that.. although there is one thing i didnt think of. Most roads (atleast major highways) are government owend so they can require whatever they want including a seatbelt. this is similar to how a fancy restaurant could require a certain dress code.. so on government owned roads they can require seat belts.. suppose i just totaly over looked that fact before.. but still techniclly they shouldnt be ale to require it if you are not on a goverment road

I always wear it apart from when I'm in a taxi

You cannot be arrested just for not wearing a seat belt. Did she have outstanding warrants? Was she drunk? What were the extenuating circumstances regarding this arrest. "I once heard a story" is not enough proof that this is remotely true.



No it is your responsibility to take responsibility for what you have said and prove that it is true. Stating an opinion is one thing, but if you claim something is fact, back it up.



Once again, what were the extenuating circumstances and of which county are you talking about? I would love to check their laws on seat belts.



Although I am Canadian, I'm pretty sure that seat belt laws have nothing to do with the United States' constitution. The founding father's were not reckless, and oh yeah, they had no concept of seat belts or automobiles. And yes, people are often harmed and killed by those who are not wearing seat belts and in an accident. A human body becomes a pretty deadly projectile when not belted in during an accident and if you do any research whatsoever you will see many instances where that has occurred, so your point is moot.

As it has been said before, seat belt laws have been enacted for three reasons:

1. For your own safety

2. For the safety of others (that whole human projectile thing)

3. And mostly to keep insurance costs from going completely insane!

you forgot #4 to generate money for police becuase they aitn getting enough from speeding tickets

Now wait a minute....think about this. Is a safety issue to buckle up while driving. You put gas, oil, put air on the tires, check the brakes and etc.....those are all safety procedures. Why can't you do the same with seat belt? These things are to protect you and other drivers. The seat belts are important for you and your passengers. Just be safe.....nothing to argue about.

Maybe only front seat guys should buckle up.. but let's say the back seat people buckle up and there's a sudden stop or a crash or whatever.. what much is it gonna do? lets say you didnt have it on.. its not like your gonna rip through the front seats and smash through the window..

what? obviously they havent put adds on the tv in australia showing the difference a seatbelt can make - if your in the back seat and not wearing a seatbelt you can fly into the person infront of you causing them serious damage. Also imagine travelling at 70mph on the motorway and having an accident - the force sending you into the seat infront would do way more than mash up your face. And - if you're sitting in the middle u can fly through the windscreen. I think people are underestimating the force that some of these accidents generate.

Last I heard Seatbelts save a lot of lives. and the stories you hear about ppl being thrown out of the car, because they weren't wearing a seatbelt, and therefor surviving the accident are statistically seen a lot smaller.

Again this is what I heard.

Do you really think governments would spend money on advertising campaigns to make people wear seatbelts if they didnt save so many lives?

No I'm all for seatbelts (my bad if I gave the opposite impression)

Safety belts do more than reduce the severity of injuries. They assist the driver in maintaining control of the car in emergency situations.
Being required to buckle up is no more an infringement on personal freedom than being required to turn on headlights at dusk or use a turn indicator to signal a turn or observe any other traffic law.

Car occupants can be killed after being struck by other passengers who are catapulted forward, backward or sideways in a car crash.

lol no dont worry - i didnt sleep too well so probably missing any sarcasm etc...

you don't have to wear them, just don't blame anyone when you lose a few limbs, or heads.

"Car occupants can be killed after being struck by other passengers who are catapulted forward, backward or sideways in a car crash"

Exactly. Can't say I wanna be responsible for killing someone sitting infront of me just because I never had my seatbelt on. Could possibly save a smashed up face also.

-AC

Yes it should be the law... its just something else for someone to lay the blame on when push comes to shove... just like labeling McDonalds coffee "WARNING : HOT BEVERAGE!".... its stupid because we all know coffee is hot.. but some jackass spilled it on herself and sued someone for it..

only in the states I take

That's only a justification for driver seatbelts. Your examples are reasons that protect other people. Following that logic, wearing a rear seatbelt provides safety for no-one other than yourself and so the personal freedom argument remains valid.

Not that I am against the law, just that argument is incomplete.

That is actually because MacDonalds heated the coffee beyond any legal safe standard- that case was actually far more justified than it is often made out to be.

Actually if you read most of this thread you will see that more than one person has made the point that passengers not wearing seatbelts can become human projectiles and kill the person(s) sitting in front of them. So that personal freedom argument does not remain valid.



Even if that coffee was heated to the point that it was hotter than Molten Lava, common sense dictates that a fresh cup of coffee is VERY VERY HOT. The degree of it's temperature is a moot point. That person sued because a lawyer saw dollar signs. In the end every pays for these frivolous lawsuits and people's lack of common sense.

A man sued an ice rink because when he walked out on the ice and cracked his head open. Does he have a case because the ice was too slippery or too hard. I think not.

"Even if that coffee was heated to the point that it was hotter than Molten Lava, common sense dictates that a fresh cup of coffee is VERY VERY HOT. The degree of it's temperature is a moot point."

Well if you are handed a cup of fresh coffee that is heated to regulation temperature, the cups provided will protect you from burning. If you were THEN to be an ass and spill it, it's your own fault. If you pick up a cup of coffee heated to a ridiculously high level, the protection of the cup that the proprietor is obligated to provide, is rendered useless. So if on contact, you are burnt and as a result, spill the coffee on yourself, you have every right to sue.

-AC

But I would have to presume that that cup of coffee was handed to that person by another person who's hand, by absence of a second lawsuit, I have to conclude was not burned.

Alot of the times it's just filled while it's on a tray though. The case may be that it was safely heated. Just saying that the degree to which said beverage is heated isn't necessarily moot.

-AC

seatbelt laws are a scam to make money i mean no one ever voted on this law and think how much money they make off it

Precisely..

NO. This was NOT a frivilous lawsuit, and the perception that it was is an inaccurate one. There are plenty of frivulous lawsuits around, but this was not one. The amount of ways in which Macdonalds callously contributed towards a lack of safety with a high-risk product were many and they were comprehensively defeated in court due to that problem.

She sued because there is no way in hell any outlet should serve customers material that can give them third degree burns- as their superheated coffee could. It was actively illegal. Since the suit they have stopped heating it to such ridiculous temperatures. People know coffee is hot- NO-ONE thinks it is going to be THAT hot (a clear 45 degrees hotter than coffee normally done at home or at most other outlets), and MacDonalds had made no provision for the problem.

Seriously, MacDonalds were TOTALLY in the wrong on this one, and had carried on with this practice despite clear evidence presented in the trial that they KNEW it was wrong, and their only excuse was that statistically they did not think many people were going to get burned that way- hardly a defence. Their own quality assurance manager in the trial testified under oath that MacDonalds knew the practice was a burns hazard, and that quite deliberatly the policy was that "while burns would occur, McDonald's had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee." Which is to say they deliberately continued with the practice despite having found out for themselves that it was unsafe- and the jury verdict aside, the whole experience led to the judge going out of his way to comment that McDonald's conduct had been "reckless, callous and willful."

And on top of that, her compensatory damages were reduced by 20% in acknowledgement of the fact that the spillage was her fault. But that was not the central point- McDonalds should not have been supplying such a criminally dangerous product in the first place.

That lawsuit was totally deserved, and anyone who thinks otherwise has simply been taken in by a lazy culture of criticising everything in law.

And incidentally, the containers are labelled because other people might not know what is in it if they pick it up. They is amazingly sensible safety legislation- anything that can be dangerous, should be labelled as such. People are too quick to criticise.

-

"Actually if you read most of this thread you will see that more than one person has made the point that passengers not wearing seatbelts can become human projectiles and kill the person(s) sitting in front of them. So that personal freedom argument does not remain valid."

Then she can add that to her argument, but it still did not stand alone.

McDonald's was following NCAUSA guidlines. SHe had more of a case against them then Micky D's, but Mickie D's has more money.

"Coffee is supposed to be served in the range of 185 degrees! The National Coffee Association recommends coffee be brewed at "between 195-205 degrees Fahrenheit for optimal extraction" and drunk "immediately". If not drunk immediately, it should be "maintained at 180-185 degrees Fahrenheit". (Source: NCAUSA.)

The plaintiffs documented 700 cases of burns from McDonald's coffee over 10 years. That works out to one injury per every 24 million cups of coffee sold at McDonald's in the US. So for every burn victim 23, 999 999 people drank their coffee safely. McDonald's did not exhibit "willful, wanton, reckless or malicious conduct.

Add what exactly to my argument?

not to mention I dont see those people getting reparations for their burns as the fool who took it to court did...because they realised it was their fault for spilling it on themselves