alt.energy.homepower

>>> Having been on construction job sites more than once with coworkers who
>>> injured themselves and had to be either
>>> rushed to hospital or extricated from dangerous places by other workers
>>> because of they were:
>>>
>>> A. Using equipment not meant for the job
>>> B. Injured and had to be extricated from dangerous position because they
>>> were not using safety belts, hard hats, foot gear etc.
>>>
>>> Yeah it happens a lot, which is why Insurance is so high for
>>> construction workers.
>>>
>>
>> That's part of my point. Why should insurance pay for someone being
>> stupid unless you have a stupid clause? If you are hurt because of your
>> own actions then you should pay for it, both physically and financially.
>> Insurance should only pay if you are hurt by a true accident or by
>> another's actions. In case of the former the insuracne company should
>> should be allowed to sue the stupid person to recover its money.

Don't you have an answer for this either?


>>> Stats show most of them do, seat belt use has gone from almost nil to
>>> 80% since the laws were enacted
>>>
>>
>> Could that be because people are afraid not to wear them? There are
>> several reports out there that show most people over pay their income
>> tax. Is this because they thing they should help the government out or
>> is it because they are afraid of what the government might do to them if
>> they make a mistake?
>>
>> You put the force of government behind almost anything you can get 80% of
>> the people to do it.

No comment on this either I see.


>> Still not an answer to the questions posed. Anyway what does all that
>> have to do with the fact that they are going 150+ mph when they crash and
>> almost all of them not only live but walk away on their own two feet.
>> Even with the small number of drivers in NASCAR the number is
>> statistically tiny.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> You give cites of how not buckling up is a danger for the person not
>>>> buckled up you have yet to give a cite showing how many accidents are
>>>> CAUSED by people not buckling up AND injure others. Can you come up
>>>> with 5 accidents in the past 30 years where an unbuckled person was the
>>>> cause of a fatal accident?
>>>>
>>>> If you can not then will you admit that there no REASONABLE risk to
>>>> anyone other than the individual who made a free choice to not buckle
>>>> his seatbelt?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> A study conducted at the University of Tokyo examined 100,000 collisions
>>> involving front and rear passengers.
>>> The study found that drivers who are buckled up have five times the risk
>>> of dying in a collision if their rear seat
>>> passengers are not buckled up. The injuries to the driver and front seat
>>>
>>
>> Nice try but the accidents mentioned are not caused by anyone being
>> unbelted. The deaths are but again its the driver's choice to drive
>> before everyone is buckled in. I once spent 15 minutes sitting in the
>> Wal Mart parking lot because my dad refused to buckle up. Ticked him off
>> but he got over it.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Can't you read? " *_The study found that drivers who are buckled up have
> five times the risk of
> dying in a collision _*_*if their rear seat passengers are not buckled
> up*_

Ok but just how is thing going to cause a fatal accident? It may kill
someone in THAT accident.


> The* driver* of a MTA Metro Bus was* ejected* from his bus and then run
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Los Angeles. The driver of the bus died at the scene. The driver of the
>>> SUV was transported in critical condition
>>>
>>
>> Ooooo, so close. Critial condition not dead.
>>
> The bus driver died

BUT HE WAS THE ONE EJECTED IN THE ACCIDENT. He was not killed because
someone else was ejected. IOW, being ejected did not CAUSE (look up the
word if you don't understand) a fatal accident he was in one.


>>> 3. Crash on icy I-80 fatal to OP woman
>>>
>>> A 32-year-old Overland Park woman wearing her lap belt but not shoulder
>>> belt was thrown from her 2002 Ford
>>> Explorer and killed when it overturned on icy I-80 in Wyoming Saturday,
>>> police said. A 7-year-old girl passenger
>>> was treated and released.
>>>
>>
>> No accident caused.
>>
> Yes it did, she struck a snowplow causing a second accident

Oops, I left out the word "fatal"


>>> "Query's husband of three years died instantly after the tread peeled
>>> off his Firestone tire, his Explorer rolled
>>> three times, and he was thrown out of the vehicle and into oncoming
>>> traffic".
>>>
>>
>> No again
>>
> He was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

Please note I specifically said fatal accident. I'll quote for you: "Can
you come up with 5 accidents in the past 30 years where an unbuckled person
was the cause of a fatal accident?"


>>> Ashanti pulled out of a planned concert in Johannesburg, South Africa,
>>> on Saturday after her cousin was killed by a drunk
>>> driver while running an errand for the singer before the show. According
>>> to the Cape Times Web site, 20-year-old Quinshae
>>> Snead was thrown into oncoming traffic from a car in which she was a
>>> passenger after it was struck by an unlicensed
>>> 17-year-old drunk driver who had stolen his mother's car.
>>>
>>
>> Again the person killed was the one unbuckled and was the fatal accident
>> not the cause.
>>
>
> What? She was thrown into the path of another car causing a second
> accident

As I have pointed out, I said cased a fatal accident. I'm sure I could come
up with some accidents where ladders falling off a truck have caused
accidents should be ban ladders?


>>> Danielle Ricco, a classmate of Miss Sallustio at Pace University and one
>>> of her close friends, was killed in the crash after
>>> being ejected from the cab's front passenger seat and thrown into the
>>> path of another taxi going in the opposite direction.
>>>
>>
>> Ditto.
>>
>
> She was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

Non-fatal accident.


>>> Police have released the identity of a Clearfield man killed Monday
>>> night after he was thrown from a rolling vehicle and hit
>>> by oncoming traffic
>>>
>
> He was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

See above.


>>> SEMINOLE COUNTY, Fla. -- A driver of a sport utility vehicle that
>>> flipped nearly 12 times on Interstate 4 was cut
>>> in half after he was launched into the air and landed in the windshield
>>> of a moving SUV, according to Local 6 News.
>>>
>>
>>
> He was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

Ditto.


>>> "A Howard Beach teenager died after the auto she was riding in flipped
>>> and ejected her into oncoming traffic on the Belt Parkway on Sunday."
>>>
>>
>> Ditto.
>>
> She was thrown into the path of another car causing a second accident

See above.


>> Nice try but you faild. None of your examples fit the criteria I set.
>> Notice that I specifically stated that the unbelted person had to be the
>> cause of a fatal accident NOT be part of a fatal accident.
>>
>
> They were, they were not wearing seatbelts and died as a result of being
> thrown into oncoming traffic.
> That is a fatal accident according to the police.

Let me try to explain it to you. I know that not wearing a seatbelt can
cause you to be tossed from a car and becoming part of the debris from your
accident and increase the odds of a secondary accident. But the same thing
can be said about cargo being carried and parts of the car which have broken
free in an accident. Point one, the odds of it happening are very, very
small. The odds of causing a secondary accident that is fatal to a second
party is so small I'm not sure how you'd figure them. Point two, with such
small odds trying to claim a law forcing everyone to wear a seatbelt is to
protect other drivers from being killed by flying bodies is ludicrous.


>> In each and every case the person who died did so because they made a
>> risky and stupid choice. People should have the right to make such
>> choices, just because you don't and don't think they should is no reason
>> to force them to do what you think is best.
>>
>
> I think you have a problem with comprehension, all I have ever claimed was
> that laws are made to protect
> stupid people and the rest of us from their actions. It is not about "what
> I think is best" or what I think the
> government should do.

My major point is why should the government trample the rights of all the
people to make choices to protect a few stupid people? I think people have
the right to be stupid and you have NO right to tell people what to do.
BTW, I didn't know that you lived in a dictatorship where the government had
total control over you and your life and you had no say in governmental
policy. I guess that's why you don't comprehend individuals having rights.


>> All of your cites have shown that the lack of seatbelt usage has made
>> accidents worse but none of them show that an accident was CAUSED by
>> someone not wearing their seatbelt.
>>
> Now you are just being ridiculous. It's not an fatal accident until it
> someone is killed, up until then it is just an accident,
> the death occurs because the seat belt is not worn. The seat belt does not
> cause the car to swerve on a patch of ice,
> force a driver to drink before they drive, or make them apply makeup while
> driving.

Let me explain. To be a causal factor of an accident the object must be a
link in the chain of events the accident which is at the front of the chain
AND its removal would prevent the accident. Example of a seatbelt being a
casual factor of a fatal accident. Car his black ice. Driver over corrects
and loses control. Car rolls over. Driver ejected. Body sails through
air. While in air body hits second car. Body flys through windshield of
second car. Body kill driver of second car. One of the causal factors in
the second accident is the lack of seatbelt use.


>> Also you like to use reasonable risk as your reason. Just what is a
>> reasonable risk? The risk of 1 person in 100,000 dieing? 1 in 500,000?
>> 1
>> in 1,000,000?
>
> You truly have your head in the sand, I have already posted reams of cites
> and quotes pointing out how one law
> regarding seat belts has saved thousands of lives, and how not wearing one
> dramatically increases your risk of killing
> yourself and those riding in the car with you.

Do you have a problem answering questions put to you? I asked you a simple
question. Please re-read it and try answering it. Is this within your
ability?

Why do you 1) care if I do something stupid and die? 2) Have the right to
contol my life and how I live it?



> What I feel is a reasonable risk has nothing to do with it, do a study
> and do the math yourself and determine what
> level of risk the government feels is acceptable. Personally I always
> buckle up, don't walk under ladders and always

Good for you, so do I.


> wear protective gear when working. You can do what ever you like, and

Not legally I can't. I can't drive in any state in the union without
wearing a seatbelt. IIRC, I can not legally install a toilet that uses more
than, I think, gallons of water. I can not install a 'high flow' shower
head. In my current locale I can not install my own mobile home. I can not
have an entry way to a mobil home without a platform smaller then 40" X 40"
if that mobile home is more than 24" off the ground.


> think about how well you exercised your rights
> ( God forbid it should happen) in the ICU or emergency room some day.

To tell you the truth if you do something stupid and wind up in the ER, ICU
or morgue it won't bother me at all.