585
!remindme 1 year
@remindme@mstdn.social is the bot you're looking for.
!remindme @remindme@mstdn.social
Should be (at)remindme(at)mstdn.social 1 year.
Not wearing a seatbelt should be completely legal (once you're over 18). It's stupid, but it should absolutely be legal.
Do you also think it should be the law for car manufacturers to provide seatbelts? If you don't, then you've got an even worse take
Wearing a seatbelt should 100% be the law. It affects others, you're just doing mental gymnastics to pretend it doesn't.
If you didn't mandate seatbelt usage it would take up extra valuable hospital resources, extra valuable emergency response resources, and simply expose more people to death of someone they know.
Go live outside of society, if you truly feel this way. Honestly.
Take your downvotes as a small microcosm that the vast majority of society is not with you on this, and maybe reconsider.
Manufacturers should be required to provide seatbelts. Failure to do so affects others negatively.
If we continue to not mandate healthy eating habits, easily preventable diseases will continue to take up extra valuable hospital resources, extra valuable emergency response resources, and simply expose more people to death of someone they know. Outlaw high BMI now!
Lemmy is a combination of control-obsessed tankies and nanny state libs - of course I'm getting downvotes. Fortunately, I'd rather be right than popular, and I guarantee you that someone read my comments here and realized for the first time just how ridiculous and hypocritical seatbelt laws are. They probably still downvoted, because accepting that what you've always been told is incorrect is difficult, but the seed will have been planted.
It's much easier to wear and police seatbelts, and totally worth it. If you could feasibility do the same for high BMI, yeah, that'd be great, but they're not really comparable. The imposition on the individual would far outweigh the benefit to society.
Seatbelts? Wooooooow, must be so hard to put it on, right? Such an effort!! Seriously, what a whinge.
People who whinge about the "nanny state" really need to get a grip.
The cost to your "freedom" here is negligible, whereas the benefits are undeniable.
Seriously, get a grip.
Edit to add: from Australia. So don't lump me in with your right-wing liberals
It’s much easier to wear and police seatbelts
You can't be serious. It's far easier to police high BMI, since it's much more obvious and way easier to spot fat people in public who are a danger to themselves (and to that healthcare system you're so concerned about) than a small strip of fabric at a distance through the windshield of a moving vehicle.
If you could feasibility do the same for high BMI, yeah, that’d be great
Wow, "we should have cops police BMI" is definitely not the argument I was expecting. You clearly are Australian.
The imposition on the individual would far outweigh the benefit to society.
You're so close! Soooo close! Just dust off that brain and try to follow the breadcrumbs!
the benefits are undeniable.
Then it should have been super easy for someone in this thread to name one, and yet...
from Australia. So don’t lump me in with your right-wing liberals
Oh, I'm not, trust me. I'm lumping you in with one of the absolute worst countries for personal liberties in the free world. Seriously Australia, get a grip.
Right, the imposition to you putting a seatbelt is so high, it outweighs all we've discussed?
You're out of touch, bud.
And yeah, if somehow we could help people not be morbidly obese, that'd would be great. Just listen to people in their position, no one is seriously suggesting (well, sane people) that being morbidly obese is pleasant. And "enforcing" it would be ridiculous, what, surveil people at every meal? This is a strawman argument. What's the equivalent we do for seat belts? Speed cameras sometimes snapping someone not wearing one. Police officers seeing you not doing it. It's pretty minor. People just do it. It doesn't need much enforcement.
Partially yeah, because it's the law.
Have you been to countries where it isn't the law, or hasn't been law long? I have, funnily enough, they have much less of the habit as a society (where it hasn't been law to wear seatbelts in the back seats). That translates into children not doing it either or getting the habit to. I have to remind people to wear one.
I don't have to do this in Australia, where it's been law for decades. We all just do it. Partially from very hands off enforcement.
I'm not even sure why I'm trying to convince you though.
You're a lost cause if you're whinging about seatbelts. And then digging your heels in, coming up with ridiculous strawman arguments like policing BMI.
Don't come to Australia, you'd be a liability to the voter base.
While at it, we should legalize drunk driving. Drunk driving got a bad name in the past because irresponsible drunk drivers were drinking behind the wheel and purposefully running people over. My father drove drunk for 30 years and he was only in 7 car accidents. It’s non sense.
The 3 down voters didn't get the implied /s
I was really hoping the last sentence would make it obvious. Oh well.
The difference being, of course, that drunk driving has an incredibly high chance of negatively affecting others, while not wearing a seatbelt has an incredibly low chance of negatively affecting others.
Depends on how many people are in the car doesnt it?
Once again, the problem here is that all other objects become deadly internal projectiles in the case of an accident as well. If we really cared that much about the danger from projectiles (human and otherwise), then by law, cars should come with multiple tie-downs all over the interior of the vehicle, and it should be illegal to have an object in the car over five pounds not firmly secured by them.
The reason, of course, that that isn't mandated is the same as the answer to all of the other questions in this thread: in the end it's really just about policing people's behavior and choices (and securing an additional revenue stream for cops, as well as a handy additional excuse to pull people over and violate their rights).
Idk if its the same where you are or not but cars in my country DO have multiple internal tiedowns throughout the passenger cabin. Theyre called seatbelts and you are supposed to secure any heavy objects using them. Infact, if you as a driver have not secured heavy objects down and one of them kills or injures a passenger, you can get prosecuted for negligence.
Sure, i dont know the exact intention behind the law, and it being a fine does indeed serve as revenue stream for cops, but it does at least in part help prosecute drivers who are putting theie passengers at risk while promoting safe driving habits.
I dunno, I think the paramedics find the sight of you stuck in your seat a whole lot nicer than you stuck in the windshield
We shouldn't curtail people's freedom of self determination just because it will make other people have to do their jobs.
My wife works in a hospital and receives patients from car crashes. If driving without a seatbelt was legal she would find another job.
Intact she has worked in a country where no one, even kids are required to wear seatbelts, and she doesn't want to work like that now
load more comments
(12 replies)
Since you don't care about human life, maybe money matters more to you: Seatbelts decrease auto insurance costs.
load more comments
(2 replies)
This is like the 3rd or 4th dumb take I've seen come out of lemm.ee users within the past few hours.
Yall must be migrating from the highly intellectual youtube community section.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(11 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
585 points (100.0% liked)
The Onion
5971 readers
691 users here now
The Onion
A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.
Great Satire Writing:
- The Onion
- Clickhole
- McSweeney's
- Reductress
- The Chaser
- The Hard Times
- The Needling
- Tattletale Times
- The Beaverton
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS