Hmm...This law is all I heard about on the News over the Memorial Day weekend, but I can't find any info online about it.... 
amish
amish
I am against laws that stop people from hurting THEMSELVES.
It's one thing to make a law to stop someone from hitting someone else with a basebat bat, but it's another thing entirely to make a law that stops someone from hitting THEMSELF with a baseball bat.
It's one thing to make a law to stop someone from hitting someone else with a basebat bat, but it's another thing entirely to make a law that stops someone from hitting THEMSELF with a baseball bat.
Buy health insurance from a company that doesn't insure motorcyclists who don't wear helmets then. How much a private company charges you for a service has absolutely no bearing at all on what aspects of the public's lives the government can control.
If your electric company decided they would lower prices by 5 percent if everyone in the country was wearing "XYZ electric company" T-shirts, would yo be in favor of a law mandating that everyone must always wear those T-shirts while in public?
XZeroII
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2001
- 12,572
- 0
- 0
It's not a new law, the media just finally got a hold of it. If I ever get pulled over and a cop just checks to see if I'm wearing a seatbelt, then tells me to go (I wear it), I will sue the police for an illegal search. The constitution is the ultimate law and no law can contradict it.
Bahahahaha!
Works great in theory, doesn't work at all in reality. They'll search your car. Or you'll be sitting there outside with your hands on your car for 4 hours and the cops will munch on donuts and drink coffee while their lights are shining on you while they wait for that warrant. When their shift is up and they want to go home, they'll tell you that they have no warrant and you can go home now.
actually medical costs for unhelmeted rider are lower because usually they die
You could make a case for life insurance, except usually "high risk" behavior is excluded.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Sorry, my taxes help pay for the ambulance drivers, (the ambulance), etc. And my taxes pay for medicaid and medicare. And, I pay insurance premiums. And the costs for unemployment and disability come out of my paycheck as well. All of these cost *ME* more money because some morons think that their choice of not wearing a seatbelt or helmet has no effect on me.
This doesn't even factor in the increased amount of time emergency personnel spend at accident scenes where there's been an injury or fatality. Slows down traffic, again having an effect on me. No one likes being in a traffic jam because someone screwed up driving... (And, I like the philosophy of the NY state troopers..(at least around here).. Accident = ticket, with the possible exception of hitting a deer. Otherwise, the cause is generally a driver's mistake.
The police don't just pull you over to check to see if you have a seatbelt on... any policeman with 2 eyes can see if the front seat occupants are wearing the shoulder belts. They still need a cause to pull you over, and that's sufficient cause.
This doesn't even factor in the increased amount of time emergency personnel spend at accident scenes where there's been an injury or fatality. Slows down traffic, again having an effect on me. No one likes being in a traffic jam because someone screwed up driving... (And, I like the philosophy of the NY state troopers..(at least around here).. Accident = ticket, with the possible exception of hitting a deer. Otherwise, the cause is generally a driver's mistake.
The police don't just pull you over to check to see if you have a seatbelt on... any policeman with 2 eyes can see if the front seat occupants are wearing the shoulder belts. They still need a cause to pull you over, and that's sufficient cause.
Here's your probably cause right here- "Oh, I thought I saw your passenger not wearing a seatbelt. My mistake. Please step aside while I search your car."
I think it's a new federal law. Most stats already have it as a law. Personally I think it should be up to the states to decide whether the law is right.
pyonir
Lifer
- Dec 18, 2001
- 40,856
- 321
- 126
despite what you may believe in your "everyone is out to get me" world, this doesn't happen all that often. They have to have probable cause to search your car as well, regardless of why they stopped you. Anything that the officer finds would probably get thrown out in court as an illegal search if you hire a good enough lawyer.
That is faulty logic there. You are trying to claim you have some say in this matter just because a very minor circumstantial cost can possibly come to you. How much higher is insurance in states where people are allowed to ride without helmets? Not very much, if at all.
The indirect, circumstantial effect on you is nothing compared to the direct effect on someone else. If everyone was allowed to have a say in matters no matter how small the impact on them was, you'd have people suing because they merely saw a crime take place.
In my world, nobody is out to get me. I'm older, I'm 27 now and police do not randomly mess with me the way they did when I was 17-early 20's.
And the fault in your argument is that even if you did get the case thrown out by hiring a good lawyer, a good chunk of money still came out of your pocket.
It is necessary, as you not wearing a seatbelt directly effects me. If you get in an accident weather or not it's your fault, it will effect me. There will be huge medical bills and my insurance will go up. The more people who wear seatbelts, the lower the fatality rate/injury rate will be and as such the lower insurance will cost for everyone. Your freedoms only go as far as that they don't infringe on my freedoms.
pyonir
Lifer
- Dec 18, 2001
- 40,856
- 321
- 126
It isn't a fault in my argument, because the chance is so low of something like that happening, it isn't even worth talking about.
EDIT: not to mention you can file a civil suit against the department/county/state that wasted your time and money and receive damages.
It's a good thing since every new car nowadays has an airbag. If you don't have your seat belt on and your air bag goes off you are in a world of hurt.
Yeah, I remember having a neighbor that loved to crank up the subwoofer and for some reason its volume and level of annoyance were always directly related to the amount of work I had in front of me.
How many times did I imagine my booted foot driving straight through the front of each speaker and then smashing down on the top of that evil subwoofer heel first? But instead, I was forced to sit quietly in anger because of the laws against such actions - laws enacted with complete disregard of my personal desires.
Stupid civilized society with its ignorant laws restricting my freedom of choice to act on my every whim.
Just kidding - I understand what you mean about freedom to act when the action will only affect ourselves. Many times state actions are justified on the basis of the state's interest in maintaining a viable society in order to benefit society as a whole. Although it may seem that you are only affecting yourself if you die because of no seatbelt, this view states that we all suffer for the loss of a productive member of society.
I personally agree that, in areas such as this, we should be free to choose. If someone can't expend the simple effort to click a buckle when it can save his life, well...
That is a very weak line of logic commonly used by people who want to have a say in the matter. You are NOT directly affected. Insurance is a PRIVATE institution, and you cannot claim to have say over legal issues because a private company decides to charge you more due to someone else's stupidity.
Did you ever look at how much insurance companies are making? They are not strapped for cash, and you won't see them take the loss- they'll pass it on to you. Just because they do that does not give you, me, or anyone else the right to lay claim to someone else's rights.
Using that same exact line of logic, we could say this: We all know that eating fast food and red meat is bad for you in the long run, and eventually those consumers will end up needing healthcare (healthcare you pay for) becasue of it. Therefore we should ban fast food and the eating of red meat.
Oh come on, you just tried to take an easy was out there.
The chances are NOT so low. This routinely happens to people.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter