I believe it's a nationwide promotion for drivers and passengers to buckle up, but at least statewide they're campaigning non-stop here; not sure if it's all over the nation.

But anyway, everyone know seat belts safety is enforced to keep occupants safe and reduce injury/deaths, but laws are variable depending on the state.

According to our Texas state law, seat belts are required for all front passengers (especially drivers), but backseat passengers are not required over the driving age. The first offense starts at a whopping $200 fine -- yeah they're that serious about it here. I don't know how it works in other states.

You'd think it's common sense to wear it, but you'd be surprise how many people have protested the law citing violation of personal choice and more government intervention/overprotection. I am in total support for enforcing seat belt laws, and since my automobile collision that saved my life a decade ago, I wear it no matter where I sit (front seat or back seat).

The question is: Are you in support of the "Click It or Ticket" program as well as being legally enforced, or are you against it.

__________________
ThrillNetwork Lead Moderator (Originally known as Hurricane)

It's time to play some DEFENSE!

Why would anybody be against it!!?? Seatbelts save lives!!! Its proven in statistics!! Besides I pretty much have a habit of wearing my seatbelt, If I dont, I feel odd...

The law is just trying to keep up safe, not kill us...

__________________
Dallas Cowboys


Somebody at school today (5/29) said TTD goes 230 mph. (laughs)

They've been pimping the Click it or Ticket thing here in Chicago for atleast 5 years. Whether the Gov is thinking of your safety or just another reason to pull someone over. It's always a good idea.

They push it here in VA a lot as well.

I obviously think its a very good idea to support buckling your seat belt. I really don't understand why some people don't. But, I don't know if the Gov't should be able to make it a law, considering my decision to wear or not wear a seat belt really doesn't directly effect any other person. If I want to be an idiot and not wear my seat belt, I feel like I should be able too...

__________________

I'm for it.

The only people I've met that were against it were bikers that advocate for no helmet laws as well. I guess the reason I'm for it is that it can save lives and I think anyone should be expected to take reasonable measures to ensure thier own safety.

__________________
Jim says; "The Potential energy of the system at the height of the lift hill is equal to the Kinetic energy at the bottom of the hill...."
Jim's friends say; "Just shut up and ride it would you."

I'm for it, don't see any reason not to be. I personally prefer the old slogan, "Click It or Faceplant on the Pavement."

__________________

It's state law in NJ, and I don't find it difficult to follow.

And, I do think the government has the right to control it, because when you go flying out the windshield, the government paid police officers and EMTs will be the ones cleaning your remains off of the streets.

They have been at it for years in North Carolina & Florida. I have seen hundreds of checkpoints over the last 2 years.

__________________

2009 Carolina Cobra Crew
Go Panthers! 4-6: Week 12 @ New York Jets

#6 North Carolina Tarheels 4-1

I'm definately for buckling up, but as for a government enforced law? I couldn't really care less. If some one is stupid enough to ride in a car and refuse to wear a seatbelt, then maybe it's a good thing that they're being cast out of the gene pool. Although, there definately should be enforcement of the law if it's a child who's not strapped in, since that would be parental neglegence.

__________________

Eh, Not really valid argument though, considering they are most likely spending more money by trying to enforce this law then they would "cleaning your remains off of the streets"

brutal, but true.

__________________

The "Click It or Ticket" campaign originated here in Tennessee by TDOT back in the late 90s. It was later picked up by the US DOT for use all over the country, and has been ever since.

__________________
2008 - Tennessee Tornado Crew

Happy 10th Anniversary to the coaster that started it all- Tennessee Tornado!

For it. I don't see any credible argument as to NOT wearing a seat belt.

__________________
Thornton to Heatley all day, every day.

I'm glad I see commercials here in NJ. When I see kids not buckled up I dare to repeat the PSA because I really want them to be alright. Nobody of course wants to see heartbroken parents/dead children/people.

The other day on a bypass I saw a lady on a mobile phone. Beyond a next intersection I suddenly see something swoop onto the road. It was an officer entering the same lane as that lady's car. Indeed she got pulled over for her mobile phone violation. It's now since March a primary offense in the State of New Jersey.

__________________
Thrillnetwork Moderator - Sophomore Original sn: CHILLERLC1
2008 & 2009 TN Coaster Draft Champion
You knew I wanted the other repeat too

This is probably the most unanimous voting I've seen on TN.


I haven't seen any checkpoints here, so I'm not sure what exactly goes on. Is it as simple as halt traffic at a point and check each vehicle to make sure all drivers are buckled up?


Hence why I thought this topic might be debatable, but since we all agree on this...

__________________
ThrillNetwork Lead Moderator (Originally known as Hurricane)

It's time to play some DEFENSE!

It may not affect you as you face plant on the pavement...but it could affect your immediate family.

I refuse to drive anywhere unless all occupants of the vehicle I'm driving are buckled up.

__________________

Good point, which leads to the age old question, should it be the governments job to protect your familys/friends right to having a heathly happy member of the family, or should it be that persons responsibilty all to himself. Personally, I'm really not sure. I truly do believe that someone should have the right to be as big of an idiot as they want, as long as it doesn't take away from any one else's rights. But, the question becomes when do you draw the line between protecting the rights of a family member, and oppresing the rights of a person?

p.s. Just for reiteration/clarification, I have absolute no problem with this law in particular, it truly does save lives, I just think its an interesting debate. Should the government be our acting parent? Keeping us from making stupid decisions. or should we, as free citizens, have the ability the make stupid decisions and then deal with the consequence later.

Blah, I think I just said the same thing three times in one post, just with different words... Woops.

__________________

^But if buckling up wasn't such a big deal, then seat belts would still be "optional" equipment much like power windows, sunroof, etc.

I'm not too sure how far you are going with these "rights" but remember that driving is a privilege.

__________________

When did I say that Buckling up wasn't a big deal? I've reiterated already the fact that I think its rediculious to not wear a seat belt. I'm just not sure if the Gov't should be able to enfore that decision onto you.

And yes, Driving is a privilege. But I don't believe that means I should lose rights over things that only effect myself. The majority of decisions and actions in a car directly effect other people, because there are other people on the road/in your car that have the right to be safe when driving. But seat belts do not directly effect anyone elses rights but the person that makes the decision. So why shouldn't he have the right to make that decision?

This is a free country, or is supposed to be, and I am a strong believer in the idea that one should have the choice to do what they want, as long as that does not effect other peoples rights directly.

I'm am strongly for banning public smoking because it effects other peoples rights to be able to breathe clean air when in public, but I am still against banning Smoking all together eventhough I would never smoke in my lifetime, because I believe people should have the right to make that decision for themself.

Another example is drinking, I am Very Very Very supportive of stronger penalties for Drunk Drivers, but I am also against banning alcohol. Same Idea.

As long as someones choice does not effect anyone else directly, then I believe they should have the ability to make that choice.

__________________

This is a free country- until you perform a little clause in the constitution which states the government may suspend rights for the general well being of the people when it comes to safety situations in which case your actions may harm yourself or other people.

__________________
2008 - Tennessee Tornado Crew

Happy 10th Anniversary to the coaster that started it all- Tennessee Tornado!

And yes when people don't wear seat belts and don't survive an accident involving another vehicle, they effect the psychology and maybe even the legal case of the driver/passengers of the other vehicles who do survive as this could haunt their minds for the rest of their lives. They have to live with the notion that they were involved in a fatal accident that took someone's life.

So yes, everyone (not just the driver who refused to wear the seat belt) is affected one way or another.

__________________
ThrillNetwork Lead Moderator (Originally known as Hurricane)

It's time to play some DEFENSE!

I absoutely despise the law. If you think that the government cares about your safety, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona that would be perfect for you.

It's about revenue generation, not safety, period. Don't be duped.

Now, while I despise seat belt laws, I love seat belts. I never go without one. I insist that everyone in my vehicle buckle up. There's no intelligent argument for not wearing one.

But the law flat out sucks.

__________________
ThrillNetwork Lead Moderator
My neighbor got a big new house, and all I got was his lousy payments

I don't know, I've always seen driving as a privilege, not a right. So if you want to have the privilege to drive, you need to obey certain laws and rules.

I see it just the same at my local Downhill Mountain Bike Resort, you MUST wear a helmet if you want to ride.

__________________
Thornton to Heatley all day, every day.

I wholly support this law. I did an extensive research project with T(exas) DOT on occupant restraint use my junior year in high school. When you do not wear a restraint, you become a potential projectile and run the risk of harming others and yourself in the case of an accident. I looked at dozens of cases/incidents where passengers of other cars caused other accidents after their own. Occupants were not wearing seat belts and either were launched into other cars or thrown in the way of oncoming cars, causing those cars to crash into others nearby.

The main fact is still, wear the seat belt. It does not take but 5 seconds to pull it across your chest/lap and in those 5 seconds, you're protecting both yourself and citizens who are driving on the same roads you are.

I think that driving is, as others said, a privilege. You can have that ability taken away (ie. license revoked, etc.) and it I think that's right. And if you don't want to generate revenues for the government, wear the seatbelt, and save yourself a ticket. I, like Andrew and a few others said, won't drive unless all the riders have "clicked it", so to speak.

__________________
ThrillNetwork Editor (past tense: lectricShark)
Never forget justice is what love looks like in public. -- OXFAM

Let's add something else in here. The "law" states that I must have car insurance. My license has already been suspended because I could not provide proof of insurance (2004). If driving is this "right" that everyone claims it to be then why weren't we all born with a driver's license? Why do we have to earn one?

__________________

Everyone keeps saying how driving isn't a right, and how people are wrong in assuming that... But who has said otherwise in this thread? If I'm missing someone's post then please point it out to me. I have only proposed the question of whether or not we have the right to decide to wear a seat belt or not. That is not the same as saying we have the right to be able to drive, not in the slightest.

__________________