Film-Tech Cinema Systems
  Home     Products     Store     Forum     Warehouse     Contact Us    
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Why do you wear a seat belt, and do you require your passengers to do the same? (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: Why do you wear a seat belt, and do you require your passengers to do the same?
Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 05-24-2003 12:15 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Rights are not absolute but have limitations so that one persons rights do not impinge on those of anothers
Steve said it was wrong the enforcement of seatbelts and seats in the upright position on an aircraft. We why should my safety be jeprodised by some one being thrown across the cabin because he (she ) chose not to belt in.
If rights were absolute then I should also be able to use my cell phone on an aircraft even though it endangers others around us by interfering with navigational equipment
Nothing irks me more than people who say my right my rights me me me me me
seatbelts in cares being manditory have reduced road fatalities and as such have benfited all by maintaining lower insurance premiums
And on the isnurance issue if it is a right to drive then how can one legislate the requirement to carry liability insurance.

 |  IP: Logged
Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

- posted 05-24-2003 12:35 PM      Profile for Paul G. Thompson   Email Paul G. Thompson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Gordon, you are absolutely correct. [thumbsup] [thumbsup]

That was basically the message I was trying to get across, but I must have failed in doing so.

Thank you. [Smile]

To add a little humor to this, here is Washington State's orginal text version Of Article 6:

Original text - Art. 6 Section 3 WHO DISQUALIFIED - All idiots, insane persons, and persons convicted of infamous crime unless restored to their civil rights are excluded from the elective franchise.

It now reads like this:

SECTION 3 WHO DISQUALIFIED. All persons convicted of infamous crime unless restored to their civil rights and all persons while they are judicially declared mentally incompetent are excluded from the elective franchise. [AMENDMENT 83, 1988 House Joint Resolution No. 4231, p 1553. Approved November 8, 1988.]

Actually, I liked the orginal text version better. [Big Grin] [Big Grin] We received out Statehood on 11 November 1889. I guess that is when the orginal text version was written. [eyes]

 |  IP: Logged
Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000

- posted 05-24-2003 12:53 PM      Profile for Phil Hill   Email Phil Hill       Edit/Delete Post 
I find this "discussion" hilarious!

We are all debating about nothing. The definition of a privilege is that it is a right!

OBTW: NO ONE said ya cannot have conditions on any "rights" or "privileges" or whatever you want to call it.

And Paul, I still can't figure out what you are trying to get across since your posts seem to be all over the map. The Bill Of Rights, the Constitutional Amendments, the State Troopers, drunk driving, seatbelts, etc… [Big Grin]

>>> Phil

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 05-24-2003 12:57 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Why do I wear seatbelts? Because my brain looks better inside my skull than being bashed onto the outside of it. It is stupid for people to drive without their seatbelts clicked.

In some aspects I agree that the US Government should have no say in a lot of things. There is lots of senseless regulation and bureaucracy in the government. Many of those levels of red tape only exist to keep a great deal of people employed in useless jobs. It is a kind of white collar welfare.

OTOH, I firmly agree 100% with seatbelt laws and have no problem at all with the highway patrol drilling some motorist with a $80 to $120 ticket for not clicking it.

My Aunt Delores has been languishing in a coma (or chronic vegetative state) since Februrary of 1989, over 14 years, due to not wearing a seatbelt. The State of New Mexico has paid a fortune for her health care all through this time.

Seatbelt use and the lack of it impacts medical costs and health insurance rates. People who get in serious car accidents and suffer brain and torso injuries due to not wearing seatbelts often infringe on my rights. Since a great deal of people are uninsured, my tax dollars often pick up the cost for their medical care. If they do have insurance, the health insurance providers cover their "idiot cost" by passing the extra fees onto policy holders like me.

I always wear my selt belt and anyone who rides with me will do the same. It's that or walk.

 |  IP: Logged
Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

- posted 05-24-2003 01:02 PM      Profile for Paul G. Thompson   Email Paul G. Thompson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Phil, it is simple. You or someone else brings up an certain sub-topic, I try to answer it, even if I have to drift off the orginal topic somewhat. That, in turn, brings up something else that is even further off the orginal topic. That's why it is all over the map as you say. [Wink]

Besides, you have admitted several times (if I recall correctly) that you like to see it drift off a little. [Wink]

 |  IP: Logged
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000

- posted 05-24-2003 04:44 PM      Profile for Dave Williams   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Williams   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have been in a few crashes that because I wore my seatbelt, I was kept from slamming into the steering wheel, and as a result of not slamming into the steering wheel, I was able to maintain some control of my vehicle, keeping it from getting slammed into other vehicles as much as possible.

If you do not wear your seatbelt, and you are in an accident, chances are you will not be able to maintain control of your vehicle, putting others on the road at risk.

Therefore you are putting your rights to NOT wear your seat belt ahead of public safety and the safety of those around you on the road, all in the name of keeping "the government" from infringing into your life.

The roads are built with public monies, so the goverment has a responsibility to control behavior on these public roads, in the interest of public safety and the safety of those around you and even you.. YES YOU!!!

We are not living in Nazi Germany, Pre-colonial England, or even Iraq. "The Goverment" Is not out to get you!

Dave

 |  IP: Logged
Sean McKinnon
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1712
From: Peabody Massachusetts
Registered: Sep 2000

- posted 05-24-2003 06:55 PM      Profile for Sean McKinnon   Author's Homepage   Email Sean McKinnon   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Operating a motor vehicle is in no way a right to a citizen of the united states, plain and simple. It is a privelidge for which you must pay and be liscensed for. Part of the "agreement" you enter into for this privelidge is to operate your vehicle in a safe manner and to follow the rules and laws of driving. If you do not want to wear your seatbelt then dont and pay the fine if you get caught. In my opinion I think that the people who claim that driving is a right are doing nothing more than undermining what our rights stand for. I would rather live in a country where I am not able to drive but am allowed to SAY, BELIEVE, and THINK what I want to than to live in a country where I can drive and am not allowed those rights.

 |  IP: Logged
Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

- posted 05-25-2003 12:47 AM      Profile for Tim Reed   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Every passenger must fasten their seatbelt before my pickup moves. Safety reasons aside, it is also PA law. I have a Class-A Commercial Driver's License that I worked very hard to get, and I do NOTHING that could in any way, shape, matter, or form jeopardize it - including getting tickets.

On the other hand, I have a major problem with the government telling us we must use them. But I have to wonder where the feminists are on this. I thought their battle cry was keep your laws off my body? We haven't heard a peep from them.
[Confused]

The rhetoric would have you believe that the state is only concerned with our "safety", but how can this be? They're considering a repeal of the motorcycle helmet law!

 |  IP: Logged
Michael Cunningham
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 186
From: Anchorage, AK
Registered: Nov 1999

- posted 05-25-2003 01:37 AM      Profile for Michael Cunningham   Email Michael Cunningham   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Couple of thoughts here. Isn't the theoretical "Right to Drive" based on some ammendment which states, in effect, that one's passage across state boundries shall not be restricted unless you have sacrificed your rights in some way (ie. felon, on parole, etc.)? Not that I'm saying we absolutely have a right to drive, but I seem to recall reading an argument something like this.

Second, whenever a discussion like this comes up, people talk about accident and medical costs being passed on to the American public. How does this work? When I incur expenses the government doesn't offer to pick them up. If I can't pay, I am refused all but the most vital of life preserving services. Those costs the hospital covers to keep me alive they garnish from MY wages, sieze from MY property and otherwise bleed the cash from ME and ME alone. If I wreck my car, MY premiums go up and I am out a vehicle. The other guy's costs are, once again, extracted from ME. I'm I just missing something here?

Thank you guys for the "keeping control of the vehicle" argument for legislating seatbelt use. I had never thought of that. It always seemed silly to me that the government should legislate behavior to protect myself when my decision whether or not to do so seemed to have no effect on others. I couldn't imagine a scenario in which my body would be flung from the car and kill some innocent bystander, heh. Not that I disagree with seatbelt use, I just think the government should stay out of all decisions by me that affect only me.

- Mike

*** edited for clarification ***

 |  IP: Logged
Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000

- posted 05-25-2003 01:41 AM      Profile for Darryl Spicer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Seat belts on at all times when in my car. I have always worn seat belts since I started driving years ago. little over ten years ago I was in a car accident that struck a telephone poll. If I hadn't had my belt on I probably would not be typing this now. It is also the law in the state of Kentucky to buckle up.

As far as it being our right to drive a car no it's not. It is a privalege. It can be taken away by having our liscence suspended or revoked.

 |  IP: Logged
Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

- posted 05-25-2003 12:30 PM      Profile for Paul G. Thompson   Email Paul G. Thompson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Michael, A couple of things that might help you understand:

quote:
Isn't the theoretical "Right to Drive" based on some ammendment which states, in effect, that one's passage across state boundries....
Being that driving is a privilege and you don't qualify for that privilege, you simply are not allowed to drive. You can, however, utilize public transportation or "thumb it" if it is legal to do so. Some areas it is illegal to "thumb it," such as around or on dangerous highways where you constitute a traffic hazard, and especially if you are driving in an area of a Federal Penetentry or, shall I say, "The State Nut House?"

quote:
Second, whenever a discussion like this comes up, people talk about accident and medical costs being passed on to the American public. How does this work?
Higher medical insurance, higher liability insurance, and more money being spent on roads to make them "idiot proof." But you also have to keep in mind that laws are passed to protect the rights of others. In short, if you impinge on the rights of others, you can expect to get "nailed." By the same token, if someone else impinges on your rights, you would probably desire that they also get "nailed." Failure to wear a seat belt can endanger the rights of those around you.

As a slight spin-off, here is an example:

I smoke cigarettes. But you are fully within your rights to tell me to "put it out" because the second-hand smoke can be dangerous to your health. If you tell me to "put it out" and I refuse to do so, I am violating your rights. Being a responsible person who cares about the health, welfare, and safety of others, I will "put out that cigarette" with no questions asked.

As a personal note, I wish cigarettes were illegal. Maybe it would be a good aid in helping me to quit. As you know, cigarettes are very dangerous, and very addictive. It is your taxes that help pay for medical attention needed because of smoking. The more places that ban tobacco use - the better.

The Constitution of the United States is basically (in part) asking us to respect the rights of others. If we fail to exercise our responsibility in doing that, we can expect consequences that may seem, and probably will be unpleasent.

True..some laws might seem idiotic...nothing is perfect. But it is the best we have, so let's live with them to the best of our ability. [Smile]

 |  IP: Logged
John Westlund
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 204
From: Burney, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 2001

- posted 05-25-2003 01:16 PM      Profile for John Westlund   Email John Westlund   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
First of all, driving IS a privilege and NOT a right. Rights cannont be taken away from you by the government. So if driving was a right that would mean that if a person was convicted of DUI, the government couldn't take that persons license away because it would be taking away one of their rights. BUT if a person is convicted of DUI then their license will be taken away. The government definatly doesnt consider driving a motor vehicle a right.

As for myself, in the summertime when the weather is nice im usually driving around in my 56 ford pickup which doesnt have seat belts. However it is legal to not have them because it did not come with them from the factory. Whenever im in my toyota pickup however, I always wear my seat belt and usually my passengers always do the same. If I see one of them not I will usually just ask them to put it on.

The reason I wear my seat belt is because I have seen them save lives several times. Just last saturday on the night of my prom a good friend of mine rolled his car with 3 other people in it. The car was totalled but all 4 walked away from the crash only because they were wearing seat belts. If they had not the more then likely would have been killed.

 |  IP: Logged
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)


Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001

- posted 05-25-2003 04:12 PM      Profile for Bob Maar   Author's Homepage   Email Bob Maar   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I hardly ever use my seat belt even though I received a ticket at a Police Set up in Central Park. First ticket was $60.00
dollars. Police trap on the 66th Street cross from West to East. Next ticket would be around 500.00 so I am told. I find them uncomforable and I do no like restraints. I have learned how to make it look like I am wearing one......but I'm not. [Roll Eyes]

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 05-25-2003 04:49 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
When I incur expenses the government doesn't offer to pick them up. If I can't pay, I am refused all but the most vital of life preserving services. Those costs the hospital covers to keep me alive they garnish from MY wages, sieze from MY property and otherwise bleed the cash from ME and ME alone. If I wreck my car, MY premiums go up and I am out a vehicle. The other guy's costs are, once again, extracted from ME. I'm I just missing something here?
Yes, because that is often not how things work. More than 40 million Americans don't have any health insurance. Many drivers on the road have no car insurance either. A great deal of people involved in serious car accidents have medical costs far above what they could ever hope to pay out of pocket. Severity of injury and cost is greatly increased by those who drive without using seatbelts. Massive head injuries, torso injuries, bone breakage, etc. requires lots of procedures and physical therapy. It is not unheard of for a person involved in a car accident to have a $500,000 doctor's bill.

And then you have to consider what health insurance companies will cover. All insurance companies pass their costs along to customers in the form of higher premium rates. Many policies will max out before covering all the medical costs for a really bad car accident. That leaves either the accident victim to cover the rest out of pocket or declare bankruptcy and have the hospital and government pick up the tab.

quote:
I have a major problem with the government telling us we must use them.
Seat belt laws would be inappropriate only in an absolute perfect world where everyone automatically did the right thing without being told to do so. Unfortunately, many in the general public are selfish morons. That's just a sad fact. The general public cannot ever be trusted to just do the right thing.

When it gets right down to it, I think our concept of "civilization" and "society" is all very illusory. As stupid and trashy as many people behave (just visit the theater auditorium after the show for the physical evidence of said behavoir), I think the only difference between us and animals is we wear clothes and are not able to lick our own asses!

With that somewhat disgusting point being made, our government's laws are not there to ruin the party and make things less fun or less cool or some other bullshit like that. They're there to attempt to protect us from the legions of idiots out there who somehow qualified themselves to drive a vehicle.

[ 05-25-2003, 08:19 PM: Message edited by: Bobby Henderson ]

 |  IP: Logged
Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

- posted 05-25-2003 04:57 PM      Profile for Paul G. Thompson   Email Paul G. Thompson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well said, Bobby! [thumbsup] [thumbsup]

 |  IP: Logged


All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
- Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.