The Chief of Highway Safety against a mandatory seat belt law, are you kidding. Safety and seat belt use go hand in hand. What a clown Mr Thompson is with this stand. I feel sorry for all NH drivers.
New Hampshire is somewhat lax on a few of their motor vehicle laws, if you have ever been there or lived there, you would agree that it coincides with the lifestyle of a New Englander. You will notice in New Hampshire that most drivers drive under the speed limit and drivers are much more considerate compared to other areas of the nation. New Hampshire does not have a law that enforces the use of helmets for motorcycle drivers either. I love the motto Live Free or Die — we do live in a free country & I feel that an adult over the age of 18 is compitent enough to make the decision to buckle up or not–hey, it is their life not yours. This is coming from someone who was born and bred in NH–Live Free or Die!
I agree – that last thing we need is more govenmental intrusion in our lives. We are fast becoming a society willing to relinquish personal choice and freedom to government rule rather than accepting personal responsibility.
I can certainly understand the points made that requiring a seatbelt (or cycle helmet) is intrusive. I have always felt such laws were an invasion of civil liberties as noncompliance only jeapordizes the individual. However, I can see the benefit of such laws from an insurance point of view. Without such laws, premiums would skyrocket (more)!
Legislation of self-preservation behavior can be seen an infrngement on personal liberties – however, if I am being forced to pay a penalty or fund personal-choice self-destructive acts it becomes a societial issue. Darwinism makes sense in some rare circumstances, but not where I may have to share responsbility for irresponsible behavior. Consider one of the benefits of seat belts is staying behind the wheel so the driver can enjoy the benefits of air bags (another legislative control we all fund) and/or control the car after an initial impact – that’s where your liberties affect my survival chances as your car becomes driverless.
In NH 66% of drivers use seat belts. The national average is around 71%. NH only has 1.3 million people including kids which is mandatory seat belt usage. We can not be bringing down the average that much which means there are 25%+ of the population breaking the law every day. This just shows that making a law doesn’t even come close to having everyone comply. Wearing a seat belt is a learned habit that is best taught at a young age or scared into you as an adult. Get to the root of why someone doesn’t wear one and don’t make another law that people disobey.
My friends who disparage government imposed mandatory seat belt requirements…would you in principle be comfortable with insurer-imposed underwriting guidelines which could , for instance, void the insurance policy’s benefits to the first party if the insurer obtain uncontrovetible evidence that the driver was not wearing a seat belt when she/he engaged in an at-fault accident?
The idea of voiding first-party benefits for not wearing seat belts punishes the insured when they are already in an unfortunate situation, which does nothing positive for the insurer’s image. I have seen some companies double Med Pay limits for insureds wearing seat belts. I am not sure if this goes very far in encouraging seat belt use, but at least it offers positive reinforcement rather than negative.
I live here, and I see the truth of the matter every day.
NH drivers are considerate and law abiding. Far from lemmings driving into telephone poles, we do use the belts because common sense dictates we do so. That’s one of the things that I love about living here. We use and apply the sense we are given. Mostly because we don’t have mandated regulation on self preservation in automobiles.
The most dangerous driving condition in NH isn’t lack of seat belt use, weather, or negligence.
It’s a Massachusetts driver who drives erratically when they get frustrated with us following the speed limit. They then pass on a double yellow to get one spot ahead of us, and get stuck behind the car up next. Then jam on their brakes and blame us for rear ending them.
And they aren’t usually using their belts despite their state mandated seat belt use.
A major task of our not-for-profit organization, Drive and Stay Alive, Inc., is to help reduce introspection around the world, on the subject of road safety.
Sadly, “introspection” is very much the appropriate word for some NH people’s attitudes on this subject. One of your correspondents claimed that the alleged usaged rate of 66% in NH isn’t much different from the US national rate of 71%, but that does not help the argument.
Why not look further afield to countries where seat belts are compulsory and there is no such thing as a secondary offence; where failure to use is always citable. Many of those countries have compliance rates in the high 80’s and even low 90’s of percent.
But much more importantly, the best of those countries also have road-crash death rates up to a stunning 60 percent lower than is found in the USA.
If, for example, the USA were to match the per capita death rate in either Sweden or Britain — the two safest, developed countries in the world — then around 25,000 fewer lives would be needlessly wasted on America’s roads each year.
Peter Thompson’s stance on the seat belt issue in New Hampshire defies belief!
Clearly seat belts aren’t enough, you must mandate helmets for drivers and passengers of all vehicles, not just motorcycles!
Then you must reduce the speed limit to 15 mph, outlaw passing, and close the roads when it rains, snows or gets dark.
Having accomplished that, you can require that everyone wear hats, mittens, zip their parkas, carry hankies; the list is endless. Better get on it!
Petulant comments, such as those posted by T. Francis, do not help in issues such as this.
If Mr./Mrs./Ms. Francis has not noticed, the topic is peoples’ lives — not a trivial matter.
Perhaps the aforementioned writer should spend a few weeks working with emergency services personnel and get a dose or reality when having to recover body parts from people who were ejected from vehicles because they weren’t wearing a seat belt.
And then try being the one to tell a victim’s parents, or spouse, or children that the person they loved isn’t coming home any more. The only thing you DON’T say, even when it is totally true, is: “But they COULD have come home again if only they had been wearing their seat belt.”
And then, of course, there is the cost aspect, too.
NHTSA/DOT have stated that each fatality in road crashes costs American society approximately $1 million. So is it acceptable for individuals to ignore that aspect of their “wanna be free” actions?
I agree with T. Francis, “Then you must reduce the speed limit to 15 mph, outlaw passing, and close the roads when it rains, snows or gets dark.” Any type of driving can be dangerous and when somebody gets behind the wheel they are take a chance that is more likely to get them killed than top-rope climbing up a mountain bluff. The point is that the driver makes the choice and if it comes down to me making a choice that might kill me or the government making a choice that takes my freedoms away, well I’ll take my chances. I now live in a state (I used to live in N.H.) that requires seat belt use at all ages and can be a primary citation. Now I always wear my seat belt as I did when I lived in N.H but it’s just the ideal that kills me, people want big brother to watch and make laws to take care of someone because they’re too stupid to take care of them self.
I know people say this is the ‘rare’ incident but a relative of mine was involved in a major automobile accident. They were in the back seat at the time and were of age that they did not have to wear a seat belt (they lived in N.H.). To get to the point it was a slippery winter night and the car went off the road and flipped over a few times. My relative was thrown to the front and good thing because the officers at the scene of the accident said that had anybody been belted in the back seat they would have been crushed to death. My relative attained no major injuries. Again, people say seat belts save lives and I agree but don’t tell me I have to wear them, let me make that choice.
I have many of the arguments for and against the seat belt law.There is no question that it is safer to wear a seat belt than not to wear one. I would rather wear a seat belt because it is safer, to wear it and not because I might get a Ticket. States that have seat belt laws would do well to spend money to educate the public rather then to promote scare tactics such as,” click it or ticket”.
Joe Hernandez wrote: “States that have seat belt laws would do well to spend money to educate the public rather then to promote scare tactics such as, ‘click it or ticket’.”
With respect, Joe, in countries where seatbelt usage rates are higher than in the USA and — not just by coincidence — the death rates are much lower and therefore much better than in the USA, it has been found that a blend of both education and enforcement have been found to work best. In other words, neither educational programs on their own, nor enforcement programs on their own, do a particularly good job. Running them in parallel is much more effective and saves more lives.
Joe also wrote: “I have many of the arguments for and against the seat belt law.”
Again with respect, I [Eddie] would comment that if saving lives is the priority, there are NO valid arguments against the use of seat belts.
I’ve had my share of driving accidents, and if it weren’t for seat belts keeping me in my seat, I wouldn’t be typing this. I believe seat belts are a good thing for people to use. That being said, I don’t believe people should be FORCED, by law, to wear seat belts. If they’re old enough, and mature enough to drive a car, they’re old enough to decide whether or not to wear seat belts.
Even if it saves just one isn’t it worth it.
Maybe a new motto on the license plates could read
“Drive free & Die”
The Chief of Highway Safety against a mandatory seat belt law, are you kidding. Safety and seat belt use go hand in hand. What a clown Mr Thompson is with this stand. I feel sorry for all NH drivers.
New Hampshire is somewhat lax on a few of their motor vehicle laws, if you have ever been there or lived there, you would agree that it coincides with the lifestyle of a New Englander. You will notice in New Hampshire that most drivers drive under the speed limit and drivers are much more considerate compared to other areas of the nation. New Hampshire does not have a law that enforces the use of helmets for motorcycle drivers either. I love the motto Live Free or Die — we do live in a free country & I feel that an adult over the age of 18 is compitent enough to make the decision to buckle up or not–hey, it is their life not yours. This is coming from someone who was born and bred in NH–Live Free or Die!
I agree – that last thing we need is more govenmental intrusion in our lives. We are fast becoming a society willing to relinquish personal choice and freedom to government rule rather than accepting personal responsibility.
I can certainly understand the points made that requiring a seatbelt (or cycle helmet) is intrusive. I have always felt such laws were an invasion of civil liberties as noncompliance only jeapordizes the individual. However, I can see the benefit of such laws from an insurance point of view. Without such laws, premiums would skyrocket (more)!
Legislation of self-preservation behavior can be seen an infrngement on personal liberties – however, if I am being forced to pay a penalty or fund personal-choice self-destructive acts it becomes a societial issue. Darwinism makes sense in some rare circumstances, but not where I may have to share responsbility for irresponsible behavior. Consider one of the benefits of seat belts is staying behind the wheel so the driver can enjoy the benefits of air bags (another legislative control we all fund) and/or control the car after an initial impact – that’s where your liberties affect my survival chances as your car becomes driverless.
In NH 66% of drivers use seat belts. The national average is around 71%. NH only has 1.3 million people including kids which is mandatory seat belt usage. We can not be bringing down the average that much which means there are 25%+ of the population breaking the law every day. This just shows that making a law doesn’t even come close to having everyone comply. Wearing a seat belt is a learned habit that is best taught at a young age or scared into you as an adult. Get to the root of why someone doesn’t wear one and don’t make another law that people disobey.
My friends who disparage government imposed mandatory seat belt requirements…would you in principle be comfortable with insurer-imposed underwriting guidelines which could , for instance, void the insurance policy’s benefits to the first party if the insurer obtain uncontrovetible evidence that the driver was not wearing a seat belt when she/he engaged in an at-fault accident?
The idea of voiding first-party benefits for not wearing seat belts punishes the insured when they are already in an unfortunate situation, which does nothing positive for the insurer’s image. I have seen some companies double Med Pay limits for insureds wearing seat belts. I am not sure if this goes very far in encouraging seat belt use, but at least it offers positive reinforcement rather than negative.
I live here, and I see the truth of the matter every day.
NH drivers are considerate and law abiding. Far from lemmings driving into telephone poles, we do use the belts because common sense dictates we do so. That’s one of the things that I love about living here. We use and apply the sense we are given. Mostly because we don’t have mandated regulation on self preservation in automobiles.
The most dangerous driving condition in NH isn’t lack of seat belt use, weather, or negligence.
It’s a Massachusetts driver who drives erratically when they get frustrated with us following the speed limit. They then pass on a double yellow to get one spot ahead of us, and get stuck behind the car up next. Then jam on their brakes and blame us for rear ending them.
And they aren’t usually using their belts despite their state mandated seat belt use.
A major task of our not-for-profit organization, Drive and Stay Alive, Inc., is to help reduce introspection around the world, on the subject of road safety.
Sadly, “introspection” is very much the appropriate word for some NH people’s attitudes on this subject. One of your correspondents claimed that the alleged usaged rate of 66% in NH isn’t much different from the US national rate of 71%, but that does not help the argument.
Why not look further afield to countries where seat belts are compulsory and there is no such thing as a secondary offence; where failure to use is always citable. Many of those countries have compliance rates in the high 80’s and even low 90’s of percent.
But much more importantly, the best of those countries also have road-crash death rates up to a stunning 60 percent lower than is found in the USA.
If, for example, the USA were to match the per capita death rate in either Sweden or Britain — the two safest, developed countries in the world — then around 25,000 fewer lives would be needlessly wasted on America’s roads each year.
Peter Thompson’s stance on the seat belt issue in New Hampshire defies belief!
Eddie Wren
http://www.driveandstayalive.com
Clearly seat belts aren’t enough, you must mandate helmets for drivers and passengers of all vehicles, not just motorcycles!
Then you must reduce the speed limit to 15 mph, outlaw passing, and close the roads when it rains, snows or gets dark.
Having accomplished that, you can require that everyone wear hats, mittens, zip their parkas, carry hankies; the list is endless. Better get on it!
Petulant comments, such as those posted by T. Francis, do not help in issues such as this.
If Mr./Mrs./Ms. Francis has not noticed, the topic is peoples’ lives — not a trivial matter.
Perhaps the aforementioned writer should spend a few weeks working with emergency services personnel and get a dose or reality when having to recover body parts from people who were ejected from vehicles because they weren’t wearing a seat belt.
And then try being the one to tell a victim’s parents, or spouse, or children that the person they loved isn’t coming home any more. The only thing you DON’T say, even when it is totally true, is: “But they COULD have come home again if only they had been wearing their seat belt.”
And then, of course, there is the cost aspect, too.
NHTSA/DOT have stated that each fatality in road crashes costs American society approximately $1 million. So is it acceptable for individuals to ignore that aspect of their “wanna be free” actions?
Eddie Wren
http://www.driveandstayalive.com
I agree with T. Francis, “Then you must reduce the speed limit to 15 mph, outlaw passing, and close the roads when it rains, snows or gets dark.” Any type of driving can be dangerous and when somebody gets behind the wheel they are take a chance that is more likely to get them killed than top-rope climbing up a mountain bluff. The point is that the driver makes the choice and if it comes down to me making a choice that might kill me or the government making a choice that takes my freedoms away, well I’ll take my chances. I now live in a state (I used to live in N.H.) that requires seat belt use at all ages and can be a primary citation. Now I always wear my seat belt as I did when I lived in N.H but it’s just the ideal that kills me, people want big brother to watch and make laws to take care of someone because they’re too stupid to take care of them self.
I know people say this is the ‘rare’ incident but a relative of mine was involved in a major automobile accident. They were in the back seat at the time and were of age that they did not have to wear a seat belt (they lived in N.H.). To get to the point it was a slippery winter night and the car went off the road and flipped over a few times. My relative was thrown to the front and good thing because the officers at the scene of the accident said that had anybody been belted in the back seat they would have been crushed to death. My relative attained no major injuries. Again, people say seat belts save lives and I agree but don’t tell me I have to wear them, let me make that choice.
I have many of the arguments for and against the seat belt law.There is no question that it is safer to wear a seat belt than not to wear one. I would rather wear a seat belt because it is safer, to wear it and not because I might get a Ticket. States that have seat belt laws would do well to spend money to educate the public rather then to promote scare tactics such as,” click it or ticket”.
Joe Hernandez wrote: “States that have seat belt laws would do well to spend money to educate the public rather then to promote scare tactics such as, ‘click it or ticket’.”
With respect, Joe, in countries where seatbelt usage rates are higher than in the USA and — not just by coincidence — the death rates are much lower and therefore much better than in the USA, it has been found that a blend of both education and enforcement have been found to work best. In other words, neither educational programs on their own, nor enforcement programs on their own, do a particularly good job. Running them in parallel is much more effective and saves more lives.
Joe also wrote: “I have many of the arguments for and against the seat belt law.”
Again with respect, I [Eddie] would comment that if saving lives is the priority, there are NO valid arguments against the use of seat belts.
Eddie Wren
http://www.driveandstayalive.com
I’ve had my share of driving accidents, and if it weren’t for seat belts keeping me in my seat, I wouldn’t be typing this. I believe seat belts are a good thing for people to use. That being said, I don’t believe people should be FORCED, by law, to wear seat belts. If they’re old enough, and mature enough to drive a car, they’re old enough to decide whether or not to wear seat belts.