Seatbelt wearing

BrianD3

I've just been looking at some pictures of a recent crash where 3 people died. Looking at the wreckage, I would be pretty sure that none of the three were wearing their seatbelts because if they had been they would probably have survived or may even have walked away with minor injuries. What a waste of 3 lives.

Anyone know current stats for seatbelt wearing in Ireland. I remember it used to be around 50% at a time when the UK had a 95% compliance rate.

Of all the people I know, I'm the only one who wears a seatbelt in the back seat of a car. Anytime I have passengers in my car I have to instruct the ones in the back to belt up, and they look at me as if I'm nuts. If I'm in the back of someone else's car I'll often find that the belts are caught behind the seat back rest which means they're not being used. Everyday of the week I see children travelling unrestrained in cars or travelling on someone's lap. See this mainly in redneck bogger areas, rarely in Dublin.

While I'm at it I'll mention the muppets who leave objects like umbrellas and torches on the rear parcel shelf of their car. Not only can these restrict visibility but they can inflict a serious head injury when they fly forward in a crash.

BrianD3

impr0v

Not to mention having an unrestrained boyfriend in the back and a samantha mumba tape playing.

I think the low compliance (though i don't think it's as bad as that now) demonstrates how removed from reality people are when the climb into the metal cocoon and hurtle along the highways. That stuff won't happen to me, and if it does it will be something akin to the footage of crash test dummies gently nodding their head in slow-mo, material damage only.

ubu

the lack of seatbelts is worrying alright, and it does seem more prevaliant in the country but thats not to say its exclusive to the country one thing which really p1sses me off is seeing is kids jumping around the back of the car totally unrestrained and parent in the front who couldnt care less, its one thing not caring for your own safety but for your childrens is another thing and raises serious questions about their suitability as a parent
people seem to feel safer in the back and as a result dont put on their seatbelts, i wont go anywhere without everyones seatbelt on, and have had arguements with my mates before about it
think they should watch that samantha mumba (song) safety ad, its the one without the seatbelt who does the damage

EDIT
impr0v, u got there before me!

FX Meister

I think the rate would be pretty high, only one person I know bitches about it when I tell him to put it on, everyone else puts it on themselves. But you do see a lot of kids not wearing seatbelts, I can't understand how someone can put their kids in this kind of situation and not worry about it

woosaysdan

i dont leave anyone in my car without them wearing seatbelts!! if they have a problem with that they can walk!!! they may not be the best safety wise but it has to make do for now!!!

BrianD3

There have been a number of ads over the years about the potential danger of unrestrained back seat passengers. As well as the one with the mumba song there was the "baby elephant" one and another one where a teenager flies forward and kills his mother.

BrianD3

PBC_1966

Last time I stated an opposing view on this I got called an idiot, but hey, I'll try again.

Seatbelts are not always universally beneficial. There are plenty of cases where a belt can cause injuries such as whiplash, broken ribs, ruptured intestines, a broken spinal column, and even a broken neck. There are cases where people have been trapped inside a burning or submerged car by a damaged seatbelt mechanism which would not release.

If you have weighed up the possibilities and decided to buckle up, then fine, that's your choice. But don't force it upon everybody else.

sci0x

But you don't really have the option of deciding weather you want to buckle up or not unless you want penalty points.

byte

I think I'd rather have my passengers, or indeed me, have whiplash/ruptured intestines, etc than have them lying dead.

I enforce use of seatbelts in my car too. I usually don't get any whining about it.

koneko

PCB, the reason you hear about those "saved by not wearing a seatbelt" cases is because they rarely happen. Even in cases where someone breaks a rib or gets whiplash, what's the alternative? Crashing through the front of the car and ending up dead a mile down the road.

I always wear my seatbelt, whether i'm driving or in the back. It's common sense (in my opinion of course...)

unkel

BrianD3 wrote:

I've just been looking at some pictures of a recent crash where 3 people died. Looking at the wreckage, I would be pretty sure that none of the three were wearing their seatbelts

I've heard on numerous occasions with fatalities that people were not wearing seatbelts. This info can not be found in the usual media

Details about wearing seatbelts should be released to the media imho. It would have an instant impact on seatbelt wearing habits and thus fatalities. The cheapest and most effective measurement any government in this country could take - forget about penalty points or safety ads :rolleyes:

BrianD3 wrote:

Anyone know current stats for seatbelt wearing in Ireland. I remember it used to be around 50%

Those were the figures from a couple of years ago for drivers only. Total percentage under 50%, male drivers 1 in 3 and female drivers 2 in 3. The percentage has improved a good bit, but can't remember details. Percentage of passengers buckling up, especially in the back seat is still very poor. No where near as good as in many other countries around us, especially the UK

Bit of a coincidence (NOT), but in the UK the number of fatalities is very low indeed

Tommy Vercetti

I HATE parents who let their kids stick their head out the sunroof when they are driving (or at any time for that matter). Don't they realise that their sprog risks being decapitated if they have to brake sharply? I saw a silver 156 doing this on Sunday with two stupid kids with their heads sticking out, I was gonna follow the driver and kick him in the nuts.

elexes

i used to be a non seatbelt wearing person . but since i started driving ive done a 180 cant stay in a car without a seatbelt just dosnt feel safe ... it almost feels like ive forgotton to bring the keys if i did . i dono its hard to explain . i think of it as much as part of driving a car as it is to turn it on ... if u know what i mean

vibe666

Tommy Vercetti wrote:

I HATE parents who let their kids stick their head out the sunroof when they are driving (or at any time for that matter).

people are stupid, plain and simple. if you have a crash at high or low speed your chances aof being killed or seriously injured are drastically lower if you're wearing a seatbelt.

i know a guy who's life was saved by not wearing a seatbelt who was thrown through his windscreen (breaking his legs and lots of other bones badly) and landed in a ditch where he laid for ages while his car was completely crushed in the accident.

at the same time i know what a huge fluke it was that we wasn't thrown into the path of something else and run right over, or skewered on a branch or fencepost or something.

the fact of the matter is, regardless of the type of accident, you're at more risk without a belt, and anyone in your car who doesn't have a belt could well kill you and everyone else in the car even if you're all wearing belts apart from him/her.

if me and my family are in an accident and some idiot comes flying through his windscreen and into my car and hurts anyone in it but survives, i'm going to make a point of killing him myself. there's no excuse for the levels of stupidity required to get into a car and not use the seatbelt provided.

stop being such fvckwits and get a grip of yourselves before you kill someone with your ignorance and stupidity. if you're that worried about not being able to get your seatbelt off then go into your local motoring shop and get one of those little emergency tools that will cut through belts and break windows etc, and stop making stupid excuses.

PBC_1966 wrote:

Last time I stated an opposing view on this I got called an idiot, but hey, I'll try again.

opinions that endanger peoples lives ARE stupid. if you kill yourself by not wearing a seatbelt then fair enough, but you could just as easily kill someone else who IS wearing a belt.

fletch

How anyone can travel in a car without wearing a seatbelt is beyond me. I absolutely need to be belted up before I go anywhere. Even movin my Dads car on and off the driveway, I automatically put my seat belt on, its just a feeling of security and safety.

alias no.9

I must admit that I can be poor at wearing belts in the back seat, especailly taxi's for some reason? However, I try to always make a conscious effort to wear one in the back.

In the front, I just don't feel secure without one. Probably goes back to being a passenger in a crash that I would probably have gone through the windscreen had I not been wearing a belt.

LFCFan

I can't even turn the car on without my seatbelt on. It's automatic. I feel naked without it and anyone (PBC) who thinks seatbelts are a hazard, need their head examined. There's probably a 1% chance that no seatbelt will work out for you in a crash. How can anyone choose this over something that has a much higher chance of saving you.

Hagar

Many years ago myself and my wife were involved in a crash with a 40ft. A brak pipe burst and I couldn't stop. We were dragged for almost 50m and the car was totally destroyed. We were both wearing seat belts and we both walked away. They were the old fashioned adjustable seatbelts not the modern inertia reel. My wife had her's adjusted slightly loosely to give her a little freedom of movement. As a result she had a two inch wide bruise across her shoulder and down the centre of her chest. Mine belt was tight so I didn't move at all. No bruises, nothing.

Wear your seat belt !!!

seaghdhas

I once wrote off a car. Not my proudest moment, but for the sake of discussion... I don't entirely remember everything but the car did go a little sideways and I fractured a bone in my hand when it got sandwiched between my head and the side window. I was wearing a seatbelt at the time and I may have gone through the windscreen had I not been wearing one. But at the same time it's not completely protective. At the same time I've not gone anywhere in any car without a seatbelt since.

IgnatiusJRiley

Ever notice in films/tv programmes how rarely people put their belts on. I'm sure this has some sort of effect.
My wife was recently in a car with two friends and their seven year old daughter. It was the daughters first communion so she was allowed sit in the front. She wasn't wearing a seat belt which my wife pointed out. The parents said 'Shir it's her communion, she can go without it for today'. The father then proceeded to drive the car at speeds of 100mph... absolute madness... they got away with it though.

Sleipnir

PBC_1966 wrote:

Last time I stated an opposing view on this I got called an idiot, but hey, I'll try again.

Seatbelts are not always universally beneficial. There are plenty of cases where a belt can cause injuries such as whiplash, broken ribs, ruptured intestines, a broken spinal column, and even a broken neck. There are cases where people have been trapped inside a burning or submerged car by a damaged seatbelt mechanism which would not release.

If you have weighed up the possibilities and decided to buckle up, then fine, that's your choice. But don't force it upon everybody else.

It was probably me who called you that.
I can force it upon anyone who gets into my car.
It's my car and while you're in it, you're my responsibility. So belt up, or get out.

If you don't want to wear a seatbelt in your own car then you're an.....well you can guess the rest.

vibe666

ah well, at least if she'd been killed she'd have already been wearing a nice dress for her funeral. :rolleyes:

Boggle

I'll never understand why people always have to take an issue and polarise it!

Seatbelts DO save lives and, while I do believe that seatbelts should be compulsory for all passengers, I do not accept that the driver should have them forced on him/her.

Heres why:
A) The driver is the one responsible for the actions for the car and therefore should be forced to take care of the safety of others but should be allowed to use common sense and own judgement to decide whats safest for him/herself depending on conditions. (I'm not a child)

When driving around towns I find that a seatbelt is a hindrence as it always seems to catch if I'm trying to lean forward to get a better view of something. (example being in tight traffic or car-park watching mainly for children popping out from behind cars)

C) Why wear a seatbelt in a housing estate? I'd rather be able to keep an eye out for kids that can pop out of nowhere and besides if you are moving fast enough to get killed in an estate then you should be killed.

D) If the driver doesn't wear his belt outside of the town (or where he feels it's needed i.e. outside 30mph speeds) then that really is his problem. A belt wont prevent a crash and it wont save any life other than the driver so less of the nanny state please. Its just another way of getting a fine.

mike65

Boggle wrote:

I'll never understand why people always have to take an issue and polarise it!

Seatbelts DO save lives and, while I do believe that seatbelts should be compulsory for all passengers, I do not accept that the driver should have them forced on him/her.

Heres why:
A) The driver is the one responsible for the actions for the car and therefore should be forced to take care of the safety of others but should be allowed to use common sense and own judgement to decide whats safest for him/herself depending on conditions. (I'm not a child)

Think of the children - your children after you die.

When driving around towns I find that a seatbelt is a hindrence as it always seems to catch if I'm trying to lean forward to get a better view of something. (example being in tight traffic or car-park watching mainly for children popping out from behind cars)

Sound like you need to adjust the height of the belt pivot point.

C) Why wear a seatbelt in a housing estate? I'd rather be able to keep an eye out for kids that can pop out of nowhere and besides if you are moving fast enough to get killed in an estate then you should be killed.

I don't follow this at all...

D) If the driver doesn't wear his belt outside of the town (or where he feels it's needed i.e. outside 30mph speeds) then that really is his problem. A belt wont prevent a crash and it wont save any life other than the driver so less of the nanny state please. Its just another way of getting a fine.

The passenger behind you will kill you if not buckled up in a crash above a
certain speed.

Mike.

Seth Brundle

Boggle wrote:

Heres why:
A) The driver is the one responsible for the actions for the car and therefore should be forced to take care of the safety of others but should be allowed to use common sense and own judgement to decide whats safest for him/herself depending on conditions. (I'm not a child)

Given the amount of fatalities/injuries/etc. on our roads, drivers show that they frequently cannot use common sense nor can they make appropriate decisions based on the environmental conditions.

Boggle wrote:

When driving around towns I find that a seatbelt is a hindrence as it always seems to catch if I'm trying to lean forward to get a better view of something. (example being in tight traffic or car-park watching mainly for children popping out from behind cars)

thats bollocks! Where are you trying to view? As Mike says fix your belt. A seat belt is not constrictive unless there is sufficient pressure on it - e.g. in an accident!

Boggle wrote:

C) Why wear a seatbelt in a housing estate? I'd rather be able to keep an eye out for kids that can pop out of nowhere and besides if you are moving fast enough to get killed in an estate then you should be killed.

Does this idiocy warrant an answer? You mean to say that driving at the allowed limit (30mph) and you come to a sudden stop, you will not in any way be forced forward? Why will wearing a belt stop you looking out for children? What position do you drive?

Boggle wrote:

D) If the driver doesn't wear his belt outside of the town (or where he feels it's needed i.e. outside 30mph speeds) then that really is his problem. A belt wont prevent a crash and it wont save any life other than the driver so less of the nanny state please. Its just another way of getting a fine.

A road fatality is estimated to cost the state €1m thereby affecting the taxpayer. it also affects those who have to scrape the carcass off the ground, it affects the familys...

seamus

Here ya go. http://www.nra.ie/PublicationsResources/DownloadableDocumentation/RoadSafety/d844.PDF

Table 5.1 Driver wearing rates (%) by gender and road class
Road Class 				       Male % 	Female %      Overall %
Urban National Primary 				73 	   88 		78
Urban National Secondary 			61 	   72 		65
Rural National Primary 				75 	   82 		78
Rural National Secondary			63 	   76 		67
Cork (Urban) 					65 	   80 		69
Dublin (Urban) 					68 	   84 		75
Dun Laoighire (Urban) 				71 	   75		73
Limerick (Urban) 				69 	   83 		74
Small Urban Areas 				52 	   71		60
Regional Roads 					69 	   86 		75
County Roads 					59 	   77 		65
Driver Total 2002 				66 	   80 		71
Driver Total 1999 				48    	   68 		55
Driver Total 1991 				49 	   60 		52
Overall Wearing Rate
(Driver + Front Passenger) 2002 		65 	   81 		72
Overall Wearing Rate
(Driver + Front Passenger) 1999 - - 					57
Overall Wearing Rate
(Driver + Front Passenger) 1991 - - 					53

Seems much improved between 1999-2002. I'm surprised.

Victor

kbannon wrote:

it also affects those who have to scrape the carcass off the ground

I agree. I think they much prefer to find the body in the car it started in, not a decapitated one halfway through the other car's windscreen

Blitzkrieger

FS people - learn to quote relevant bits. Quit quoting entire posts just cos you're lazy.

PBC_1966 wrote:

Seatbelts are not always universally beneficial. There are plenty of cases where a belt can cause injuries such as whiplash, broken ribs, ruptured intestines, a broken spinal column, and even a broken neck. There are cases where people have been trapped inside a burning or submerged car by a damaged seatbelt mechanism which would not release.

While this is true, the chances of the seatbelt being beneficial are much, much MUCH higher than the chances of it being a hinderance. Especially in modern cars. Tbh - a seat belt isn't likely to sieze up all of a sudden. How stupid do you have to be not to get a safety feature like that fixed straight away?

I met a girl once who said she never wears her seatbelt because she was in three accidents where she was thrown from the car while not wearing a belt and escaped unhurt. What a plonker. She could have been thrown under the wheels of a lorry or off a bridge or, like some poor Mayo man, thrown into a ditch to bleed to death because no one finds you.

I don't agree that a seatbelt resticts your movement either. If it does - get it looked at. I usually like to wear mine even when I'm parked in case some twit comes along and slams into me.

elexes wrote:

i think of it as much as part of driving a car as it is to turn it on ... if u know what i mean

I find flashing a bit of leg always turns my car on........

PBC_1966

Boggle wrote:

Seatbelts DO save lives and, while I do believe that seatbelts should be compulsory for all passengers, I do not accept that the driver should have them forced on him/her.

Boggle,
I thank you for at least acknowledging that drivers should have a right to decide for themselves, and I agree entirely with the points you set out in paragraphs A-D.

I have to ask the following however: If you believe that the nanny state should not force the driver of a vehicle to buckle up, then why do you think it should be compulsory for passengers? If a driver has the right to decide for himself what steps he will take to protect himself, then don't passengers have the same right?

One of your last points I believe needs emphasizing:

A belt wont prevent a crash and it wont save any life other than the driver so less of the nanny state please. Its just another way of getting a fine.

Hear hear. Has a seatbelt ever prevented a crash? No. Has dangerous driving caused crashes? You bet it has (the man driving his little girl at 100mph sounds like a prime example). I want the book thrown at the reckless driver who it endangering everybody else as well as himself. I don't want the government persecuting people simply because they have chosen -- of their own free will -- to not use a certain safety device.

Even if it's accepted that a belt is beneficial more often that it is detrimental, that still means that in some cases the belt will injure or kill. Do you think the government should force you to do something which may be harmful?

Compare this with vaccinations. In some cases a vaccine has debilitated or even killed. Would you accept a law forcing vaccinations upon you, knowing that there is chance of harm, even if they were safe for 95% of the time? Wouldn't you be objecting, claiming that you have the right to choose? I sure would.

By the way, at least the penalty points issue mentioned above doesn't apply here in Britain (not yet anyway).

jongore

PBC_1966 wrote:

Boggle,
Hear hear. Has a seatbelt ever prevented a crash? No. Has dangerous driving caused crashes? You bet it has (the man driving his little girl at 100mph sounds like a prime example). I want the book thrown at the reckless driver who it endangering everybody else as well as himself. I don't want the government persecuting people simply because they have chosen -- of their own free will -- to not use a certain safety device.

1)Any driver not wearing a belt is by definition being reckless
2)An unbelted driver can seriously injure or kill his pasengers during side on crashs.

PBC_1966 wrote:

Boggle,
Even if it's accepted that a belt is beneficial more often that it is detrimental, that still means that in some cases the belt will injure or kill. Do you think the government should force you to do something which may be harmful?

For the belt to injure you, you needs to be a high speed crash (in which you are more likely to die without the belt) or the device is faulty and you should have fixed it.

Simple fact is there are no good reasons not to wear a belt, I don't really want to come across a bloody carcass on the road so please BELT UP!

BrianD3

Consider this: people bitch about the price of cars, then they don't wear their seatbelt. Do they realise that manufacturers spend huge amounts of money on crumple zones, safety cells, crash testing and restraint systems. They then pass this cost onto the consumer. Hit a wall at 25 mph with your seatbelt on in modern car and you walk away, thanks to this engineering. Have the same accident with your seatbelt off and all the safety features that you spent your money on become useless AND you're probably dead or have severe brain damage.

PBC_1966: I think it is a bit irresponsible of you to be "spreading the word" that seatbelts are responsible for broken spines, ruptured intenstines etc. This is extremely misleading. The small number of cases where these injuries were reported were where the person was wearing a LAP belt not a properly fitted 3 point belt. Big difference. Even so, the experts agree that even wearing a lap belt, you're still far better of than with no belt at all.

If you don't want to wear your belt then fine - it's your choice. However it sounds from your comments on seat belts that you're not making an informed choice because your opinions on the dangers of belts are extremely dubious at best. I suggest you read up on automotive safety engineering, biomechanics etc. and you may change your mind.

BrianD3