Safe Speed Forums

Similar views Ern -

One colleague had one prang , wrote van off - he walked away(he was wearing belt ,and honestly -it saved his life) . Another crash on same corner (incidentally the same one that featured on the cyclist crash on A82 ,Carr's Corner ),driver was saved by not wearing belt -((wood in rear came through rear window of pickup).In my case -no conclusive evidence - all passengers recieved no injuries when hit from behind - although the car that rammed me ,after getting hit a second time --the driver was hurt,despite belt .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

You can't take into consideration the feelings of the person responsible for clearing up after an accident caused or exacerbated by a motorists own actions, not on this forum anyway - it doesn't matter how bad they feel, because mentioning it is simply emotional blackmail.
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15817&p=154754#p154754

Apparently, if your former employee couldn't cope with it, he should have got himself a nice office job.

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

He was a volunteer.. giving up his FREE time to do this. which place him up at toppest rung of the fireman's ladder as person.

I am not sure penalty pointing ist right direction. You need the cops out there. But then there will be biggest initial PR und then it fizzle out to status quo as with the Handy phone law

I still think Jimmy Saville und the Green Cross Code man, along with Tufty seem to pitch it right. There ist a web site somewhere where you can still see these gems. I think they are better than the current ones.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

As a taxidriver, or as a passenger of same, in New York State, no one is required to wear a seat belt. There are other occupations which entail driving, that expressly go out of their way to state that wearing a seat belt is not required. I have no idea why.

I wear my seat belt anyway, regardless of what I'm driving, or whether I'm driving, or even if I'm a passenger.

Just because everyone should wear their seatbelt, however, doesn't mean anyone should be legally required to do so, or legally / financially penalized for failing to do so.

I have trouble forming the words as to why, and I don't want to say things like, "Well, why not make smoking completely illegal?" ...

I just came up with the idea that the people who pay fines for not wearing it, will pay for those who don't wear it and die when they could have lived, but we all know that's not how it works.

The closest thing I could see as sensible, would be to report your not wearing a seat belt to your insurance company, who will then offer you the option of saving up for the possibility that you will have to cover the increased costs of cleaning up your mistake in judgement, should that come to pass. (If it doesn't, you win!) Again, we all know that's not how it works. (Why can't you get back the money you've paid for insurance if you manage to 'retire from driving' with a spotless record, by the way?)

There is something inherently wrong with this, and the fact that I can't yet clearly state why, doesn't change my conviction.

{edit]
Seat belt law petition to No 10
Is there really such a thing as an original idea?

"I am right for wearing my seat belt. You are wrong for fining me for failure to do so." I suppose that doesn't sum up my argument, because I still haven't figured out why, but ...
[/edit]

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

I know what you mean.

As I have said before, "Safety" legislation is insidious because;

1)There is ALWAYS something you can do to make things safer!

2) "Safety" rules are difficult to oppose (You dont want to help make the world safer/a better place, think of the children etc etc???)

So it gets worse and worse. Socioty seems incapable of drawing a line in the sand and saying "Thats safe enough" and accepting that further accedents are, well, acceptable! Even if, in theory, something could be done to prevent them!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

Could not agree more!

This is me running to work in my protective suit...



Seriously though. There is no line! It's rediculous!

I'm going to put my googles on now and stay in bed all day.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

I like your sig too ...
I know this isn't exactly logical either, but I will set aside what John Adams has to say about Risk Compensation ...
Risky Business
Clumsy Perspective

Aside from those who get to spend the money, who benefits from anyone being fined for not wearing their seatbelt?

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

At the risk of slight topic drift, the "Safety disease" mentality also affects other aspects of socioty.

EG

There is ALWAYS something you can do to reduce polution.

There is ALWAYS something you can do to improve MPG

There is ALWAYS something you can do to make a sick person live a little longer!

And so on and so on!

Just because we CAN do all these things doesnt mean that we SHOULD, but can you see any politician having the guts to say "enough is enough"

it it not only costing us a fortune, I believe it is actually damaging the fabric of our socioty by distorting our collective perception of realistic expectations and by diverting resourses from projects that might be of greater long term importance.

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

Those who are employed at the public expense to seek out, prosecute, fine, etc etc seat belt villins!

IE Policeman, administrators, lawyers, judges, magistrates DVLA penpushers and so on.

Just like speed cams, it is not so much a "Source of revenue" as a way of conning us that un-employment levels are falling by keeping large numbers of useless people in useless jobs at the public expense while at the same time claiming not to have "Raised taxes" to pay for it!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

With reference to your slight topic drift Dusty.

With companies, it’s never enough to make a profit each year. It has to be a better profit than the previous year

At grass roots level, if a postman delivers 500 letters one day there’s no reason you can’t go for 510 the next day - or the same in less time.

As Rush will know, there’s an expression which goes better cheaper faster – pick any two?

But in reality the expectation is to push for all three until something, or someone, breaks!

The “fabric” which slowly tears leads to a dysfunctional society in the form of crime, drugs, drink, depression etc… But this has to be covered up or figures manipulated in order to get re/elected.

In my own work, I have been shot down in flames for daring to tell it as it is. As the the late great Sir John Harvey Jones once said, (approximately) "You can't keep getting more of better".

If it’s brown and it came from a bull’s bottom, I know what it’s called even if others can’t or won’t recognise it.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Anyone who is involved in a car crash where their seatbelt saves their life and who would otherwise have been inclined not to wear it were it not for the fact that its 'the law'.
Lets forget the cynical 'revenue raising' white noise for now, fining people for not wearing their seatbelt is meant to punish them for not doing so and to deter others from doing the same.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Agreed.


It's nonsense anyway as fining people for not wearing a seat belt involves a net cost as it requires a stop by an actual traffic copper and can't be automated.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

True... but we still find umpteen who do not wear them all the same

I still think the old "Cluck Click" and the two current "Think!" adverts are a useful educational mean - and should be more prominent in peak viewing slots.



True. You do need a cop to stop this just as you need cops out there to nail the Hand-held mobile phone drivers

But again - we are back to "discretion" If the person has just set off from a car park or whatever - it can be a mere oversight and usually just a quiet painless reminding chat can educate this type better.

Penalty pointing this offence or transgression could be more akin to using a sledge hammer to crack a monkey nut all the same ... The current fine does work and maybe increasing the fine levy rather than penalty pointing might be one possibility.

Even.. just to mull over in the discussion
Or reducing the fine/waiving a first penalty point (if this is introduced ) provided the miscreant attends the courses as offered by all emergency services in turn ...

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

I guess what I'm trying to say, is that:

a) I usually wear it anyway, to stay in the center of the seat, and to avoid using the steering wheel to do so (I am no longer fit enough to keep it on while making change for and collecting fares; it comes off whenever the car isn't in gear)
b) I don't need anyone telling me to wear it ... and frankly, neither do you ... do you?
c) a dangerous precedent is being maintained by allowing the government to act as a parent
d) if they really wanted you to wear it that badly, you would only be able to put the car in gear if your seat belt was fastened (unless you had ordered the police package, or somesuch)

We'd all rather we'd all wear them, but giving someone the right to punish anyone for not doing so is a form of masochism enabled by several denials.

On the other hand, if the only reason why you wear your seat belt is for fear of reprisal for not wearing it, then perhaps you are in need of remedial education ... but how do we find you before you wreck yourself?

I suppose a fine is much more profitable than preventive education ... which I'm sure the fine pays for, right?

The vast majority of my friends and family wear theirs, and I am grateful, as I am certain they are that I wear mine.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Firstly I should say that I have always "Chosen" to wear a belt (since long before it was a requirement) Also, as "Captain" of my Ship, I require all passangers to wear belts too (Always have done I)

ISTM that there are essentially two issues here.

1) Personal freedom of choice. In much the same was as freedom of speech means accepting that people will say things that you dont like.(otherwise the concept is meaningless) Freedom of choice means that you have to accept that people will make bad choices! (otherwise, again, the concept is meaningless)

To my mind, The law should only become involved where peoples freedom to make bad choices may significantly affect other peoples welfare. (for example, it may be acceptable to complell rear passanges to wear belts but to allow front occupants to make a free choice)

However, none of this would prevent government agencys from attempting to educate people.

2) The second issue is more subtle. Do seatbelts reduce deaths/serious injuries?? Seems obvious that they would do, certainly at an individual level it is obvious that (except in the rarest of cases) one would be better off restrained. But what is the effect over a population of tens of millions of drivers?? Seatbelt law opponants suggest that the risk compensation effects will make accedents more likly thus, at a national level, the effect of enforced use are neutralised as far as accedent reduction is concerned.

(A bit like the Mobi ban. talking/driving accedents are rare! whilst usage is common (even with the ban). it is possible that the added stress of millions of drivers every day either worriing about missing calls, or taking them but watching out for , might cause far more accedents than "Talking and driving" ever did!)

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

1) Then what:
a) is preventing such education
b) is / are the motive[s] behind the misinformation taking the place of the real education?

2) Technically, I guess that makes me an opponent of both 'seat belt laws' and 'mobile phone laws' as they are right now. I don't buy the party line that any government has done or does it to save lives, and even if it were statistically proven to do so, I would consider it incidental, and of no indication of the real motive[s].

[Run-on sentences follow]
How many people really buy the line that speaking on a cellphone has the same effect on driving as a .08% BAC? Of course we all know that some people are much worse at a .08% BAC than others, and that it takes different amounts of time for different people to reach and maintain what is actually a different level of impairment for each person, right?

Paul Smith already detected changes in the manner in which KSI statistics were being 'reinterpreted' to produce more favorable results. I'm pretty sure that the manner in which KSI statistics are recorded today - in the US and the UK - would make it difficult, if not impossible, to notice how many more pedestrains might have been KSI'd by drivers whose driving style either got worse, or couldn't get any worse (drunk drivers above .15% BAC), which, by the way, is far more indicative of motive.

Seat belts couldn't possibly ever save this trooper.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

I've noticed a few people recently who have buckled their seatbelt before they've got into the seat. I can only assume that this is because it looks from behind that they are wearing it, although they are actually sitting in front of it.

A motorcycle seems to give a better angle to see whether a belt is being worn. I have observed that on my commute into London, more than one would think don't wear a belt.

Mike.

_________________
www.misspelled-signs.com - A tribute to illiterate signwriters.

My taxi company has some used ex-'police interceptors', but we also have some used civilian Crown Victorias. The latter chime annoyingly every 15 seconds or so, unless the seatbelt is buckled.
Some of the older drivers, and / or those with more laid back driving styles, don't wear their seat belts (and no one should force them to do so, except for themselves), but they do buckle them, and then sit on top of them, circumventing the irritating chimes.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Yes, people buckle them up to put out the warning light and shut up the beeping noise. Especially common with taxi drivers. What I've always wondered is whether the airbag computer in some cars fires the airbags differently depending on whether a belt is being worn or not. It would make sense to do so, I guess.