mandatory seat belt and helmet laws

I had my kids convinced that our car wouldn't start unless their seat belts
were on. Now that they are adults, they wear their belts all the time, and
insist that their passengers do the same. So far, 100% of my children have
survived.



"FireStorme" wrote in message
...
On 4 Apr 2004 13:09:40 -0700, (911) wrote:

Nobody rides in my vehicle unless their seatbelt is on, law or no law.
20% of driver fatalities are caused by un-secured passengers being
transformed into missiles that terminate on the drivers body upon
impact.



(mandatory seat belt and helmet laws)

I'm not, because I think adults should be able to do whatever stupid
things with their own lives that they like

FireStorme wrote:

On 4 Apr 2004 13:09:40 -0700, (911) wrote:

Nobody rides in my vehicle unless their seatbelt is on, law or no law.
20% of driver fatalities are caused by un-secured passengers being
transformed into missiles that terminate on the drivers body upon
impact.

If "20% of driver fatalities are caused by un-secured passengers being
transformed into missiles," then the other 80% must come from secured
passengers.

From a real-world standpoint, you're better off NOT wearing a seatbelt!

(Just kidding.)

Larry

The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (state insurance
provider (monopoly)) just released those stats publicly last month.
Because they are the only provider of base auto insurance in the
Province of BC, and have all of the crash stats for every accident,
they are a pretty good source of info. I cannot imagine that the stats
would vary much elsewhere.



On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 20:59:37 -0400, Carey Gregory
wrote:

FireStorme wrote:

On 4 Apr 2004 13:09:40 -0700, (911) wrote:

Nobody rides in my vehicle unless their seatbelt is on, law or no law.
20% of driver fatalities are caused by un-secured passengers being
transformed into missiles that terminate on the drivers body upon
impact.

Do you have a source for that?

Not doubting it, just wondering where it comes from.

Lawrence Glasser wrote in message ...
Guy wrote:

I agree. So long as we (society) don't have to pain for them when they end
up with something like a "Closed Head Injury" and end up with the bill
(paying for their rehab or long term care), "Welfare"!

What I really hate is laws that are made to generate revenue for communities
(States) - In reality, Taxation with out representation!

How 'bout "No seatbelt/helmet, no insurance."?

Larry

easter bunny 2004

now lar How About No seatbelt for you next time you drive drunk and
run into a p&ge pole going 80mph that would be a good thing.

Lawrence Glasser wrote in message ...
Guy wrote:

I agree. So long as we (society) don't have to pain for them when they end
up with something like a "Closed Head Injury" and end up with the bill
(paying for their rehab or long term care), "Welfare"!

What I really hate is laws that are made to generate revenue for communities
(States) - In reality, Taxation with out representation!

How 'bout "No seatbelt/helmet, no insurance."?

Larry

easter bunny 2004

now lar How About No seatbelt for you next time you drive drunk and
run into a p&ge pole going 80mph that would be a good thing.