Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
nature
climber
Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 05:23pm PT
|
as this is a free country, well most of the time, I think we should be free to not wear a helmet. Of course I also think the system should be free to (uh... required to) let you die at the side of the road if you crash your bike without a helmet (instead of putting you on life support which YOU won't be paying for).
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 05:26pm PT
|
seatbelt law = 1984?
I like it!
But, you are still free to not wear one. You can choose to risk a fine instead. You're not going to go to jail.
I don't know. I'm a big fan of choice/personal freedom too, but considering that driving is one of if not the most dangerous things that we all do regularly, it seems a small sacrifice.
|
|
TradIsGood
Happy and Healthy climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 05:48pm PT
|
Mighty hiker, you got the airbags thing wrong. They supplement seat belts.
Without seatbelts, airbags themselves will cause injuries, epecially to the femur, which likely could be fatal. I heard a description of Corzine's injuries, and the multiple leg fracture was supposedly a common modality of injury caused by lack of seat belt and use of airbags.
As far as rights, you do have the right not to drive a car, which in all states is a licensed privilege.
So if it is about rights, then perhaps you should have the right to drive drunk.
|
|
5150
Trad climber
JOSHUA TREE
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 05:52pm PT
|
mojede
if I hit a truck on my Harley doing 80mph, my helmet's not doin' $hit... I'm probably fuct.
|
|
TradIsGood
Happy and Healthy climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 05:54pm PT
|
If there were a truck on your Harley, the Harley would probably be f'ed as well.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 06:05pm PT
|
TiG: Yes, airbags are meant to supplement, not replace, seat belts. But many treat them as though they do replace seat belts. I suspect that AOTBE, a crash with airbags but without seatbelts is likely to result in fewer/less severe injuries, or fatalities, than one with neither air bags or seatbelts. Probably the NHTSA has statistics...
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 06:09pm PT
|
I was trying to sing this thread, but it became clear pretty quick you all suck as songwriters...
|
|
TradIsGood
Happy and Healthy climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 06:11pm PT
|
MH - I used to take the shoes off and park the feet where the airbag is on long trips just to stretch a bit. I think twice about that now!
You can be sure that air bags can be dangerous without seat belts and even with if you aren't the right height. That's why child safety seats and short kids go in the back seat.
I have no idea whether you are better off without seat belt with airbag or without both, but you don't have that option in any vehicle, so it's kind of moot.
|
|
Moof
Trad climber
A cube at my soul sucking job in Oregon
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 21, 2007 - 06:16pm PT
|
I'd be fine giving the insurance companies a way out. A dramatic limit on the payout on your injuries if you chose to not wear your seatbelt would satisfy their bottom line need. But I'm with Tahoe Climber, choice is good. I've taken to voting liberatrian or green recently due to both the reds and blues each having a laundry list of rights on their hit list.
There is also a mindset that I think the laws like the seatbelt law promotes. I probably despise the mindset more than the law. The mindset is that the government should legislate our safety. Legislating safety standards of products is generally a good thing. Legislating our choices and behavior for safety sake is scary, and is already a ways down the slippery slope.
The Mt. Hood incident made my wife mad at me. I thought the rescue effort was great, but my opinion was that they got themselves into it, tough cow patties if they die. Harsh, but as soon as outdoor folks demand rescues instead of being gratious and thankful when we're lucky enough to have our asses bailed out, we'll deserve to both pay for rescues AND carry locators to facilitate our requests. I would much rather keep the current system and just further encourage family member to not ask rescuers to risk their lives when it is clearly a corpse recovery effort. But if the public mindset is won over in favor of not allowing the man vs. nature battle being played for keeps we'll really lose something.
|
|
TradIsGood
Happy and Healthy climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 06:25pm PT
|
Moof, with you when it only affects your own safety AND when there is no recourse on the part of the injured/deceased or his estate against any deep pockets, like insurance companies, manufacturers or individuals.
Legislating your personal safety is one thing. But we do expect laws to protect us against the bad choices of others, right?
|
|
Wild Bill
climber
Ca
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 06:27pm PT
|
PLEASE VIEW THE VIDEO LINK I POSTED ABOVE BEFORE POSTING YOUR OPINION HERE ON THIS THREAD.
Thank you
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 06:28pm PT
|
no thanks.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 06:34pm PT
|
The soundtrack and lyrics sucked on that too.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 06:35pm PT
|
I'm all for freedom and personal choice, assumption of risk and all, but the problem is that the way we have things structured now when somebody does something stupid and blows it then everyone ELSE winds up footing the bill.
Only because of THAT do I believe in seatbelt laws. Helmets for people who ride donorcycles is even more specious.
Hey I loved riding, but after an old man in a pickup fractured my spine I realized how foolish riding on the street is. Now I get the same rush in my convertable in a safer mode surrounded by steel (plus belts and bags too).
But since our taxes pay for rescues rather than the stupid gumbies who on occasion cause them can minimum skill requirements ala SCUBA be too far off? And climbing licenses? And boating licenses? And wilderness camping licenses?
And....?
|
|
Tahoe climber
Trad climber
a dark-green forester out west
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 07:36pm PT
|
TIG
Dude, be honest with us - and with yourself.
You don't REALLY mean to suggest that there is a valid parallel between driving drunk and driving w/o a seatbelt, do you? And that fighting for your rights for one of those is the same as fighting for your rights to do the other?
That's a hell of a leap, IMO.
Someone driving drunk does a lot to endanger others.
Someone driving w/o seatbelt? Zero danger to others.
Come on, man. Use your noggin.
I still think people should use their seatbelts. They just shouldn't be forced to by the gov't.
-A
|
|
Tahoe climber
Trad climber
a dark-green forester out west
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 07:38pm PT
|
Piton Ron -
Doesn't Canada have national healthcare?
And you're quibbling about everyone else paying the bill here?
wtf?
|
|
TradIsGood
Happy and Healthy climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 07:49pm PT
|
Tahoe, you must not have read my first reply. You are driving in urban environment and get hit glancing blow (say to the rear). Your car is now pointed at pedestrians on the sidewalk. With seatbelt on, you can use the break. Without, you may be in the wrong part of the car.
Remember, I said the DRIVER should be required to use the seatbelt.
That said, apparently back seat passengers often injure front seat passengers.
Now if you do not think those people should be responsible for not hurting others in an accident, then it is but a slippery slope to DWI being permissible, because after all, we are only talking about probability now.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 07:53pm PT
|
There will be mandatory seat belts required for riding your bicycle.
The Valley SAR team will be exempt, since we know how to ride a bike.
The rest of ya buckle up, you ain't got no choice!
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 08:47pm PT
|
Tahoe,
what's Canada got to do with it? Read the smaller print sport.
<
And when I'm one of the "other" people that pays I have a right to quibble.
|
|
Rocky5000
Trad climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
May 21, 2007 - 09:57pm PT
|
Not only should seat belts be strictly a matter of personal choice, they should be made with a little puzzle you would have to solve before you could put them on. Thousands of our weaker thinkers would be winnowed out through attrition and their own choices, and gradually some kind of Utopia would emerge as the population grew smaller and smarter. Now if I could just get my program approved to put sterilizing agents in all fried potato products - not secretly, it would be promoted as a free government service - we'd have it made in the shade in about a century or so. Hell, make the fries themselves free, too.
All you drivers, clap your hands and stand up in your convertible if you agree! Or even if you don't!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!