£60 fine, no seat belt

[pipmk]

I know they're just doing their job but i think the bigger question is why the hell is there a law in force that stops people endangering themselves.

There's enough idiotic behaviour on the roads and in society in general that causes harm to others, and surely this is where the police are needed, not in protecting one from oneself?

How about the unbelted driver who loses control when braking hard? What about the cost of treating severe injuries caused by not wearing a belt? Are we free to cause our loved ones the pain of losing us or having to nurse a cripple because we were too stupid to do up a belt? Are unbelted children using free choice? They are protecting us from non belt wearers. Yes there are other dangers,but who is to say which is so important that others should be ignored or neglected.Young men sometimes think it is not "cool" to wear a belt and we see the terrible results everyday in the press,do we think their parents believe it would be wrong to protect them from themselves?
I think you need to think again.

 

[dml]

Now, if you want an interesting police story, I'll give you one...

The other night my wife came home from work, as per normal, about 7pm on a Thursday. In my usual style I had had a glass or two of wine and the Kiddywinks were sound asleep. Hearing her key in the door I stepped into the hall to help her with her bag. Imagine my surprise to see her standing there with a policeman young enough to be my son....
"Your wife's car is not insured sir, so I've followed her home to check it out"
Emboldened by the couple of glasses of Rioja swilling around in my empty stomach, I blurt out "Oh really! Well I know it is, and I have a computer just here connected to the Internet. Let's ask MID, shall we??"
Allowing him to dictate the registration to me, and showing him every key press on the way, sure enough, the car was insured. Perfectly.
"Well, thank you very much sir, seems I have made a mistake" he said, and headed for the door.
I think I managed something meek, like "Yes, thank you officer", but what I should have said was, "Yeah, I think you liked the look of my wife pal, but were a bit surprised to find me at home, weren't you??"
Next time, next time...

Cor, that's some smart quick thinking on the part of your wife's lover; I can see why she likes him! He had to get out of there quick though because his rental uniform was due back in the costume shop by 8pm.

 

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Careful here DML

There are a couple of old proverbs spring to mind here:

'never a truer word spoken in jest'

or probably a more sanguine approach to those occasional thoughts that must cross every ones mind regarding the fidelity of a spouse,

'what the mind doesn't miss, the heart doesn't mind?' :lol:

Speaking as a longtime single male.

 

[cleverdicky]

Maybe he'd no intention of being a toyboy and was just making sure you got her back

 

[Miffy]

I am not suggesting the £60 fine is extreme for failing to wear a seatbelt, but why are pedestrians not given a fine for walking across a road where it is not marked as a crossing point? They not only put themselves at risk, but also every car driver that comes close to contact with them. A car driver / passenger failing to wear a belt is not increasing the risk of having an accident, only increasing the risks of more serious injury should they be in a collision.

Lets not even start on cyclists who run the red light.

 

[toby1]

Pretty sure crossing a road is not illegal for a pedestrian - but we're drifting off-topic

 

[EmilysDad]

Pretty sure crossing a road is not illegal for a pedestrian ......

It's called Jaywalking in the States

 

[toby1]

I am aware of that, thanks

 

[roop_the_loop]

A close friend, let's call him Jack, was once involved in an accident. To cut a long story short, the driver of the oncoming vehicle was not wearing his seat belt (this was shown conclusively in the forensic technical investigation and through witness statements), and was ejected through the side window and sadly died on impact with the tarmac. The front-seat passenger was wearing the belt, and came out with barely a bruise and no need of medical attention.

Jack was convicted of causing death by dangerous driving (although this was later reduced as he was not speeding, not under the influence, etc., and had a clean record up to that point). Had the driver of the other vehicle been wearing his seat belt, it is 99.9% certain he would not have died and would probably have come out fine just like the passenger sitting next to him; the matter would most probably not even have gone to court.

The fact that the deceased significantly contributed to his own death was completely overlooked by the court, and Jack was left bearing full responsibility (and just to be clear, he accepted his responsibility for the accident, but not for the death, at least not entirely). So Jack paid the price for the other driver's 'right' to not wear a seat belt as required by law.

If you were to ask Jack what he thinks of people not wearing their seat belts because 'it's their right not to' or 'it's only their own lives they're risking', what do you reckon he would say?