Click It or Ticket

[Cement Man]

  I can tell you that in the 4 1/2 years I spent as a LEO I never unbuckled a dead man.


  If they would tell hospitals they didn't have to treat anyone who didn't have insurance I'd be OK with it but since they won't do that I feel like it's my tax money that is ultimately being saved.

I'm not doubting your word, but it happens often. I lost my daughter last June in a roll over accident, and she was wearing her seat belt. There were four in her car, and two were wearing and the other two were not.

I think God , there were no more lives lost.

I think wearing the belt will save lives in most cases, but the seat belt law is a money maker, and is hypocritical! After all! Our precious children ride school buses every day in America without them. WHY?

nw_hunter,

First off, I am very sorry for your terrible loss.  I wish you comfort and peace. 

I also have wondered why school buses don't have or require seat belts.  I found several reasons or issues, including: the concept of "compartmentalism" (if I have the term right) where the seat backs are padded to cushion the youngsters on impact, less injurious than head injuries when restrained at the mid-section, costs, DOT doesn't require, and some school districts are piloting seat belt programs anyway.  So it seems thare are several strategies and opinions on the subject and the issue is being studied.

How the government ever got the power to tell us that we had to wear a seat belt is beyond me.

Heather

I really do get conflicted with laws that might infringe on personal freedom, yet seem to make sense for the protection of the citizen.  I am totally convinced that seatbelts save lives.  The benefits outweigh the risks.  Yet, I don't like "big brother" dictating every detail of life either.  So how about this....  Repeal seat belt laws under the following condition.  Since we are still (barely) a capitalist society, why not let the market sort it out?  If you do not want to wear a seatbelt, declare it to your insurance companies (auto, life, credit, health care, etc.) so that you are in different risk pools than those who agree to wear a seatbelt.  The seatbelt users will presumably get a rightful discount on several types of insurance that could be affected by auto injuries and the folks who don't want to wear the belts will be free to do so while paying a more appropriate share of insurance premiums.  Sound fair?

[Redtail1949]

All in all I think the seatbelt has saved many lives and in some cases it has cost lives. I believe and adult should be able to choose to wear one but a child should be required to.

I have noticed in Colorado that there seems to be a surge of all kinds of enforcement on the highways. I believe this is directly related to the economics of the cities and counties. It will only get worse in the coming year or so.

[gypsyman]

The Fed's dictated to the state's, if you don't pass a seatbelt law, we will with hold highway funds. Any state that recieve's back more money then it sent in, naturally passed the law.
As it started out, it was a good idea, just like MADD. But in the last decade or so, it's gotten to where it's more for revenue than anything else. And Redtail's right, with the economy getting worse, local gov't is going to have law enforcement tighten up. Low overhead revenue for the counties and city's. gypsyman

[beerbelly]

Here in Alabama there was some talk about some state troopers getting the axe because of revenue short fall. We  now have three to four troopers in the six miles form here to town, writing tickets as fast as their little fingers can go.
 It is like living under the Gestapo! You had better not be doing one mile over the speed limit!
                              Beerbelly

[Matt]

  I can tell you that in the 4 1/2 years I spent as a LEO I never unbuckled a dead man.


  If they would tell hospitals they didn't have to treat anyone who didn't have insurance I'd be OK with it but since they won't do that I feel like it's my tax money that is ultimately being saved.

Well after 7 years as a Fire Fighter / First Responder I unbuckled many of dead folks... but I still buckle up before my car moves an inch... not becuase I am scared of getting a ticket but because I dont want to be ejected from the car should I have a wreck... But that is just me.

As to the question of it being a cash cow.... ALL TRAFFIC COURTS ARE A SCAM TO GET MORE MONEY !!!!

Matt

[SHOOTALL]

I did not read all , but the insurance companies caused the seat belt law . They were paying out for death and injury . Wheather or not you like it they proved it cost them less if everyone wore one . In turn it cost policy holders less if everyone wore one . Their goal was to reduce cost . That said in a small % of cases the seat belt caused injury but overall it cost less. Now it was a no brainer to pass laws and enforce wearing them as it was cost effective in terms of lives saved and cash made to do so .

[williamlayton]

Once more too the choir.
No law has ever prevented a death.
The device, be it a belt or a helmet, can save a life but the law did not. The law gives the reporting folks a piece of paper to report on.
That said, I do not drive with large heavy objects loose in the car where they can fly around in a crash. I don't drive in the rain without wipers. I don't drive after dark, at dusk or dawn without headlights. I don't talk on the phone and drive. Well, there are a bunch of things I will not do when I am driving and nobody has to make a law too tell me to do what is smart.
Now, if you want to be an obstinate old grouch, go ahead, but, doing these things just proves you are dumb, and, there is no need in that, I read about you folks in the paper every day.
Blessings

[rockbilly]

Don’t be too hasty in jumping to conclusions; it has been proved time and time again that seat belts do save lives. This is not always true, but percentage wise those that wear them stand a far better chance of surviving an accident that those who do not. While in the military one of my additional duties was Safety Officer for the group.  I worked very close with the Navy Safety Center, Army Safety Center as well as the Air Force Safety Center.  Over the years I used data derived from their studies to instruct and prevent industrial as well as motor vehicle accidents.  The loss of live in motor vehicle accidents was drastically reduced through education and the requirement that everyone wear them.  Total enforcement was near impossible, but enforcement on base was fairly easy and when a person learned they would loose their driving privileges if caught without one folks started snapping them before starting the engine.  This habit eventually extended to their off-base driving as well.  I would not think of starting the engine in any of my vehicles without first putting my seatbelt on because I know from personal experience they do work.

As for the laws and traffic courts, this is the price we pay for some order of safety while on the road.  Can you imagine the confusion if there were no laws pertaining to driving, and no penalty for those that break them?  Have you ever driven in a foreign country where little or no traffic laws exist?  Spend a little time in Mexico for example and you will learn to appreciate the convenience of having a somewhat orderly roadway system here in the states.

Though I do have to agree there are some places where the traffic cop passes out tickets to increase the revenue for the city, county, etc.  I remember Warner Robbins, Ga back in the early sixties when the officer got a percentage of the fine for each ticket they wrote, it was hell driving there around Christmas.

As Americans we can consider ourselves lucky to have the degree of safety provided by the laws and penalties for those that break them.  Without them there would be chaos on the streets.

[Cement Man]

Well said Rockbilly!

[Matt]

Well here is a prime example of the traffic cops on the road today

[yt=425,350]KluItc365hU[/yt]


http://www.nowpublic.com/strange/oklahoma-highway-patrol-officers-stop-ambulance-fight-emt

[MGMorden]

Very interseting post Matt.  It's amazing the power trip that some (not all, probably not even the majority, but some) LEO's get on.  Public outcry at least gets to set a few of them straight over now and then. 

I've actually seriously considered starting to carry around a video camera in my car just in case.  They're small, and have gotten cheap enough that it's as much as a protection device as your carry piece now.

Amusingly, I've seen at least one piece of legislation that actually tried to outlaw a civilian video recording a cop on while he's making a stop/arrest.  In another case a guy - clean record who was later discovered to simply have an interest in mechanical devices - was arrested because he walked by an open ATM and started filming it with his phone's camera.  Cop saw him and immediately pulled him over and arrested him. 

One thing a tyrannical government hates just as much if not more than an armed populace is a populace that can communicate as quickly and efficiently as we the internet has allowed us to recently.  Look at how many censorship laws are trying to be passed, here, in Britain, Australia, Germany, etc.  In Australia (though they've since backed off, for now, due to public outrage) they actually were trying to pass legislation where there was a banned list of websites that you could be arrested for visiting.  Thing is, publishing that list was to be illegal.  When it was finally leaked (which was published by Wikileaks.de, who which was forcibly taken offline by the German government shortly thereafter) it was determined that tons of sites on there were completely harmless.  Yet you weren't supposed to go there under penalty of law (though you wouldn't find out that you weren't supposed to until AFTER they can knocking at your door).

[Cement Man]

There are indeed some lousy cops. This goes back almost 30 years ago: As acting Lt. on a paid-on-call FD, I was in charge of an accident scene in an unincorporated area, arriving on scene before any police did.  It was a rollover, (typical 0300 Saturday morning drunk) half in the ditch with a leaky gas tank and a trapped occupant.  I had the rig positioned behind the rollover and half in the lane to shield our rescue people against more traffic (more drunks on the road who might not see the 30 flashing lights on the rig and the ambulance) and the booster line was charged to cover us doing the extraction.  There was very little traffic (3 am) and we were blocking one lane only.

A city cop from the town which was next to our unincorporated area rolled up in his squad car and instead of helping us with traffic control, starts shouting orders to move the (%$X*&#@) fire truck. (I was going to refer to him as Barney Fife, but Barney was far smarter and more tolerable than this blow-hard and I wouldn't want to insult Barney).  I don't believe this guy had jurisdiction there, but it didn't matter.  I explained to him firmly that the rig was gonna stay until the risk was over.  He argued. He was going to arrest me.  I asked him if he really wanted to accept responsibility for how this call was handled if we lost any time getting the occupant out, a firefighter got hurt, the car ignited, or the patient's transport was delayed.  He argued some more, he backed off, and we got the drunk out OK.  The cop was pretty old and experienced, but really just had too much blow-hard and pathetically poor judgment in this situation.  It wasn't about WHAT was right, it was about WHO was right for this fool.

I later went to the police chief and complained.  The chief covered for the guy and tried to infer that we part-time FF's didn't know what we were doing.  I produced my certified F/F credentials, DOT Emergency Rescue Technician credentials, and EMT license.  I asked him what training he and the old blow hard had in this area.  None.  I told him "case closed" and went home.

I've met a few with "the attitude", but worked with many more that were good.

I am 63 and I have seen a transformation in the past 20 years or so to a very militaristic, dictatorial method of policing.  I understand some of it under appropriate circumstances but dislike it very much as standard operating procedure.

[Siskiyou]

I am a believer in seat belts. 
In the pre-seat belt days I was a passenger in a vehicle driven by my mother.  We were in a head on accident and I spent seven days in the hospital.
Ten years later I am driving a ¾ ton International 4x4.  A car comes around the corner on my side and hits me head-on at about 30 miles an hour.  I see the female passenger’s face slam against the other vehicles windshield.  She then pops out on the frozen roadway.  Her boy friend gets out puking blood all over the snow.  Immediate first aid is given and it takes an ambulance about an hour to get up the mountain.

My passenger and I were not injured.  The frontend of the rig was crushed, and the tires were point inward.  Both the passenger and I were wearing seat belts.  The other driver was cited, and his insurance paid for the repair.
I was the first responder to arrive at a head-on collision.  Everybody look fair accept the Boy Scout riding the center of the rear seat.  On impact he flew forward hitting the driver’s mirror.  We put him on a backboard and sent him down mountain.  He was rather sorry crumpled between the front and rear seats.  He had been setting on his seat belt.

It amazed me over the years how many drivers did not have medical insurance or inadequate insurance.   I have heard the complainers about the government telling them what to do, they are the same people who expect the government to pick up their hospital bill, or fail to pay their hospital bill.  Unpaid hospital bills cost hospitals’ and government millions of dollars every year.  Not surprising a lot of drunks do not have a driver’s license, nor do they have insurance.

When we first got married we lived and worked 15-miles back on a dirt road.  I trade my Chevy Impala in for a pickup.  My next move was to trade it in on a pickup.  I installed three seat belts up front. 

When I bought the Toyota Land Cruiser in 1970 I added a center seatbelt up front and two on each side in the rear.  A few years later I was loading up Boy Scouts for a week stay at camp.  One of the boys told me he did not wear seat belts and his dad said he did not have to wear a seat belt.  I called the kid’s dad and ask him to come and get his son.  Problem solved!

[Cement Man]

Some seat belt issues "close to home" for me:

In 1968, my wife and her college roommate were found ejected from a Mustang that had rolled 5 times during an overnite ride to the other girl's parents' summer home in Michigan.  No seatbelts used. No one even knows how long they were lying there. Other girl died, my wife was in a coma for weeks , required brain surgery, and has lived with a serious siezure disorder since then.  This has affected our life tremendously and cost a lot of misery over the past 41 years.

In 1975 my Dad, Mom, and two sisters were traveling on vacation.  Going about 55 on a two lane hwy in a curve to the right a drunk going 80(?) rear-ended my Dad, totalling his '72 4 dr. Ford LTD.  My Dad said he had almost no chance to react.  He did say that he was glad that he had his belt on because it allowed him to maintain control and not get shoved into the oncoming traffic.  This was a case where the oncoming drivers benefitted also as a result of seat belt use.

In about 1962 one of my friends was home from West Point for the summer.  He was a cadet.  He was driving home from a summer job one evening and got into an accident at an intersection in which he was ejected and IIRC hit his head on a concrete curb.  It was not a particularly high speed crash from what I understood.  He recovered physically, but after that had the mentality of a child.  He would walk around town talking nonsense and occasionally exposing himself to people.  From the USMA to that was a pretty stark and sad thing to see.

I can remember 3 bad crashes in high school where multiple kids were killed.  We really didn't even know or think about seat belts back then (only racing drivers used 'em) but as two of those crashes involved wild driving and ejections I believe some of those kids would be living yet if belts were used.

Saw too many bad things working "10-50's" on the FD's.  Also saw some near miracle survivals for belted people in rollovers and "airborne" cars after going over a berm.

The only time I don't wear mine is when traveling on a very small car ferry across the Ohio river.  Since they ask you to stay in the vehicle while crossing, I like mine off with the windows down and doors unlocked - just in case.

[BlkHawk73]

BUT I do think that if you are stupid enough to not use a helmet or seat belt and are injured the responsibility should rest on you not on the other driver.

  All of it too, no insurance payments not aid, you pay it all!

[Swampman]

Since most serious automobile injuries are paid for by the taxpayer, I think the seat belt law is a great idea.

[Cement Man]

The costs are also shared by all drivers who buy insurance.

One of the small FD's I was on covered a major expressway in Chicago.  The cost of calls on this highway was exorbitant to the small village, so we started billing the people involved in the accidents.  Seems wrong to do that for emergency services, but it also seems more fair.

[Hairtrigger]

How the government ever got the power to tell us that we had to wear a seat belt is beyond me.

Heather

I am guessing insurance companies lobbied for a law

[Fazak]

I got the windows tinted on my vehicle when the mandatory seat belt law was enacted in my state.

It's nobody's business whether I choose to wear a seat belt or not.

[Swampman]

When your medical bills exceed what your auto insurance will pay the it becomes the taxpayer's business.  This is very common.  In FL you are only required to have $10,000.00 worth of medical coverage.  1/2+ the folks driving down here have no insurance at all.

[Siskiyou]

I have never seen anybody eject from a car when properly wearing a seat belt. 
“Ejected from his own car in a 2005 crash, Jason Adams was left with a badly damaged frontal brain lobe and a short-term memory of only a few minutes, his father said. He can recollect things learned years ago – such as his father's cell phone number – but nothing new.”

This is a sad story, and I expect we will the hospital will be find.  I doubt if this person would have been ejected from his car if he had been wearing a seat belt.\

http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/1903583.html?storylink=omni_popular

Somebody ends up paying bill

[Brett]

Don't see how you can say it's a cash cow for the feds since they don't write the tickets but for sure it is for all police agencies who do. Is it a life saver? Well sure if you are buckled in your chances are far better to survive but no one should be forced to do it if they are ignorant enough not to. Same with helmet laws. BUT I do think that if you are stupid enough to not use a helmet or seat belt and are injured the responsibility should rest on you not on the other driver.

Big +1

I don't like the fact that the Gov'ment thinks they should control every aspect of our lives.  But I also agree with GB in that we need to take responsibility for our own decisions and not penalize the general populace for the actions of a few ignorant or stubborn individuals.   

[Swampman]

We already have nationalized health care.  If your insurance (assuming you have some) doesn't pay your bills, the taxpayers do.  I have several kinds of insurance.  I also wear a helmet when riding my bike or a seatbelt when driving my car.  Everyone that rides in my car wears one too.  It's the law.  Don't be an outlaw.

[Cement Man]

I got the windows tinted on my vehicle when the mandatory seat belt law was enacted in my state.

It's nobody's business whether I choose to wear a seat belt or not.

Other than the fact that I share in the extra costs of people who do not wear seat belts -  resulting in extra public safety emergency expenses and increased insurance rates, I really don't care if you wear a seat belt or not.  I am too old to be awakened in the middle of the night and pull heads out of windshields, people out of trees, and human pot roast chunks off of rebar any more. No more washing brains, blood, and body fluids off the pavement and bridge abutments with the booster line.  Younger people do that now.  I also hope that if you get into an accident that you do not lose control of your vehicle and cause collateral damage that hurts anyone else.  Finally, I hope no children observe your behavior and mimic it until they are of age to make sensible decisions on their own. 

I'll even throw in that I hope you aren't hurt either.

In a significant number of jurisdictions it is illegal to tint your windows so that the front seat occupants cannot be seen.  That would have the effect of limiting where one can use their vehicle with the dark windows -unless they don't mind being pulled over and cited.

So - you go to the expense and effort to tint your windows and you limit where you can drive so that you can hide behind dark windows while making yourself less safe?  Sounds like a plan.
And TM says ditto, so it must be a really good plan!   

Just curious... If for some reason a cop pulls you over and behind your dark windows you are not wearing a seat belt, do you "buckle up" before he walks up and sees it or do you leave it off and tell him it's none his business.  Just wondering.

I cherish our freedoms as much as you do.  Maybe even more.

[Swampman]

At any rate, most of the expense is passed on to those of us who are responsible.  Wear your seat belt.

[Siskiyou]

TM7, or is it The Spin Doctor?

If a patient fails to pay the hospital and doctors, and others end of paying more to cover the loss.  It may be increased cost to those who have the cash or insurance.  In some States there are programs the State pays the bills.  I understand that California pays many millions of dollars for illegal alien’s medical care.

Spin Doctor you must have a medical degree and an agenda because in No Way did I suggest a National Health Care program.

Our society expects a lot for nothing.  Back in the 70’s there was a TV show called Squad 51 located in LA County. http://www.guildernet.com/emergency/squad51.asp

As a result everybody across the United States expected their local fire department to respond to their non-fire needs.   This had a crushing impact on small volunteer fire departments supported by fund raising events, or department which received marginal tax support.  In the early 1980’s I was on a community committee working to get funds to build a fire house and fund a used fire truck, and obtain turn out gear for the firemen.  Getting enough strong health men and women to volunteer was tough.  Seemed like the local drunks wanted to join.

The State was dispatching us, and anybody that called got service including the local drunk who locked herself out of her car, her house, and called because a bat was flying around her house.  When somebody had a heart attack or a vehicle accident we went.  But the community was not willing to tax themselves to pay for oxygen, bandages, and other equipment.  The number of medical aids quickly exceeded the fire calls.  Even the feel good calls exceeded the fire calls.   Let a qualified EMT move into town and the calls will eat up his or life in a short time. 

My job changed and I moved from the community, but with 3 years the volunteer fire department was down to one good man and a fire truck during the working day, and three people at night.

A lot of rural hospitals have gone out of business, they cannot afford to provide medical career to those SELF PAY patients who will never pay.  SELF PAY in many cases is a wisp of smoke, and then it is gone.

[Swampman]

If you want health care, buy insurance.  It seems simple enough to me.

[Cement Man]

Cement...
...yeah ditto,,,,its a good idea Fazak still has, and an idea of what being free is; and it ain't conforming to your pragmatism, gore, and stories of bureacracy. He's was talking about 'big brother' getting in the car with him when he goes for a drive claiming to protect us and the childrun.  You're apparently 'big brother' posing as a so-called conservative. Now, are you working for us, or insurance company's bottom line..? Like as if insurance rates went down when seat belt laws were enacted...   Give it a rest.

~~~~~~~~

TM

Maybe put your finger under the words and read my posted words slowly......

"Other than the fact that I share in the extra costs of people who do not wear seat belts -  resulting in extra public safety emergency expenses and increased insurance rates, I really don't care if you wear a seat belt or not. "

I don't care if you paint all your windows black either.

If you don't think insurance rates are affected by losses and risks, be my guest.

If you don't believe rescue and emergency services cost money that taxpayers pay and that the cost rises incrementally with activity and risk - well go ahead and believe that.

If me sharing my bad experiences to support safety practices upset you  - sorry if I offended your sensitivities.  Life shouldn't be so nasty should it?

I said if you dittoed Fazak's plan, it must really be a good one.  Can't you take a compliment?

I did lie about one thing.  When I first got into this discussion I said something about not even wanting to argue or waste my time with people about the value of seatbelts in protecting life.  I said I say my peice once and don't bother with them after that.  No, I kept posting on this subject, and in your case I did waste my time.  Shame on me.

[Cement Man]

Yeah I get it. You're claiming neutrality; i.e. don't give a hoot what we do except for your purse strings and a perceived waste of your time. . Here's  the deaL >>>.... you are either with us or against us for freedom and liberty from oppression....that's the way it is.  (now, where have I heard something like that before...)
.
Meanwhile, I guess there is a few ways to interpret sacred seatbelt laws, huh!?..in spite of fractured egos. You see the deal with HC is you can have the government and their lackeys imposing all kinds of 'indirect' health care such as seatbelt laws (likely erroneously, too); or you can actually step up to the plate of justice and do something about 'direct' HC for real people in the here and now; ...and stop fixating on the hereafter.  Get it...?


...TM7

Facts:

I stated that I am somewhat conflicted regarding laws like this.  It makes sense to use seatbelts - often life and death sense.  But I do not like the government dictating everything.  Because I strongly believe that seatbelts do save lives, and because too many kids have been lost due to not being properly restrained,  because my family, friends, and I have personally been affected by car accidents, and I also have risked my rear end to serve a lot of people who might not have been killed or maimed if they had been belted in, and I have had to deal with the real life results, I think the plus/minus ratio falls soundly on the side of seat belts.

You called me pragmatic.  You got that right.  When it comes to battles over liberty, I'll choose my fights in MY order of importance and I can't get real excited about disputing seat belt laws.  I think it's foolish not to use them and if you want to make a big case about your personal freedom over seat belts - go ahead.  I don't much care about that one, and even less about what you think about it.

My purse strings are affected by risk and losses, and the consequences of damage and suffering. So are yours.  What's to debate about that?

I am either "with you or against you for freedom and liberty from oppression"?  Over advocating seat belts?  Maybe I'm more concerned about health and safety than I am about your goofy idea about me being for you or against you regarding your liberty.  "With us or against us" over a basic discussion regarding seatbelts saving lives and whether I have to agree in toto with you?  My personal liberty dictates to me that I can have a different opinion than you and a laugh over car window tinting as an expression of liberty.

As far as me being with you or against you, I served in the military to preserve your right to liberty and your right to your opinions no matter how much I agree or do not agree with you.  I also served on two fire departments risking myself, without prejudice, and helped lots of people - even if some were negligent, selfish, stupid, criminal, or just plain goofy. 

Do not exclude me from the ranks of those who cherish liberty because I don't fall in line with your opinions.  You can exclude me from the ranks of those who cherish all of your opinions though.  You had a pretty good one a while back about gun safety and young people (sheesh, I even complimented you!) but I'm not with you on this one. 

Drive safely, and please - Buckle Up!

[williamlayton]

I like the feel of a seat belt--especially on long drives as it keeps my posture better.
I do sometimes take it off for a period, while driving.
If I want to take a chance I will.
Being in agreement with a law is not necessiarily being brought under subjection.
Folks die every day in a mirad of ways that we cannot prevent.
Folks get injured the same way.
I say lets just pass a law that makes it a criminal offense in the catagory of a felony to get injured or have a wreck or die, and be done with it.
Saves on paperwork and forms.
Blessings