Seatbelt law
 

My mate just called me to say he got stopped in his type r for not wearing a seat belt, and as well as getting a fine, was slapped with 3 points too.

Couple of years ago, I was caught without wearing one (the socket was broken :Whatever_ ) but only received a £30 fine...

have they changed the law?:wonder:

If thats what he was given then they must have.
Why wasn't he wearing one, its not big and its not clever :D

QFT :thumb:

that will teach him

I can't drive without a seatbelt on, just feels un-natural :freak3:

I agree :thumb:

I have a mate that never wears one but the funny thing is he says he would happily wear a racing harness instead, fair enough they do feel a lot better but most cars dont have them so he doesnt get much choice :p

The law has not changed [yet - although it probably will at some point in the future..]

You do not get penalty points on your licence for not wearing a seatbelt..

So your friend must have been doing something else wrong as well as not wearing his seat belt.

Personally I can understand why this law exists to protect children, but if an adult decides that they don't want to wear one in the front of a car then IMO it has fcuk all to do with anyone else.. It is their prerogative.. This is another example of nanny state Britain.

N.B. I always wear a seatbelt, I just think it's wrong that I am forced to do so by law.

Apart from the poor F**kers who have to attend the scene of a fatal accident and clean it up, inform next of kin, coroners court, cost to the NHS (should they survive), the list goes on. Get a grip and stop making silly comments!

As already mentioned, not wearing a seat belt is dealt with by a non-endorseable FPT.

dont people die in car crashes even with a seatbelt on?

Yes Ok I take your point regarding the inconvenience that would be experienced by the emergency services, but I still maintain my point, which is, it's my life so what the fcuk has that got to do with anybody else if I wear one or not?

As stated I do actually wear one, it is the principal of the matter that disturbs me and these kinds of principals i.e. taking the decision away from the adult and handing the decision making process over to the authorities is the point I am making here.

The are lot of other "dangerous" things in life that will be targeted next in a similar manner.

If the current trends continue there will come a point when you will not be able to scratch your arse for fear of reprisal*..

* Presumably because the bugs that live there could make you sick!!

You are correct ~ Seatbelts become completely ineffective if the combined impact speed exceeds about 35mph.

Look don't get me wrong, I totally agree with wearing a seatbelt, and I accept that they save lives.

I just don't like the fact that as an adult, I am not deemed to be responsible enough to make my own decision on the matter..

We might as well all just stay in the womb as it would be alot safer.. ;)

funniest thing I've read this morning...be interesting to see where your evidence comes from :wonder:

Not all adults are responsible. You only have to look around to see that. That's why wearing a seat belt is compulsory.



In fact, come to think of it, that's why speeding is an offence. A lot of people (adults included) would not be able to consider what is a safe speed unless they're limited by legislation. And remember, speed limits are just that - limits. They are not targets.

Get a Grip

Question: If wearing of a seatbelt was not mandatory. Would you wear one? If you were required to declare "I don't wear a seatbelt" to your insurance and that doubled your premium, would you then choose to wear one?

J.

That is toss!! What a hilarious comment to make! My seatbelt certainly helped save my life rolling a beetle at 70ish!!! Sure the seatbelt would become fairly ineffective from certain speeds in certain types of crashes. A head-on crash where speed is violently dropped from say 80 to 0 would invariably cause major injury or death but to say that a seatbelt is ineffective over combined speeds of 35mph is just untrue and only speculates on one or two types of accident IMHO.

You are living in LaLa land. Can't believe I'm reading this $hite!

Was it not suggested the other day that if Dodi and Diana had been wearing seatbelts that they would have survived. Strange then that the only survivor was their bodyguard who was wearing a seatbelt.

seat belts have no effect at over 35mph

rafpmsl, what complete boldox

i had a big crsdh at 55mph, i had a seatbelt on and it kept me in place meaning i walked away with a few scratches and bruises and aches.

i would not dream of not wearing my seatbelt, it does save lives and to claim it doesn't is complete ignorance.

in fact i can prove it

freind and a big smash a few months back, they both had seatbelts on, car that hit them head on the ocupiers didn't, and they all died. yes they had serious injuries (some caused by the belts) but had they not had them on it would have been much much worse.

Simple question of what you would rather do - get 3 points and/or a fine, or try and headbutt your way through your windscreen even at a fairly low speed.

I cant drive without mine, still have it drilled into my head from learning to drive - turn on the ignition, put seat belt on, start engine - I just do it automatically without thinking now.

Now that cars have airbags it is pretty important you do wear your seatbelt , or the airbag will kill you instead of saving you.

not read any evidence that supports that...be interested to read anything if you can point me in the right direction. :wonder::)

having been in a car that ended up up side down (friend was driving I hasten to add)

I'm glad we put seatbelts on.

both of us managed to unclip- kick the windscreen out and walk away.

don't wear a seatbelt-- I'm all for it- it'll reduce morons from the gene pool :lol1:

there was some evidence re: airbags hurting people after massive investigation in America. My vague memory is there is a finite chance an airbag could hurt you- but its so small, the odds are the airbag is of benefit.

Older cars would cause serious injury or death if the driver was not waring a seatbelt and the airbag went off. newer cars detect if the seatbelt is being worn and adjust the timing of the bag.

Air bag - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Still dumb as **** not to put your seat belt on though imho. I know i would be pretty pissed if someone crashed into me, and went flyign through their windscreen into my car and made a mess ... yucky!

sorry, can't see any evidence there to support the airbags kill claim; lots of supposition and even two 'citations' where even Wikipedia suggests some evidence should be lodged...Wikipedia is not exactly renown for its accuracy either:)

Of course they do, but the accident has to be much worse.
Where I live we had lots of snow on sunday morning. I was out mountain biking and needed to go up a local A road, but the police had it closed off. Multi vehicle accident, the bill let us pass if we walked and didnt move any debris. Now involved in this accident was a white van, it didnt even have a broken screen and was hardly damaged. But the unbelted driver had been airlifted to hospital and wasnt expected to make it. The police were waiting to hear as it affected how they treat the scene.
It wasnt the van drivers fault either. If the dick had had a seat belt on he would have walked away without a scratch, like all the others involved.
So how clever is not wearing a seat belt? I bet his family dont think it was a good idea!

Shoot down any link i make mate, i was simply passing on some information i found. Airbags can kill, the statement maybe be a bit specific that im sure not everyone that doesnt have a sealtbelt on and has a crash with the airbag being deployed dies i would imagine (imho) it would happen.

These people report stats on how many people have been killed with airbag related accidents, so they "can" cause death, although you can never be sure what will happen.

Air bag-related deaths cut to nearly zero; safety rules credited | The San Diego Union-Tribune

You could get shot by a gun... they cause death... doesnt mean your gonna die though does it... :)

USA airbags tend to be very much larger than those fitted to European cars because European drivers are expected to wear seatbelts. USA drivers either are not or were not or it's the usual state-by-state mish-mash of legislation.

Whilst airbags can kill, it's less likely to happen over this side of the pond. Unless you want to look at rear facing child seats and passenger side airbags.

J.

I reiterate my point, seatbelts become completely ineffective when the combined impact speed exceeds about 35 to 40 MPH, Agreed that this only applies to a head on collision where deceleration occurs instantaneously, but the statistic is nevertheless correct. [based on a three point belt not a harness, which would probably give you a lot more support before the belt shatters your ribcage..].

This does not mean that seatbelts cannot be of great assistance in other types of collisions or crashes where deceleration does not occur so rapidly.. [i.e. most accidents]

As previously stated I am not saying that I disagree with there use.

Perhaps, inconvenience was the wrong word to use there baser, I'm sorry if I caused you any offence, If you look at the context of what I wrote you will see that there was none intended. I have the utmost respect for anyone that works for any of the emergency services.

Going through the windscreen of a Renault 14 at low speed convinced me. The seat belt laws are an example of "for the greater good" legislation. You may be able to make a rational and adult decision to not wear a seatbelt, and suffer the consequences if the worst happens. Unfortunately there are a lot of dumbos that need guidance on things like not looking for gas leaks with matches, driving through the high street at 150 MPH, trying not to kill themselves by parking their 20 year old Nissan Bluebird in the back of a cement lorry. As others have pointed out, it's not just you that takes the consequences, it's friends, families, the emergency services, innocent bystanders that see you doing an impression of Superman through your windscreen. In theory any crash that's more than a car parking bump could kill you in the right circumstances, even in a 5* NCAP, 26 different airbags, super safety cell, racing harness equiped car, and people walk away unscathed from highspeed crashes in deathtrap specials with no safety gear or belts. It's down to chance and risk factors, and that's the point of seatbelts, reducing the risk. Like decent brakes, tyres, not consuming 8 cans of Special Brew before driving.

Blimey, verbal diarrhoea, sorry about that:wonder:

Im all for seatbelts. However there was a guy I worked with who didn't have to wear one as he had a back condition that the wearing of a seatbelt agrivated and so he was exempt from wearing one.

Also do you have to wear a seatbelt (legally) if reversing? Do taxi drivers have to wear seatbelts? Anyone got a ref website

Cool, pretty much saying the same thing - Extreme circumstances can cause the seatbelt to injure/kill (at some speeds it doesn't matter what safety measures are in place) but they're still a really good idea to wear.

Groovy :)