SEAT BELTS

[Anony-mousse]

My wifes Golf 5 has a safety beep and dash warning plus the doors lock at about 20kms. My Jeep beeps after about 30 seconds when the engine is on. The doors only lock at 20kms but the beep starts even if the car is not moving.

I've asked both VW and Jeep dealerships to turn off the sound. A colleague asked Volvo. All refused stating they didn't want to be help liable and where not legally permitted to disable safety features. I'm sure non-dealership garages could do it though.

Also in the Jeep you have to use the key to open the petrol tank which means you can't have the radio on and fill up at the same time. Apparently this is regulation in the US. The ignition has a special position for operating the radio without the motor running.

And why not just put the seatbelt on if the sound bothers? Stupid car manufacturer. Those beep installing idiots really want you to arrive alive. How can they? Roflmfao

 

[Turbo_Aspiration]

And why not just put the seatbelt on if the sound bothers? Stupid car manufacturer. Those beep installing idiots really want you to arrive alive. How can they? Roflmfao

Don't give the manufacturer too much credit. If it wasn't for laws in the other countries they export to they wouldn't give a damn.

 

[Anony-mousse]

Either way, still strange to go to the dealer to have the beep removed.

But the most stupid thing I have seen in my life was a Volvo driver who drove off, the ding dong plus a red light started flashing (was one old Volvo, no idea what), he put the seat belt on and removed it again. I asked him WTF that was and he said he doesn't want to wear seat belts because he doesn't want to burn inside the car when he has an accident due to the belt that can't be released then. He has heard some stories that people would have survived without seat belts and blahblah. Just the common nonsense...

As I already said, stupidity has no limits.

 

[Rosaudio]

Im sure its an EU thing. Did the EU not make it compulsory for car manufacturers to install these things in new cars?

 

[ToxicBunny]

Very possibly, but its a good thing..

Its illegal to drive without seatbelts in this country, and if your car gets annoying when you don't have one, well you'll put it on won't you?

 

[ponder]

Either way, still strange to go to the dealer to have the beep removed.

They just annoy me. There are a few instances when I do not wear my seat belt.

 

[Anony-mousse]

Im sure its an EU thing. Did the EU not make it compulsory for car manufacturers to install these things in new cars?

No way, the seat belt law exists since 1976 already. All cars from 1974 were required to have seat belts front and rear as standard.

 

[PeterCH]

There's no harm in just a light, or doors locking at 20km/h (that's the speed mine does). But to force laws about seatbelts because someone thinks he's knows what's best for you is not acceptable IMO. You're not harming anyone or anything so there should be no law against it. Whether you value your life or not is besides the point because you have the option to wear it if you do.

Well maybe you don't value your life but if you're ejected from the car -- you can hit someone else. Secondly, someone else will have to pick up the pieces and finally the taxpayer, medical aids (and their other subscribers) as well as the economy suffers more if you get seriously hurt or killed because you're not wearing a seat belt. A seat belt is very simple and unobtrusive to put on and saves lives and prevents serious injuries.

It's also illegal to assist people in suicide.

 

[Conradl]

It's also illegal to assist people in suicide.

It's even illegal TO commit suicide - that a law like that was made tells you something

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Well maybe you don't value your life but if you're ejected from the car -- you can hit someone else. Secondly, someone else will have to pick up the pieces and finally the taxpayer, medical aids (and their other subscribers) as well as the economy suffers more if you get seriously hurt or killed because you're not wearing a seat belt. A seat belt is very simple and unobtrusive to put on and saves lives and prevents serious injuries.

It's also illegal to assist people in suicide.

Maybe you didn't read my subsequent posts, but I never advocated not wearing one, nor did I say that I don't use one

And yeah the big steering wheel is sure to ask the laws of physics to make an exception for you so that you may move in an upward and then horizontal direction, in order to become a projectile through the windscreen.

Why would the taxpayer suffer for someone not wearing a seat belt? Does the person driving also not pay the fuel tax and his medical aid? So what's the deal - you can only pay it, but heaven forbid you try and use it. It's not like you avoid all injury by wearing one anyway. It may help in saving your life, but it's not a magic wand Peter.

 

[PeterCH]

And yeah the big steering wheel is sure to ask the laws of physics to make an exception for you so that you may move in an upward and then horizontal direction, in order to become a projectile through the windscreen.

Steering wheels are not a substitute for seat belts. You need to learn some basic physics there chum.

Why would the taxpayer suffer for someone not wearing a seat belt? Does the person driving also not pay the fuel tax and his medical aid? So what's the deal - you can only pay it, but heaven forbid you try and use it. It's not like you avoid all injury by wearing one anyway. It may help in saving your life, but it's not a magic wand Peter.

Taxpayer pays because of numerous direct and indirect costs. The cops who come out to flag the traffic down, the state paramedics who respond, the delays in traffic which has to slow down, the crime and other people who suffer because you were inconsiderate and got seriously hurt instead of waling away from the accident - the cops could have been responding to crime for example; and wait and people in turn are late for work, deliveries don't get done etc - all impact the economy. Then your wife takes time off work and is less productive, she wastes money in visiting you in hospital, your friends also come in, everyone has secondary expenses etc. All of that affects the economy, business earnings, tax, profits etc.
Not to mention you - you do have 30 days sick leave per 3 years, don't you. If you're badly hurt you end up wasting your companies' money and they generate less revenue, less tax, fewer jobs, etc. The economy suffers in numerous ways. If you become incapacitated your PPS or insurance kicks in, your company has to still pay and find a replacement for you, work does not get done, there are delays, etc - everything affects company revenues and therefore the economy. Someone new has to assume your job and train and catch up with your projects etc.

Seat belts are a magic wand. They do save lives and they do prevent serious injuries in most accidents. They are the single most effective safety feature in vehicles. Airbags are BS in comparison.

As for medical aid, the more individual members spend the more the costs go up for everyone concerned. Realise also that most drugs, IVs, prosthetic devices, XRAY and CT scan films and consumables are imported which means you're contributing to the budget deficit. Many accidents are unavoidable but not wearing a seat belt is a way to make accidents worse and and its so easy to buckle up.

Everything I've said can be confirmed with a few simple Google searches.

You can apply this one for the effects on the economy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Steering wheels are not a substitute for seat belts. You need to learn some basic physics there chum.

Where did I state that it was? I said that you won't become a projectile as easily as you say, chum.

Taxpayer pays because of numerous direct and indirect costs. The cops who come out to flag the traffic down, the state paramedics who respond, the delays in traffic which has to slow down, the crime and other people who suffer because you were inconsiderate and got seriously hurt instead of waling away from the accident - the cops could have been responding to crime for example; and wait and people in turn are late for work, deliveries don't get done etc - all impact the economy. Then your wife takes time off work and is less productive, she wastes money in visiting you in hospital, your friends also come in, everyone has secondary expenses etc. All of that affects the economy, business earnings, tax, profits etc.
Not to mention you - you do have 30 days sick leave per 3 years, don't you. If you're badly hurt you end up wasting your companies' money and they generate less revenue, less tax, fewer jobs, etc. The economy suffers in numerous ways.

Seat belts are a magic wand. They do save lives and they do prevent serious injuries in most accidents. They are the single most effective safety feature in vehicles. Airbags are BS in comparison.

As for medical aid, the more individual members spend the more the costs go up for everyone concerned. Realise also that most drugs, IVs, prosthetic devices, XRAY and CT scan films and consumables are imported which means you're contributing to the budget deficit. Many accidents are unavoidable but not wearing a seat belt is a way to make accidents worse and and its so easy to buckle up.

Everything I've said can be confirmed with a few simple Google searches.

God I'm not arguing that it isn't safe. I'm saying that it should not be legal to tell people what to do with their lives. Care to explain the law against suicide?

You're also assuming that the seat belt will avoid the accident altogether, because if the driver had been wearing one, the cops wouldn't have to come out and block off the lane since he wouldn't have had an accident in the first place. As I said, it's not a magic wand. It may help save your life, but it doesn't prevent the accident in the first place and it doesn't mean that you won't incur any injuries.

 

[asshat99]

In some cases, the benefits are so great, and the cost is so small (yes that seatbelt fits over the biggest gut), and some people somehow do not have the mental capacity to figure it out for themselves, that it can be made law.

People are incredibly selfish if they can't accept they should do something simple to reduce the likelyhood of serious injuries, costing society money and pain because for some reason (I really can't think of any serious advantages) they don't want an unobtrusive strap over their chest. It takes one second to put on and less to take off.

By your argument, we should be allowed to take hard drugs (high cost to society, no long term benefit). Here again, you have to draw the line because no one really gets anything out of letting people do wtf they want.

Rules for the greater good are the basis of society, if one can't accept that, then one shouldn't live in it.

 

[JK8]

Seat belts are for people who dont have faith in their own driving!

 

[Bismuth]

I see that in most modern cars, the deployment of the airbag is triggered by the g-sensor AND the seatbelt tensioner working together. So even if your car does have airbags, you will still go flying through the windscreen if you aren't wearing your seatbelt.

I don't care what you do in your own car, but in mine or when I am driving, you WILL wear your seatbelt, or walk.

Was actually talking to someone about that sound the other day, and we agreed that it is too soft, and nowhere near annoying enough. We decided that it should be the same sound that an aircraft uses for a stall warning. Oh yes, and integrate into the car's systems in such a way that it CANNOT be disabled.

B

 

[Smooth Criminal]

It's obvious that the majority are against personal liberty and will do whatever governments instruct them to do, because they believe it's for the greater good. What's next? You're not allowed to take a dump during office hours because of the costs involved?

http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/Seat belts for significance.pdf

Not only has the law failed to achieve the life-saving
benefits claimed for it, and produced an unfair re-distribution of risk on the
road, it has set a dangerous precedent. In criminalizing self-risk it has
established a dangerous, liberty-threatening, principle that licenses the state to
proscribe any thing or activity of which it might disapprove – from rockclimbing,
to drinking and smoking, to eating too many cream buns.

They're right - maybe you guys shouldn't indulge in things such as alcohol and junk food because of the increased health risk and burden that you add to society as a result.

 

[HapticSimian]

56 posts arguing over cars beeping 'cause you don't have your seat belt fastened? Seriously...?

I know people get caught up with trivialities but I just can't comprehend this. Some people are forgetful. Your car reminds you to buckle up. You're better off having it fastened than not, unless you happen to be involved in a statistically improbable weird collision where you would've been better off without. Are you going to bank on winning the Lotto on Saturday as well?

The ONLY time I don't wear my seat belt is when we're in the Kruger. Loop the belt behind the seat & buckle it - problem solved...

Sheesh...

 

[Anony-mousse]

Seat belts are for people who dont have faith in their own driving!

That takes the biscuit. By far the most stupid statement I have ever heard in my life. That actually deserves a position in my signature.

rza got competition.

 

[JK8]

That takes the biscuit. By far the most stupid statement I have ever heard in my life. That actually deserves a position in my signature.

rza got competition.

Why is it stupid?

 

[Anony-mousse]

You call it smart? Whenever I drive, I don't doubt my own abilities, but considering how many idiots are causing accidents and injuring and killing people in traffic, this statement is far away from being intelligent.