Survivalist Forum - Reply to Topic
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > > > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Advertise Here
Thread: 48% killed no seat belt Reply to Thread
Title:
  
Message:
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
06-25-2019 08:18 AM
America's Patriot Wear a seat-belt on a motorcycle? Did we actually get to a point that we had to stoop to that level of argument? And for what it's worth, motorcycles are dangerous because people get on them without proper training. EVERYONE should be taking an advanced course on how to ride a motorcycle and I don't mean that ****ing joke of a motorcycle safety course. I mean a real course, on a real track, with real instructors, and with active scenarios. On top of that, there is education involved in riding in order to avoid getting killed by some schmuck in a car that isn't paying attention... I could go on and on with this, so let's not bring motorcycles into an argument about seat-belts.


BTW, seat-belts and airbags do save lives. But like any other safety gear, you have to use them properly.
06-25-2019 08:06 AM
Justme11 Are seat belts even necessary with the advent of vehicles with a dozen airbags?

Belts do cause injuries.
Would they have been hurt worse without them? probably, but have they tested airbag only for collision safety?
https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/pdf/10.114...s.11.1.1996397

". Vascular Injuries
We have seen one case of transection of the
common carotid artery in a patient involved
in a motor vehicle accident while using a
three-point seat belt (Fig 1 7a) . The same patient also had a fracture of the larynx that ne- cessitated a tracheostomy (Fig 1 7b) . Similar
cases, as well as injuries to the internal carotid artery, subclavian artery, and superior vena cava, have also been reported In the literature (31-35). The force of collision required to produce
thoracic aortic tears appears to be greater in restrained occupants than in unrestrained
persons. The shoulder strap may allow a more controlled deceleration of the chest
during the collision, which may decrease the shearing force on the aorta somewhat. Still,
aortic injuries are relatively common with severe forces (Fig i 8) (36).
Seat belt-related injuries involving the abdominal aorta have been reported (37,38).
We observed one case in which distal abdominal aortic occlusion occurred due to a near-complete transection "

I wear my seat belt all the time now, but only because it is the law.
As I said, don't ever get in a wreck and the point becomes moot.

But this is over reach of a government's authority in my opinion.

South park did a show about this and the TSA once.
The government decided it would be safer if they required everyone to undergo a TSA inspection (Toilet Safety Administration), before using the toilet and also mandated seat belts be installed and used on the commodes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revers...rl_(South_Park)





Another thought occurs.
All this crap costs money.
Say someone is financially strapped and needs to buy a vehicle. That $15,000 vehicle now costs $30,000
with all the safety devices. 11 airbags, five seat belts, crumple zones, etc.
So they are forced to buy a used car with bad brakes, because they are priced out of the new market.
Then they crash and die because their brakes failed. Or their car could not accelerate out of harm's way, because it has an old crappy engine and the car weighs an extra 300 lbs with all the safety stuff in it.

How is this any different from the government forcing you to buy health care?

Is our government guided by the constitution or by the insurance companies?

And as I mentioned before, the seat belt can keep you from ducking a deer coming through the windshield, and it can keep you from checking your blind spot when merging onto a highway. Where are THOSE statistics ?
06-25-2019 07:06 AM
NW GUY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justme11 View Post
The other part of my objection was the uneven treatment of the law.

You can choose to ride a motorcycle which is a lot more more dangerous than driving a car or truck with no seat belt. The law is OK with that. Why? Whay do I owe the state $200 for not wearing a seatbelt in a car, when I can put myself at far greater risk on a motor cycle?

Also, school buses had no seat belts. Maybe they do now, I don't know.
But all this enforcement on the individual schmuck but the school buses, hey no problem. They have that iron bar to cushion the impact on little Timmy's head.

And my vehicle's have been under constant air bag recalls. They go off to fast, they don't go off at all, They throw steel shards into your eyes at 200 mph. Hey, that's all right for them to plant a freakin bomb in front of my face, but woe be upon me if I don't fasten that seat belt that rubs my throat raw with the sharp fiberglass belt that would sever my jugular in an impact.
FYI...
After handling thousands of accidents I have never seen anyone with a throat cut from their seatbelt.

You don't like the airbag, pull the fuse.

I do not care how YOU justify it, I have a lot of experience seeing what they do FOR people and what can happen without people wearing it. I do not go anywhere without wearing it.

But I agree with the cycle part. They are extremely dangerous. (I know because I have laid down bikes twice to avoid hitting BIG things.) In one accident I was knocked cold and I skidded down the pavement in my leathers on my full face helmet. Without it I would have either died, or had my face ground to where I could get a job in a side show.
and
while more and more states are saying you don't need a helmet, we call those riders future organ donors.
06-24-2019 10:20 PM
three If you are the only one in the car and don’t want to wear a seatbelt, that’s your choice.

When others are in the vehicle and you become a pinball inside that car during the crash and kill one or everyone else because you got thrown all around... you are simply an ignorant and arrogant *******!
06-24-2019 10:12 PM
merlinfire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justme11 View Post
The question I have is, do you prefer freedom or tyranny?

Those who sacrifice freedom for safety neither get, nor deserve it.
Honestly, this is a ridiculous application of those concepts.

Whether there be a law or there not be a law, I'm going to wear my seatbelt.

Putting yourself at risk for no benefit is not "fighting the power of tyranny", and wearing a seatbelt doesn't make me undeserving of freedom. What a bizarre response.
06-24-2019 08:42 PM
Justme11 The other part of my objection was the uneven treatment of the law.

You can choose to ride a motorcycle which is a lot more more dangerous than driving a car or truck with no seat belt. The law is OK with that. Why? Whay do I owe the state $200 for not wearing a seatbelt in a car, when I can put myself at far greater risk on a motor cycle?

Also, school buses had no seat belts. Maybe they do now, I don't know.
But all this enforcement on the individual schmuck but the school buses, hey no problem. They have that iron bar to cushion the impact on little Timmy's head.

And my vehicle's have been under constant air bag recalls. They go off to fast, they don't go off at all, They throw steel shards into your eyes at 200 mph. Hey, that's all right for them to plant a freakin bomb in front of my face, but woe be upon me if I don't fasten that seat belt that rubs my throat raw with the sharp fiberglass belt that would sever my jugular in an impact.
06-24-2019 08:37 PM
SeaBeeDaddy Okay. Sounds good.
06-24-2019 08:27 PM
9111315 With that kind of argument, we should stop fining companies who commit egregious acts of pollution to the environment and ground water.
06-24-2019 08:24 PM
SeaBeeDaddy I could care less if someone has insurance or wears their seat belt. I'm covered to deal with such folks. And it has paid off several times.

I have yet to get hit by a driver who had insurance. I'm sure they had better things to spend it on like sodas, cigarettes, beetus meds, alimony, etc.
06-24-2019 08:07 PM
~Black.Dog~
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justme11 View Post
His fist was not expecting the early impact ... mine was.

My profound comment of the day - A fist is not a head. you can tense your wrist and tighten your fist. But your head is your head.
For the record, I wasn't doubting you. It just put that in my head.
I had a similar experience once. A guy at a party tried to punch me and I caught his fist. He tried to hit me with his other hand and I caught that one, too. He left the party.
I'm not that much of a badass. He was just slightly drunker than I was. It looked pretty cool, though! [emoji1]

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
06-24-2019 08:04 PM
9111315
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcalibres View Post
Nope

The other 52% died too (and were wearing seatbelts).

The stat says that (with so few people now not wearing seatbelts) you are much more likely to die from the same accident if you are not wearing a seatbelt.

It is simple physics - car decelerates suddenly on impact - you don't - you hit something hard/strong inside the car and get broken - or you get ejected from the car - hit something hard and get broken.

It is better to be decelerated with the car by ergonomically designed restraint rather than impact.

The deniers don't want to talk about how many other lives the seat belts saved.

We must remember, seat belts are not magic. Seat belts are not like PT belts.
06-24-2019 08:02 PM
9111315 ... covering other vehicles and property to prevent infringement on their freedom ... or at least for just compensation for such infringement.
06-24-2019 08:00 PM
Goodwrench708 You do know they only require you to have insurance to cover the other vehicle.....
Full coverage insurance is only required by the finance company that finances the loan on your vehicle........ not .... .gov
06-24-2019 07:54 PM
Goodwrench708
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_SonofLiberty View Post
Read the title. that means 52% lived. Making it mandatory was just a sop to the insurance lobbyists. Car insurance, when mandated by .gov, has become an overpriced scam. It was much cheaper before .gov mandated it. I prefer a return to a free market. Since I never pay more that $1k for a vehicle, why would I spend even close to that to insure something I can replace by simply saving up my payments? Makes no sense. Since I don't drive like a complete retard, if I ever did have an accident the chances of it being my fault are minuscule at best.
So when you plow into my vehicle.... damaging it...and possibly hurting or killing my occupants..... will you be able to compensate me?
I kind of doubt that.
If your driving record is as good as you say....and you buy cheap vehicles.... your insurance would be cheap...... if not.... are you not disclosing everything?.
06-24-2019 07:51 PM
A_SonofLiberty
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodwrench708 View Post
Itís amazing how we have had several first responders on this site give testimony about seatbelts.... and some of you are too thick headed to see
For you that profess to be survivalists.... not too smart to run around with risky behavior

We are a country of laws.... failure to follow a very simple one. Just so you can prove some minor point. Not very bright
Making stupid laws leads to a loss of respect for the law and the system. There was no need for this to be made a law except as a way to increase insurance company profits. However, even before this stupid law was enacted, I still never wore seat belts. IMO, .gov has overstepped their authority in this matter(as well as others many of which I also refuse to obey).
06-24-2019 07:47 PM
Goodwrench708 It’s amazing how we have had several first responders on this site give testimony about seatbelts.... and some of you are too thick headed to see
For you that profess to be survivalists.... not too smart to run around with risky behavior

We are a country of laws.... failure to follow a very simple one. Just so you can prove some minor point. Not very bright
06-24-2019 07:47 PM
A_SonofLiberty
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcalibres View Post
Nope

The other 52% died too (and were wearing seatbelts).

The stat says that (with so few people now not wearing seatbelts) you are much more likely to die from the same accident if you are not wearing a seatbelt.

It is simple physics - car decelerates suddenly on impact - you don't - you hit something hard/strong inside the car and get broken - or you get ejected from the car - hit something hard and get broken.

It is better to be decelerated with the car by ergonomically designed restraint rather than impact.
Either way. I choose not to. Been driving that way for 38 years. No reason to change now.
06-24-2019 07:44 PM
hardcalibres
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_SonofLiberty View Post
Read the title. that means 52% lived.
Nope

The other 52% died too (and were wearing seatbelts).

The stat says that (with so few people now not wearing seatbelts) you are much more likely to die from the same accident if you are not wearing a seatbelt.

It is simple physics - car decelerates suddenly on impact - you don't - you hit something hard/strong inside the car and get broken - or you get ejected from the car - hit something hard and get broken.

It is better to be decelerated with the car by ergonomically designed restraint rather than impact.
06-24-2019 07:36 PM
A_SonofLiberty
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodwrench708 View Post
Okay....we know you are a rebel .... but other than the drama.... why donít you wear the seat belt? Why do you not like having car insurance
Read the title.
Quote:
48% killed no seat belt
that means 52% lived. Making it mandatory was just a sop to the insurance lobbyists. Car insurance, when mandated by .gov, has become an overpriced scam. It was much cheaper before .gov mandated it. I prefer a return to a free market. Since I never pay more that $1k for a vehicle, why would I spend even close to that to insure something I can replace by simply saving up my payments? Makes no sense. Since I don't drive like a complete retard, if I ever did have an accident the chances of it being my fault are minuscule at best.
06-24-2019 07:33 PM
hardcalibres
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_SonofLiberty View Post
I have no interest in heroin.
Agreed.

Most of us avoid heroin addiction because it would be dumb - like not wearing a seatbelt.
This thread has more than 20 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net