What are your views on seat belt laws...too lenient or too strict and why???
542918
Seat belts saving more lives\n\nWASHINGTON, D.C. -- For the first time in six years, the number of motor-vehicle deaths fell last year. The federal government attributed the drop to an increase in the use of seat belts. \n\nIn 2002, a total of 43,005 Americans died on the country's roadways; in 2003, the number declined to 42,643. The decline in deaths included people in vehicles (drivers and passengers), as well as pedestrians. The number of motor-vehicle injuries also decreased. \n\nAbout 79 percent of vehicle occupants wore seat belts in 2003, up from about 75 percent in 2002, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). \n\nNorman Mineta, the federal secretary of transportation, said more people are buckling up because of stricter state laws and a federal government campaign encouraging people to wear seat belts.
760298
As a firefighter/paramedic, I have to say that the guy who said most people are respectful has never driven an emergency vehicle.  Yes, there should be MUCH stiffer penalties.  Ignoring emergency vehicles puts too many people in danger.  I don't think this needs to be regulated at a federal level, but it would be great if the police would start enforcing the laws that are already on the books.
138347
Because the general public accepts that it's not a sound decision to drive without a seatbelt.\n\nHowever, there are still many people who believe that a woman has the right to decide if she wants to give birth to what's growing in -her- body.
1162361
I agree with the concept of too much freedom. Heaven forbid you try to talk to a teen about manners.  All you'll get is a loud F off, and if your really lucky, a beating by them and 20 or so of the closest peers.  And as for children, yes I do agree that there is a severe lack of parental supervision as compared to the good old days when one parent worked and one stayed home.  Although both my parents worked and I always say please/thank-you, etc.  I have even had comments from people where I work (my second job is a cashier) that I am always so polite and it is nice to see. It all boils down again to lack of respect for anyone but ourselves.  We are taught that we are the most important person in the world and that no one has the right to say anything to you that you don't like, be it teacher, parent, pastor (if anyone goes to church anymore), principle, or even the elderly neighbour down the block.
1071801
I'd say no, leave them alone.  Alot of senior citizens are just trying to hang on to some independence.  And alot of times, it's imperative for them to be able to get around to doctor's appointments and to do their own food shopping and things like that.  We're never going to be able to remove all unsafe drivers from the road.  We all know that young, road-rage filled, inexperienced, drivers cause even more accidents than seniors do.  Should we remove all them as well by making a law saying you have to be 25 years old before you can drive?  Of course not.  That would be ridiculous.  Leave the seniors alone.  If we looked into each and every car on the road, probably most of us shouldn't be driving for one reason or another.  But hey.  We live in a free society (supposedly).  We need to have tolerance for one another, not more laws.
781040
This question can have many different opinions from different people. Freedom isn't the ability to do what ever one wanted to do, if it was, just picture a world that has no law...it would be total chaos...whoever didn't like you because of what you said could shoot you with no consequences taken, and I turn that would be living in fear and living in fear is NOT freedom. Even though we have the law we can still have freedom...for example....if the speed limit says 25, 45, 55 or 70 mph, as long as I didn't break the speed limit I have the freedom to drive where ever I wanted to, but if I break the speed limit and get stopped...then I no longer have the freedom to keep driving. Freedom is abiding by the rules and laws of life. Laws are not to prohibit people from doing things, but to protect people from harm. I don't know if your religious or not, but the 10 commandments were to protect us so to speak, not to hurt us. So, why get rid of something that doesn't hurt us. Like anything in life...there's a price for freedom....and it's not cheap!!! The price of the Freedom that has been given to me has caused many deaths of the solders that died in war so I can be Free...even free to the point of burning the flag (which I wouldn't do) that gave me the freedom that I have.
631125
Funny answers here...\n\nI thought speeding was illegal...lol\n\nNobody is comparing it to murder that I have heard, and no one is using a similar punishment, so that part of the issue really is stupid.\n\nSent them back or make them sign up, this is simple...
595735
Definitely abusing the convenience.  I'm positive the number of auto accidents has risen dramatically because people are too busy F*&KING around with their phones and not paying attention.  Sorry, but my safety and my kids safety is way more important than any phone call!
153420
I'm totally for teen driving restrictions..it gives you time to learn in a more restrictive way without so many distractions before you "go it alone", I am however not at all supportive of raising the driving age...I want my son home the first few years he's driving (when people are likelier to have accidents) so that by the time he's 'going it alone' he's got a few supervised years experience under his belt...plus, as your parents- we love you & want you safe :)
26456
I'm very thankful for the seatbelt law in America.  I would hate to think of all the people who would be dead now if they were not wearing seat belts in a car accident.
68403
if i had my way i would raise it to age 21. some  young people drive like madmen. excessive speeding and not abiding the rules of the road.
493303
Darn good question, I have lately become concerned that this whole country is just getting to a point where there is no more self responsibility.  The govt told me to wear a seatbelt, therefore if I still got hurt cuz I was drunk driving, clearly it is the govt's fault.\n\nI am sorry I am not going to be much help, because I don't know where that line should be drawn...\nI think I read someone's answer the other day that said when our freedom infringes on another's - that's when they should definitely step in.  But then some people also need extra help to keep from killing themselves.\n\nI look forward to someone having the right answer.
1187660
Yeah. Since some people break the speed limit laws, I should get to murder people.\n\nJust because someone else wrongs, that doesn't justify allowing people to continue to break the law.\n\nThat's hypocritical: Having laws and not enforcing them.
112793
This is a scary thought, but it depends on the way(or area) of the impaction. For example, if you were traveling at a high speed(say 75-80 mph) and were hit from behind, it would be best to not have on the seatbelt...because you would have better chances of surviving if you were thrown out of the car! But, if you were traveling at a relatively low speed(35-40) and were hit from the side or something, it would be best to wear the seatbelt! It really just depends on the situation! Most who street race etc. do not wear seatbelts because they know that they are going to be traveling at high speeds and have a better rate of surviving not wearing the belt. But, that being said, most of us do not drive that fast and the instances where seatbelts did more harm than good are rare...so, always where your seatbelt!!!
54358
No, it violates an individuals right to choose and their right to privacy whether or not they wear a seat belt in their person, private vehicles.  because of Roe V. Wade we have a right to privacy and we are told that women should have the right to choose whether they want to have a child or not.  What is the difference if someone doesn't want to wear a seatbelt that may or may not save their life?  There isn't.  It is the same principle.
45035
When it comes to the free-moral agency of man, your question can be answered "yes" and "no".  People do things for two reasons...because they feel they "have to", and because they "want to".  I don't like being told to wear my seat belt, and often times don't, till I see that ploice officer in the distance.  I used to be a slob.  I got married, and my ex-wife demanded neatness, so to keep peace in the house, I complied.  As soon as my ex left me, I reverted to my original standards.  In both of these cases, my behavior was modified only insofar as I wanted to avoid the consequences.  But as far as my thought process behind my actions, my behavior wasn't truly modified.  As soon as I feel I can get away with my normal behaviors, I revert to them.  Behavior in humans is only truly capable in humans when one can modify that person's conscience to feel guilty if they violate a given expected behavior.  If all they fear is consequences, but don't feel guilty, their behavior has never been truly modified.
493965
Great question, my wife is too pregnant and I am concern with everything she do! Driving is safe just make sure that if possible someone is with her or her cell is always charged, she is wearing her seat belt and that the vehicle is equipped with front and side airbags. Really sometimes it's not them behind the whel it the fool in the other car that worries me!