Enhanced Seatbelt Law for Colorado

gpsman wrote:
> Brent P wrote: <brevity snip>
> >
> > Seatbelt use should simply be the same as the use of any other
piece
> of
> > equipment required on a motor vehicle. Using headlamps at night,
> using
> > wipers when needed, using mirrors before changing lanes. It's an
> > equipment issue. Nothing more or less. It's a piece of equipment to
> keep
> > occupants in their place and that's the reason it should be used.
Not
>
> > because our right of choice becomes suspended whenever some
possible
> > impact on others can be drawn.
>
> I used to agree with you... until the Supplemental Restraint System
> (SRS) became mandated. Seatbelt laws are a necessary evil because not
> enough people are smart enough to use them. These are the same
> non-thinkers that crash into **** and get killed.

Why in the world do we want the stupid ****s of this country to
survive?

Those bad drivers are going to crash whether they're wearing a seat
belt or not.

I hadn't thought about a beater; good idea! Hey Judy, if you're reading
this, can I borrow your car for a few minutes?
Never a better definition of the term "Justifiable homicide." :-D

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> I hadn't thought about a beater; good idea! Hey Judy, if you're reading
> this, can I borrow your car for a few minutes?
> Never a better definition of the term "Justifiable homicide." :-D

my old ford pickup (26 years old) has some rust spots. maybe their not
really rust spots. hard to tell. but if you lay down in the road i can drive
right over you and never touch. care to test?
>

"gpsman" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Brent P wrote: <brevity snip>
> >
> > Seatbelt use should simply be the same as the use of any other piece
> of
> > equipment required on a motor vehicle. Using headlamps at night,
> using
> > wipers when needed, using mirrors before changing lanes. It's an
> > equipment issue. Nothing more or less. It's a piece of equipment to
> keep
> > occupants in their place and that's the reason it should be used. Not
>
> > because our right of choice becomes suspended whenever some possible
> > impact on others can be drawn.
>
> I used to agree with you... until the Supplemental Restraint System
> (SRS) became mandated. Seatbelt laws are a necessary evil because not
> enough people are smart enough to use them. These are the same
> non-thinkers that crash into **** and get killed.
>
> Thanks to them airbags were rushed to be made mandatory to punch us in
> the face or break our arms during a collision.

SRS - aka airbags are a crock. in smashups that are hard enough to kill
people airbags are worth ****. they don't protect you from the side (even
with side bags). they don't prevent you from being ejected. if your car
rolls they don't do **** either.

wear a belt or die - your choice


>
> And, it could be argued that keeping a numbnuts in their seat during a
> collision/loss of control would assist them in regaining control or, at
> least, reducing the loss of control... but not by me.
> -----
>
> - gpsman
>

"Bob Lutz" > wrote in message
newsan.2005.01.20.08.27.35.804478@blutz...
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:10:05 -0800, John David Galt wrote:
>
> > How does this law help anybody other than the individual who is forced
to
> > belt in?
> >
> > I say, let natural selection take its course. Colorado and especially
> > Boulder have more than enough stupid people already.
>
> Well, it DOES have Boulder in the crossposted groups... that explains a
> lot of it. The People's Republic of Boulder is why you can't smoke
> anymore in Colorado.

nope, that started in Aspic, then Denver, then the PRB
>
> Hey, the cops have to eat too
>