I know what you're saying about number of accidents vs severity of injury from those accidents
But I'm not sure he's aware of that nuance. And it'll do him no good intertwined in his steering wheel.
(, Sat 3 Dec 2022, 20:21, Reply)
I would never not wear a seatbelt, nor is anybody who sits behind me allowed not to.
But something about the legislative system that won’t outlaw people’s stupidity and blatant disregard for their own self preservation appeals to me. We are fine with all kinds of idiots believing all kind of bullshit like religion, so, if someone believes it’s a good idea not to wear one, leave them to it. Compared to what billions of religious people think, it really isn’t so nuts.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Sat 3 Dec 2022, 21:45,
Reply)
Totally with you.
However, I suspect that one of the reasons that they're mandatory is due to the risk posed to third parties by unbelted passengers/drivers during collisions.
'Victim ejected from vehicle' is a very real thing, and when your car decelerates from 40mph to 0mph in the blink of an eye, the fleshy sacks of blood and bone don't - and won't until something impedes their trajectory.
The chances of actually going through the windscreen of a car made after 1990 are pretty slim, but you're a lot more likely to inflict serious injuries on whoever is in the car with you should you choose to travel unrestrained.
I won't link it here, but there's a video showing a car rolling after a colission and literally flinging an occupant out of a side window a good 15-20 feet in the air. They should probably show that to the anti-belt fuckwits.
(, Sun 4 Dec 2022, 20:40, Reply)
An adult didn’t have to wear a seatbelt in the back till 1991. Kids aged 14 and under since 1989.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Sun 4 Dec 2022, 20:46,
Reply)
I remember.
I also remember how put out my uncle was by the whole thing. I was in single figures at the time, but even then I remember thinking it was perfectly reasonable.
(, Sun 4 Dec 2022, 20:52, Reply)
