Seatbelt tickets are for the intelligent rebel.

[H311RA151N]

I don't know how we quote multiple post.
Deeve, funny I thought the same thing about without money yesterday and how bad I would like to get back to this civilization. Would I be able to make a fire, how about 50,000 years ago if I had never seen fire how would I think of it.

Eric, there will be no saving us once we pay to imagine.

Glory im not crazy, but do understand the laws of physics we are familiar with are relative to our relation to earth specificaly. While anyone can define the effect of gravity, no human can define the cause. It is possible that the person who defines the cause of gravity will have also discovered how to defy the "laws" of physics.
I guess as far as my day coming goes I have been a little concerened I would be part of a tragic event on the road since I started this thread. Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

The + button between the quote button and the quick reply button which takes you to the bottom of the page to quick reply. Hit that + button as your scrolling though responses to the posts you want to quote. Then once you have selected the ones you want to quote go to the bottom of the page and hit the new reply button. The quotes will be on the reply to thread page you will be taken to.

Not sure what your insurance companies are like down there. Up here, if you are in an accident and the investigating officer reports you were not wearing a seat belt. Most timers your coverage will be denied for personal injury. No matter if you are at fault or not.


Is it really worth the extra cost!

I asked my attorney this because of the accident report. Since it said I wasn't wearing a safety device but the official report did. Doesn't matter one way or the other as for anyone's injuries go. The person(s) liable for the accident taking place are directly responsible for the injuries of those involved in the accident. Rightfully so.

Wearing your seat belt doesn't give you immortality.

If someone hits you they are responsible for your injuries. Not you for not wearing a seat belt. The seat belt wouldn't have mattered one way or the other had someone not hit you. That's just how it is (at least here) in real life. And I'm in no way responsible for the ways of this world. I just live in it. I didn't create it. If someone has an issue with the way things are then they need to go way further up the totem pole than I am.

[deevergote]

Josh, you're arguing a totally different point there. What Ghost is saying is regarding the insurance company. Legally, yes, the person responsible for the accident is at fault for your injuries. However, if the injured party was not wearing their seatbelt, had an intentionally deactivated airbag, or bypassed other safety features of the car, the insurance company could most certainly deny payment for medical expenses, especially if the injuries sustained would most likely have been avoided if you were wearing a seatbelt.

For example, if you shattered your cheekbone by hitting your face on the steering wheel in an accident, something that would not likely have happened in that same accident had you been wearing a seat belt, should the insurance company pay you for your injury? Sure, you wouldn't have gotten injured if the person that hit you hadn't done so... but you wouldn't have smacked your face on the steering wheel had you been wearing you belt, either.


The point is, seatbelts are the law. I believe they are the law everywhere in the US and Canada, and probably many other countries as well. Even if you don't agree with it, you must abide by it. If you wish to change it, go through the proper channels to make it happen.

[GhostAccord]

If someone hits you they are responsible for your injuries. Not you for not wearing a seat belt. The seat belt wouldn't have mattered one way or the other had someone not hit you. That's just how it is (at least here) in real life.

I agree 100% that if a person is at fault they are responsible for injuries. However, Like mike mentioned, In real life, the amount of payment for those injuries would be easily contested, by any insurance company or any court of law, if the injured person was not wearing a personal restraint or had an SRS that had been tampered with.

I think they call it the "seat belt defense". If I'm not mistaken it was put in place because of ambulance chasers and those who chose not to wear seat belts and still try to sue people for injuries. Injuries that have been proven not to happen when wearing a seat belt.

[H311RA151N]

Josh, you're arguing a totally different point there. What Ghost is saying is regarding the insurance company. Legally, yes, the person responsible for the accident is at fault for your injuries. However, if the injured party was not wearing their seatbelt, had an intentionally deactivated airbag, or bypassed other safety features of the car, the insurance company could most certainly deny payment for medical expenses, especially if the injuries sustained would most likely have been avoided if you were wearing a seat belt.

For example, if you shattered your cheekbone by hitting your face on the steering wheel in an accident, something that would not likely have happened in that same accident had you been wearing a seat belt, should the insurance company pay you for your injury? Sure, you wouldn't have gotten injured if the person that hit you hadn't done so... but you wouldn't have smacked your face on the steering wheel had you been wearing you belt, either.


The point is, seatbelts are the law. I believe they are the law everywhere in the US and Canada, and probably many other countries as well. Even if you don't agree with it, you must abide by it. If you wish to change it, go through the proper channels to make it happen.

Insurance is to financially protect and compensate you from other peoples mistakes and to protect others from your mistakes. If someone was doing something making them at risk to be injured the person liable for injuring them is totally liable. Making the insurance company totally liable. The risky thing the injured was doing when it happened doesn't make any difference. What ever it was that they were doing at the time of the incident didn't cause them to be harmed. The other person is what caused the injured to be harmed.

That's a very rough explanation so I'll try to simplify it. Joe was driving his car without his air bag activated. Mark was driving beside Joe. For unknown reasons Mark slams into the side of Joe's car causing Joe to exit the roadway at speed. Joe's car collides with a tree head on and Joe hit's his head on the steering wheel severely injuring Joe's brain. Why did Joe hit his head resulting in a brain injury? Because Mark slammed into the side of Joe's car.

De-activated air bag, it doesn't matter. Legally.

If someone is walking a power line like a tight rope and you came up and bumped into the power pole making the guy fall then you made the guy fall. Your at fault regardless of the risk he was taking before you bumped the pole. You bumping the pole made him fall. And that is all that matters. That's how it was explained to me by my attorney about 5 years ago.

The DOT workers are doing something dangerous. Working in the middle of the highway. Just because they are in the road doesn't mean if you hit one of them your not responsible simply because they were in the middle of the road. Them being in the road didn't hurt them. You hitting them with your car did.

I do see the point you and Ghost made. And that same point was my reason for asking in the first place. But after it was explained to me like how I tried to explain it above, I understood why it wasn't like that.

There are certain circumstances which would be different I presume as law is very complicated. But in general and typical instances this is just the way it is. Or was anyhow.

I agree totally with seat belts and with obeying the law, all laws. Seat belts save lives.

I agree 100% that if a person is at fault they are responsible for injuries. However, Like mike mentioned, In real life, the amount of payment for those injuries would be easily contested, by any insurance company or any court of law, if the injured person was not wearing a personal restraint or had an SRS that had been tampered with.

I think they call it the "seat belt defense". If I'm not mistaken it was put in place because of ambulance chasers and those who chose not to wear seat belts and still try to sue people for injuries. Injuries that have been proven not to happen when wearing a seat belt.

That is a real life factor. Totally agree. But that's not how they look at it here. Or not how they used to. Should they? Maybe. It is valid and it does have a very direct effect on the injuries in which people sustain.

I see now exactly what you were stating.

I don't think they go about it in that way because it's so scientific to prove anything and nothing would ever get done in a timely manner if it were pursued like that. The accident would need to be recreated in some instances and that could take years ti get anything done with. I fought for 2.5 years on mine and it was simple.

[wed3k]

alright, dont wear your seat belt, youre such a rebel. have a nice day and move on...we get it.

[H311RA151N]

Who are you talking to anyways wed3k? There are several here on the "side" you evidently oppose. I just want to be sure of who your addressing before I make a response.

[Raf99]

Seat belts save lives. We all know that.

But it still baffles me that cabs (in my town) do not have to wear seat belts, same with pizza delivery drivers. And yes, they do drive on the highway.
Same with school buses and passenger buses. I think they should at least be given the option to put one on.

[gloryaccordy]

I don't think they go about it in that way because it's so scientific to prove anything and nothing would ever get done in a timely manner if it were pursued like that. The accident would need to be recreated in some instances and that could take years ti get anything done with. I fought for 2.5 years on mine and it was simple.

Its pretty easy actually. Often seat belts bruise in an accident. Plus there are statistics. You are in a 35 MPH crash most people who have similar crashes in your car escape w/minimum injury, and u come away with a fractured skull/collarbone/ribcage, slumped over the wheel w/your seatbelt detatched, a cop worth his salt will make note of that detail on the accident report.

What pisses me off is folks like you drive up my insurance premiums. Would you be willing to pay 2-3x higher insurance to not wear a seat belt? Because that's how much more likely it is for you to be seriously injured without one.

This manic "rebellion" against common sense is idiotic. I feel like the govt should issue safety mandates for fatal activities so these folks can remove themselves from the gene pool and stop spiking my auto/health insurance premiums

[ontheroad92]

get an antique car as a daily driver?

[H311RA151N]

Its pretty easy actually. Often seat belts bruise in an accident. Plus there are statistics. You are in a 35 MPH crash most people who have similar crashes in your car escape w/minimum injury, and u come away with a fractured skull/collarbone/ribcage, slumped over the wheel w/your seatbelt detatched, a cop worth his salt will make note of that detail on the accident report.

What pisses me off is folks like you drive up my insurance premiums. Would you be willing to pay 2-3x higher insurance to not wear a seat belt? Because that's how much more likely it is for you to be seriously injured without one.

This manic "rebellion" against common sense is idiotic. I feel like the govt should issue safety mandates for fatal activities so these folks can remove themselves from the gene pool and stop spiking my auto/health insurance premiums

I have nothing to do with your insurance premiums. You don't know anything about me or my driving record. smh Is the law not good enough for you? I obey the law so to hell with what you have to say, and why tell me anything anyways? If I'm in accordance with the law and you don't like what I'm doing then you need to start with the law, not me.

And why single me out over this shit? Can't you find others to blame for "raising your insurance premiums"? If you really care your efforts will be much better spent elsewhere. Like those around you, in person.

Trying to put so much direct blame on me like I have such an impact on your life is what's ignorant. But I doubt you see that.

Your turns over gloryaccordy, time for the next person in line. But until your back at the front of the line go read random comments on YoutTube. If you got the urge to go after me just over a seat belt, you'll have a hay day there.



And I will add, this clearly isn't about seat belts anymore.

Kick someone when they are already being kicked then make up reasons to continue kicking them when you think the beating has surpassed the "offense". You guys just can't get enough! But go ahead. Your only kicking yourselves.

[Honda_Lady]

Didn't read it all, not going to join the fight, just going to say, I never go anywhere without a seat belt, Florida is a Click it or Ticket state and I lost a good friend who was not wearing a seat belt and was thrown into his spoiler on his trunk, was declared dead on scene. That is all, removing myself from this conversation now.

[deevergote]

An injury that would have been avoided had the injured party obeyed the law could (and would) most certainly have their claim rejected by an insurance company.

If Person A rear-ends Person B, and Person B is wearing their seatbelt, the injury may be minor. If Person B is not wearing their seatbelt, they may fracture bones in their face, break their jaw, receive severe eye injuries, etc... from hitting the steering wheel. Sure, Person A's actions were the ultimate cause, but had Person B followed the law and been wearing their seatbelt, the injuries sustained would not have been so severe.
So is it fair to expect the insurance company to pay tens of thousands of dollars for treatment of injuries obtained because Person B was breaking the law and not wearing their seatbelt? Should the insurance company be responsible for medical expenses that would otherwise have been avoided?

Insurance companies exist to make money. They are not doing anyone any favors, and they don't give away money if they can avoid doing so.

[cb7 calling]

OP thinks hes smarter than physics and human physiology. No matter. His day will come

Don't you put that evil on me!

[floored]

I guess I am stubborn. I never had to wear one back in the day so why now? Why can I ride my motorcycle with basketball shorts no shirt and no hemet....as ong as i have glasses on?

[Accrdwgnguy]

I guess I am stubborn. I never had to wear one back in the day so why now? Why can I ride my motorcycle with basketball shorts no shirt and no hemet....as ong as i have glasses on?

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should..you could jump off a bridge if you wanted to.