Posted on 05/15/2006 2:20:53 AM PDT by mathprof
Seat belt use is reaching record levels, so just who are the holdouts who fail to buckle up? Often they are young men who live in rural areas and drive pickups, the government says.
About 48 million people do not regularly put on seat belts when they are on the road, a figure the government's highway safety agency hopes to lower with an annual public education campaign ahead of the summer driving season.
The "Click It or Ticket" campaign involves checkpoints, patrols and advertisements to help enforce seat belt laws. It runs from May 22 through June 4.
The latest report on seat belt use by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says men account for 65 percent of the more than 31,000 people killed each year in passenger vehicles.
The report being released Monday found:
_58 percent of those killed who were not wearing a seat belt crashed along rural roads.
_in crashes involving pickup trucks, about seven in 10 people who died were unbelted.
_more than six in 10 people age 8-44 who were killed inside a passenger vehicle were not buckled up.
The agency said that lap and shoulder safety belts reduce the risk of death for those in the front seat of passenger cars by 45 percent and the risk of moderate-to-critical injuries by 50 percent.
The fatality risk for front-seat motorists in sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks and vans who wear seat belts is reduced by 60 percent; moderate-to-critical injuries by 65 percent.
The public education campaign is using $31 million in state and federal grants for national and state ads that seek to attract young drivers who watch sporting events such as NASCAR and baseball.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Like I said, MMO worked like magic 11 years ago! I swear by it.
About my Pontiac, and any other automobile from that era:
It has no "crush zones."
It has a non-collapsible steering column.
The dashboard is made of the same material as the rest of the car - hard steel. In fact, it's welded to the cowl assembly. (This makes working on the wiring lots of fun!)
The engine / transmission will become unwelcome guests in the passenger compartment in a front end collision.
It is a chore to drive. Remember the movies from the '30's and '40's in scenes when someone is driving? They're constantly stirring the steering wheel. They're doing that for a reason - to keep the car on the road! My car has no power steering or power brakes. It doesn't even have ball joints - it has king pins. With the old bias-belted tires, it wandered all over the place, which made stirring the steering wheel a necessity. At the end of a long drive, I was exhausted! I'll be mounting wide-whitewall radials this time, and that should improve things, a little.
In my county, the DUI checkpoints are published in the local rag a few days ahead of time.
I guess that this is one of those cases where the happy medium is the rule: if you really don't want to wear a seat belt, you can get around it.
Technically, I can't see a reason not to wear a seat belt; internally, those that don't I write off as a Stupidity Tax (like those that play the lottery).
But it's not under my jurisdiction to enforce my beliefs on others in this matter.
It's Monday..........so
Nanny State Ping!!!!!!!!!
I remember reading a Popular Mechanics article by Tom MacCahill ( sic ) years ago, when he was stunt-driving for Hollywood, about how he had to find a piece of rope to lash him behind the wheel of an old Cadillac, which, of course in those days had nary a seatbelt.
I always liked working on the old iron, because they were very simple mechanically- but they weren't a good thing to have a wreck in.
Write It and Bite It
Cram It and Jam It
Shove It and Love It
...etc., etc.
My Response to "Click It or Ticket" is...A simple "Click It or Ticket? Stick it!" works for me.
-Eric
Seat belts= more revenue. The "great" state of ohio implemented these laws quite awhile ago. I have yet to wear a seatbelt.
"Often they are young men who live in rural areas and drive pickups, the government says."
Of course, I drive an old Jeep J-10 truck, so they'll be on the lookout for me. But, hey that's profiling! Can't profile terrorists, but we can profile evil rednecks in pick-ups, you know.
The nanny state; working hard to get more revenue from you.
Yup, us evil rednecks in pickup trucks are going to destroy the world as we know...............actually thta sounds like a pretty good idea, cnsidering the state of the nanny state now-a-days.
I'm just glad that state law here in GA specifically exempts people who drive pick-up trucks from having to use seatbelts. They are a nuisance and it's nobody's business whether or not I use one(I don't).
I could not believe I saw Click It or Ticket signage behind home plate of a televised baseball game the other day. God damn big government nanny state F!!cks. It is impossible to be an american and believe in this kinda crap. Oh, they may have an address in the USA, but they aren't american. Real Americans know that click it or ticket dumbassess are inferior scum.
/rant
---
What's next? Smoking bans in/on private property?
/sarcasm
Who put you in charge of thinking for free Americans. Where is it in the Constitution is it written that the government is responsible for making people use common sense when it comes to safety?
If people want to insure their safety by wearing seat belts...they wear them. If they don't want to wear them, how does that threaten you or anyone else?
The mandatory wearing seat belts was made into a law for several reasons:
1. To insure more profits to all engaged in the manufacture and sale of seat belts.
2. To generate revenue for cities through the fines for not wearing seat belts.
3. To insure higher profits for the insurance companies so that their payouts are reduced while their premiums remain the same, or higher.
4. To generate more legal fodder for the legal establishment in litigation over whether the automobile manufacturer was liable for installation or use of the seat belt. Don't believe it...look on the sign that is attached to your windshield visor.
The bottom line is that safety belts do not have any effect on anything, or anybody, external to the vehicle. Inside the vehicle, it is common sense to use them...but only if you want to.
Freedom of choice? Where is it?
My state now allows the cops to stop you, just for a seat belt infraction...something the legislature promised would never happen.
Recently a cop lectured me on the proper use of a seatbelt....I don't like mine over the shoulder, and prefer it under my arm across the chest. Apparently that is incorrect useage....he didn't give me a ticket, just a verbal lashing, and I was pretty pissed off.
I went home and perused the legislative laws and found nothing regarding "how" the seatbelt must be worn, just a mandate that it must be worn, and have printed out a copy to carry in the car. My husband on the other hand, does not want me to argue with the police, so I'm wondering: should I bother calling the precinct the cop works for and ask them what the actual law states?
I would be dead if I hadn't been wearing my seat belt the day I got into a high speed accident.
I'm not sure what to say. Insurance companies offer the service then change the terms to affect their financial situation when things go wrong (super-size hurricanes, accidents without seatbelts, etc.).
They lobby the politicians and pour money into campaigns to get their way.
People have got to be free to make their own decisions and if politicians get in the way because of insurance company pressure then who is partly responsible for taking away our freedoms.
Simple.......have your license/reg. out when the cop approaches your window and say you JUST undid the seatbelt to get your wallet out of your back pocket.
Works everytime!
I look to the pros for advice. Driving without a seatbelt is as smart as playing football without a helmet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.