Click it or ticket

[Beirut]

Public vs. Private. If you're doing doughnuts on your front lawn at 100 mph, you don't need to wear a seat belt. If you drive to the store at 20 mph you do.

Public roads have public rules. However, inside your private car, you may yell at your kids, pick your nose, listen to rap, or drink instant coffee with skim milk. You may also decide which route you want to take while going from point A to point B, and decide, to a reasonable degree, how fast you wish to drive there and how many stops you want to makwe on the way.

Pubic - Private. This has nothing to do with personal freedom, only to allow a certain amount of bitching amongst those who live to complain about... something. "Waaaahhhhhh!"

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Public roads have public rules. However, inside your private car, you may yell at your kids, pick your nose, listen to rap, or drink instant coffee with skim milk.

Its against the law to consume any beverage while you drive. They can give you a ticket. So the coffee is out.

[UglyandHasty]

I always, and always have, fasten my seat belt. But if my next door neighbor Gawain dont want to fasten it, i wont give a s**t. Everyone is free to choose imo. But cope with the consequence.

But those law are only hidden tax though. Made by people who work for the government, these people want to guarantee their job by creating new law, more and more new law and rules. And that in all domain. Energy, transport, sports, etc... The machine is gettin bigger and hungrier.

[Beirut]

Its against the law to consume any beverage while you drive. They can give you a ticket. So the coffee is out.

You are, of course, correct. Though this rule is seldom, if ever, enforced. Apparently, it's illegal for anyone in the front of the car to consume any beverage or food. At least that's what I heard.

[IrishMike]

Wow, I break that beverage rule every day then. What about toothpicks are they allowed or against the law?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Though this rule is seldom, if ever, enforced.

Thats what used to be said of the seatbelt laws.

Wow, I break that beverage rule every day then.

Then you are next.

[bmolsson]

There would be even less accidents if people used public transportation rather than private cars. In order to increase traffic safety we should therefore ban private cars.........

[Gawain of Orkeny]

There would be even less accidents if people used public transportation rather than private cars. In order to increase traffic safety we should therefore ban private cars........

Exactly. And on a Bus you dont have to wear a seatbelt. Why?

[Beirut]

This is sad. And quite possibly the most useless waste of braincells in the Org.

Let's try an adult approach...

"Put on your stupid seatbelt and stop crying like five year-old girls who lost their Barbie dolls."

I mean, cmon! It's a seatbelt meant to save your life, not a government edict forcing you to stick lit matches in your rectum. But the way some people cry you'd swear it was the same thing.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

I mean, cmon! It's a seatbelt meant to save your life, not a government edict forcing you to stick lit matches in your rectum. But the way some people cry you'd swear it was the same thing.

Its none f the government s buissness if I dont want to wear a seatbelt or stick lit matches up my rectum. The law was made to collect money and save insurance companies money. Saving lives is just an excuse. Again banning all cars and making everyone take public transit would save many more lives and stop much polution. Where does it stop? Next your going to have to wear a helmet when you take a shower just in case you slip.Are we going to make laws against anything thats dangerous?

[Ronin]

Its none f the government s buissness if I dont want to wear a seatbelt or stick lit matches up my rectum. The law was made to collect money and save insurance companies money. Saving lives is just an excuse. Again banning all cars and making everyone take public transit would save many more lives and stop much polution. Where does it stop? Next your going to have to wear a helmet when you take a shower just in case you slip.Are we going to make laws against anything thats dangerous?

i think it´s pretty safe just to do the ones that are common sense!


but i guess a lot of people are missing one...so what can you do?

[ichi]

Since an uninsured moron who drinks and drives himself into a bridge abutment without wearing his seatbelt will become a liability on all us taxpaying chumps, it is my interest to reduce the amount of unrestrained and uninsured drunks.

My preference would be to allow said drunk to lay out in the waiting room panhandling for sufficient change to get a med student to work on fixing his injuries, but gentle civilized society has a problem with heartless bottom lines, especially when the injured is a family man (who will think of the children?!).

So since we can't bring ourselves to make people responsible for their actions, we have to protect them (and us) from themselves (ourselves).

Gah!

ichi

ps as an emergency responder I've seen the difference that wearing restraints makes - anybody who rides around without 'clicking in' is in denial and needs to wise up.

[bmolsson]

Since an uninsured moron who drinks and drives himself into a bridge abutment without wearing his seatbelt will become a liability on all us taxpaying chumps, it is my interest to reduce the amount of unrestrained and uninsured drunks.

You have now hit the structural problem. Why would this moron be the resposibility of the tax payers in the first place ? If you have an insurance policy that gives you the right to NOT wear a seat belt, and you pay for it, regardless what the reason is, then there wouldn't be any problem, would there. Same thing with eating to much, smoking, drinking, bunji jumping etc etc.

The state have taken a lot of responsibility from it's citizens to justify it's existence. This creates a situation where silly laws suddenly have to be created. The individual citizens have stopped to use commons sense and when something goes wrong, you blame the state.
Imagine when you reach the point where you have to be instructed on what party to vote on since it's not safe to vote on any other party........

[Beirut]

Its none f the government s buissness if I dont want to wear a seatbelt or stick lit matches up my rectum.

Fine then, so would you agree the state also has no business telling people who they can marry?

I mean, if the state cannot be truted to properly apply its laws regarding something so banal as a seatbelt, how on Earth can you trust the state to tell a person whether they can or can't marry someone of their own sex?

[Ronin]

Fine then, so would you agree the state also has no business telling people who they can marry?

I mean, if the state cannot be truted to properly apply its laws regarding something so banal as a seatbelt, how on Earth can you trust the state to tell a person whether they can or can't marry someone of their own sex?

that has to be the biggest "touche" moment in history

[Gawain of Orkeny]

I mean, if the state cannot be truted to properly apply its laws regarding something so banal as a seatbelt, how on Earth can you trust the state to tell a person whether they can or can't marry someone of their own sex?




that has to be the biggest "touche" moment in history

You think so? Anyone can marry anyone, just dont expect the state to sanction it. I guess we cant trust the state to make any laws accordding to that logic. There are good laws and bad ones. There are constitutional laws and unconstitutional ones. The seatblet law is one of the unconstitutional ones.

[Slyspy]

A friend of mine had a brother that drowned due to he got stuck in the seatbelt and couldn't get out of the car that went of a bridge. He was very smart to use the seatbelt. They forgot to write it on his grave stone though........

And I had a friend who died in similar circumstances. In his case he died because he couldn't open the car door underwater. Would you argue that car travel would be safer without doors? The fact is, seatbelts save lives. If they restrict your mobility and vision then you have the wrong car or cannot use it correctly. Wearing a seatbelt is sensible. People are not, and that is why such laws exist. Night vision goggles seem excessive though.

[bmolsson]

And I had a friend who died in similar circumstances. In his case he died because he couldn't open the car door underwater. Would you argue that car travel would be safer without doors? The fact is, seatbelts save lives. If they restrict your mobility and vision then you have the wrong car or cannot use it correctly. Wearing a seatbelt is sensible. People are not, and that is why such laws exist. Night vision goggles seem excessive though.

What I argue is that anyone that drives a car should be educated in how and when to use certain features on the car. For example, you don't drive during the night in heavy rain if don't must. If you have to drive without light on, night vision goggles would be a feasabile option.
Actually beach buggies don't have doors, just in case........

My real concern is that people is expected to decide what I can do and not do, take half of my salary to spend on things I disagree with. At the same time the same people can't even decide for them selves if they are to use a seat belt or not..........

[Papewaio]

I think people who are smoking or using a mobile (cell phone) or intoxicated while driving should be hit by the law harder then those not wearing a seat belt.

Those not wearing a seat belt are a danger to themselves. The others cause accidents and are a danger to others.

[bmolsson]

I think people who are smoking or using a mobile (cell phone) or intoxicated while driving should be hit by the law harder then those not wearing a seat belt.

Those not wearing a seat belt are a danger to themselves. The others cause accidents and are a danger to others.

Actually there is a danger to drive a car at all. Everyone that use the car without a permit and a very good reason should be punished. People should stay at home and keep the stove of. That is safest for them and most profitable for the state........

[GoreBag]

Actually there is a danger to drive a car at all. Everyone that use the car without a permit and a very good reason should be punished. People should stay at home and keep the stove of. That is safest for them and most profitable for the state........

There is danger in driving a car. I never understood how a 16 year-old is allowed to drive, putting his own life, the lives of his passengers, and the lives of everyone else on the road in his hands, but he is allowed to have a say in how his country is run.

Unrelated, I know. I'm sorry.

[bmolsson]

There is danger in driving a car. I never understood how a 16 year-old is allowed to drive, putting his own life, the lives of his passengers, and the lives of everyone else on the road in his hands, but he is allowed to have a say in how his country is run.

Unrelated, I know. I'm sorry.

Actually a 16 year old is not allowed to have a say in how his country is run. It is correct though that in some states he is allowed to risk a lot lives......

[GoreBag]

Actually a 16 year old is not allowed to have a say in how his country is run. It is correct though that in some states he is allowed to risk a lot lives......

Whoops, forgot the negative in there. Nice catch.