Utah’s new seat-belt law. Big government? Really?

[Moonbeam]

Personally i don't get it. I Can't drive without a seat-belt. i just feel naked without it. It's not just a safety issue for the driver but others. if you get in a wreck you can fly out the window and kill someone.

Crap,what a worthless jerk I am. I wear the belt but I never even thought about becoming a deadly missile. I'm going to have to work on my social skill.

 

[HeXen]

Been a law here for years. But driving is a privilege, not a right. Seatbelts are part of your responsibility as a privileged driver on tax payer's roads.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Next up; the law of gravity infringes on American rights! Who does The Earth think it is by telling me I can't go flying into space!? What right does Earth have in keeping me here, grounded?!

1st we bow down to the Earth on Earth day.

Then we are placed under Earths oppressive thumb (gravity) 24/7. It's not right.

Look at Mars, planet with the least gravitational pull - and it's doing just fine! Zero crime. Zero corruption. Zero oppression.

What war did we lose?

 

[sportage]

Personally i don't get it. I Can't drive without a seat-belt. i just feel naked without it. It's not just a safety issue for the driver but others. if you get in a wreck you can fly out the window and kill someone.

DUCK! Good point.

I'd think a good seat belt law would also lower insurance rates for all in that state?
Who doesn't like saving a buck? Or two?
And then we have NASCAR. The professionals never climb behind the wheel without strapping on that seat belt. And I'd be willing to bet not only on the track, but also on the way to and from the track.

But like I said, there will always be people that will turn anything into an attack on their personal freedoms.
Well, I guess there are no laws against ones ignorance? Yet....

 

[marincounty]

Just like the broken taillight is an excuse to pull you over, the seatbelt law is another one that will lead to jail for many unfortunates.
The ever creeping list of things to pull you over for and then try and search your vehicle.
God help you if you happen to be a minority and have a wad of cash, doesn't matter if your Grandmother gave it to you, law enforcement will try and take it.
I don't know why more of you don't oppose the increasingly abusive police state?

 

[halik]

The reason why we need this law are all these dumb fucks that don't understand the statistics. Same thing for helmet laws - I've got to wear one when I'm moving my bike on the street not because of the government, but because all these dipshits doing 80 on the highway while wearing just oakleys.

Don't blame the government, blame the idiots.

 

[MtnMan]

30+ years as a firefighter/first responder, responding to many many MVA's. Never had to unbuckle a dead person, found many dead outside the vehicle, under the vehicle, or stuffed under the dash/steering wheel like a sack of broken bones, which pretty much describes their condition.

Stupid people do not wear seat belts.

 

[Theb]

Don't all modern vehicles start chiming if you go more than a block or two without a seatbelt on?

 

[desy]

The only issue I have is seatbelt counts as points against my drivers license.
OK I can get one as a passenger, I'm not driving. Not wearing my seatbelt doesn't endanger others on the road and is in no way impairing my ability to drive the vehicle.
However if your drive around with bald tires that does and that isn't a points violation. .
WTF

 

[MatSm]

I don't get it. What's the deal? It's ok to pass a law to require seatbelts, to protect the unenlightened, but not ok to make helmets mandatory on motorcycles? Madness is everywhere.

 

[piasabird]

This is like passing a law which requires all occupants inside a vehicle to wear a helmet. Statistics would show it increases their safety. I am not against safety. It helps greatly for race track drivers. Why not require roll bars in all cars also.

 

[Perknose]

I don't get it. What's the deal? It's ok to pass a law to require seatbelts, to protect the unenlightened, but not ok to make helmets mandatory on motorcycles? Madness is everywhere.

Came in here to post this. Not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle is FAR more dangerous than not wearing a seat belt in a two ton car, yet the rider's lobby in a ton of states has gotten such laws overturned.

Traumatic brain injuries from cycle accidents are costly and infinitely sad. Many require uber costly care for the rest of their lives. Who pays for that? You and I do, that's who.

 

[xBiffx]

Came in here to post this. Not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle is FAR more dangerous than not wearing a seat belt in a two ton car, yet the rider's lobby in a ton of states has gotten such laws overturned.

Traumatic brain injuries from cycle accidents are costly and infinitely sad. Many require uber costly care for the rest of their lives. Who pays for that? You and I do, that's who.

They are called donor cycles for a reason. It isn't costly to bury people.

 

[Perknose]

Why not require roll bars in all cars also.

Because the cost/price equation for equipping ALL cars with roll bars for this relatively rare occurence doesn't add up, that's why.

 

[xBiffx]

Because the cost/price equation for equipping ALL cars with roll bars for this relatively rare occurence doesn't add up, that's why.

But its okay for the relatively rare occurrence of a non fatal brain injury due to lack of a helmet?

 

[Perknose]

They are called donor cycles for a reason. It isn't costly to bury people.

It's extremely costly to provide intensive life long care for those suffering from traumatic brain injury.

On a per mile basis, motorcyclists are approximately 16 times more likely than the occupants of a passenger car to suffer fatal injuries in an accident, reports the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Motorcyclists also have a four times higher risk of suffering injuries. Head injury is the leading cause of disability or fatality in motorcycle accidents, highlighting the importance of wearing a helmet while riding.

[...]

The therapy process can continue for months or even years. Even with years of rehabilitation, a patient may never be able to return to his or her level of health prior to the accident and could require nursing care.

All of these are expensive measures, which is one of the reasons why traumatic brain injuries are also some of the most expensive injuries. Costs of care can run into the tens, or even hundreds, of thousands of dollars. Some might require millions of dollars worth of care, especially if they are young at the time of injury and suffer permanent and severe effects.

[...]

Wearing a helmet is the single best way to reduce the risk of a head injury from a motorcycle accident. Helmeted motorcyclists are more likely to survive a motorcycle accident. A helmet can also reduce the severity of injury that might occur compared to non-helmeted motorcyclists.

The evidence is compelling and inarguable.

 

[Perknose]

But its okay for the relatively rare occurrence of a non fatal brain injury due to lack of a helmet?

FFS, it's NOT relatively rare. Read above and educate yourself.

Here, I'll post this statistic again:

Motorcyclists also have a four times higher risk of suffering injuries. Head injury is the leading cause of disability or fatality in motorcycle accidents, highlighting the importance of wearing a helmet while riding.

 

[xBiffx]

It's extremely costly to provide intensive life long care for those suffering from traumatic brain injury.



The evidence is compelling and inarguable.

I didn't refute that. It's also extremely costly when they are involved in a rollover accident. But in one case you say a helmet is warranted but in an nearly unlikely scenario a roll over cage isn't.

It's not about the costs alone, its about frequency and risk mitigation. There are many more cars on the road. There are many more accidents involving cars. Seat belts can therefore prevent many more injuries or reduce the severity of many more injuries. Motorcycle helmets are like roll cages in that they would only serve a purpose in a very small percentage of accidents.

If you are going to apply a standard then have one to begin with.

 

[xBiffx]

FFS, it's NOT relatively rare. Read above and educate yourself.

Here, I'll post this statistic again:

About 5% of motorcycle accidents involve non fatal head injuries when the rider wasn't wearing a helmet. Who knows how many of those ended up being brain injuries, but you can be sure it is less than 5%. I've educated myself just fine on the topic. I ride a motorcycle. I have chosen to ride a motorcycle with a helmet but it has nothing to do with costs. Personal safety is just that, personal.

Edit: Oh and studies have shown that with the addition of a helmet, that 5% goes all the way down to 2%. Both are still a very low percentage.

 

[Perknose]

Personal safety is just that, personal.

So, you are, of course, opposed to all seat belt laws based on this statement, right?

Also, personal safety is not just personal when the rest of us have to pay and pay and pay for the ongoing medical care of someone who foolishly foregoes it.

 

[Perknose]

About 5% of motorcycle accidents involve non fatal head injuries when the rider wasn't wearing a helmet. Who knows how many of those ended up being brain injuries, but you can be sure it is less than 5%. I've educated myself just fine on the topic. I ride a motorcycle. I have chosen to ride a motorcycle with a helmet but it has nothing to do with costs. Personal safety is just that, personal.

Edit: Oh and studies have shown that with the addition of a helmet, that 5% goes all the way down to 2%. Both are still a very low percentage.

Links, please.

 

[Perknose]

I didn't refute that.
Motorcycle helmets are like roll cages in that they would only serve a purpose in a very small percentage of accidents.

You sure didn't.

If you are going to apply a standard then have one to begin with.

The "one standard" is cost benefit ratio. Wearing helmets cost little, mandating expensive roll bars in all cars, not so much.

 

[xBiffx]

So, you are, of course, opposed to all seat belt laws based on this statement, right?

Also, personal safety is not just personal when the rest of us have to pay and pay and pay for the ongoing medical care of someone who foolishly foregoes it.

You aren't reading, are you? The answer was just posted, in a response to you no less.

 

[xBiffx]

You sure didn't.

I wasn't trying to argue that brain injuries aren't costly, just that they are rare.

The "one standard" is cost benefit ratio. Wearing helmets cost little, mandating expensive roll bars in all cars, not so much.

Neither a role cage, nor a helmet serve to significantly lower costs because they affect only a small percentage of crashes. So why is it that you think one should be required while the other shouldn't. Neither are that expensive, especially when considering the costs of either activity. A car costs 10's of thousands so what's another couple thousand? A motorcycle costs thousands, so what a couple of hundred?

Neither serve a purpose in reducing costs in the vast majority of accidents. So expecting one and not the other isn't very standard.

 

[xBiffx]

Links, please.

Ok.

https://www.east.org/education/prac...ad-injury-and-mortality-in-motorcycle-crashes

All 25 of the studies that had prevalence of a nonfatal head injury as an outcome had a significantly lower incidence for helmeted riders, after reenactment or before repeal of a helmet law. One of the prospective studies that observed motorcycle riders to determine the incidence of head injury-associated crashes showed that nonhelmeted riders sustained a head injury more than twice the rate of helmeted riders[1] (4.7% vs. 1.9%).

I was off a bit on the numbers, but not by much.

Edit: After finding that link and reading it more, it appears the percentages (4.7% vs. 1.9%) are of crashes that were non fatal, not all crashes. I need to read it more.

Edit2:

Head injuries are one of the most common injuries after motorcycle crashes and were estimated to be the cause of death in >50% of these fatalities. In close to a third of these victims, the head injury is the sole organ system that is injured.

That seems to be at odds with what the previous quote states.

Hmm, my original statement was based off numbers given out during my motorcycle training. I've got to wonder where they got their figures from. I've also got to wonder if someone who was anti helmet was helping find those figures. I really didn't give it much thought, I knew I was going to wear a helmet.

Perk, sorry, I stand corrected on the helmet numbers.