|Submited on :||Mon, 11th of Feb 2019 - 05:57:16 AM|
|Post ID :||ap8yj9|
|Post Name :||t3_ap8yj9|
|Post Type :||link|
|Subreddit Type :||public|
|Subreddit ID :||t5_2qqjc|
“Big seat belt” knew they had to silence their biggest detractor
That's why Takata made those faulty airbags. They were taking out the people who knew what was behind their seat belt scheme.
Fun fact: Volvo owns the patent for the modern seat belt because their engineer Nils Bohlin worked for them when he invented it. But they let everyone use their seat belt patent freely because they felt that it was more valuable to save lives than to make more profits.
Less fun fact: Ford Pinto became a subject of controversy after Mother Jones magazine exposed that it was prone to deadly fires in rear-end collisions; Ford’s internal documents showed the company knew of the potential problem but chose not to fix it, calculating that it would be cheaper to pay out possible injury claims. Following the deaths of three teenage girls in Indiana.
This is why corporations aren't people.
Yet it's the people that made these decisions that need to go to jail.
We pretend corporations are people for legal purposes. But if we consider them people, then it makes sense to also ask what sort of people they are and act accordingly.
In most cases, they’re psychopaths.
That's not fair at all. Corporations are just regular Joe's like you and me. You know... Immortal, simultaneously acting in multiple nations, absorbing weaker beings to consolidate power. One of us.
That’s the sole reason why I never advocate anything
I'm gonna start advocating banning the lottery, I'm bound to win just for that sweet irony
Breaking news: All lotteries have been banned and shutdown.
“I was just so inspired by what u/dahuoshan had to say,” says World, “they really put up a strong case as to why we should get rid of them. Now nobody will suffer the lottery, especially dahuoshan, our savior.”
Also good. That shit is a tax on the poor.
I used to think people were just being edgy when they said this, but it's really true.
Who plays the lottery? Generally speaking, people who are bad with money. People who need to fantasise about winning the jackpot and being lifted out of poverty to get through the day at their shitty minimum wage job.
Those people are £104/year worse off, and yet only have a 1 in 13,983,816 chance of winning big on any given draw.
Who does benefit from the lottery? Often, it's middle class people!
National lottery funding often goes towards parks, gyms, schools, community groups, projects to conserve national heritage, etc. I'd guess that successful applications are disproportionately from wealthy areas, considering that grant applications can be difficult to write well.
There's a building in my old town that dates from the 1400s, and the project to restore it was given nearly £60,000 of lottery money. It now has a nice café that serves delicious cheese scones, and it frequently hosts wedding receptions and craft fairs.
It's all a bit regressive, really.
Think I saw a front page headline in the last week or so where a woman won after buying a ticket to prove to her husband it was a waste of money.
I loudly proclaimed that sentiment to a cashier the next day hoping the universe would hear me, but nah. Of course it heard that little inner voice in my head that was daydreaming about not having a mortgage and being able to afford stem cell treatment.
Or like that guy who won a scratcher. And the local news asked him to demonstrate how he bought it (not sure why) but he bought another ticket on camera, and won again!
They just wanted him to "reenact" the scene for a couple seconds of footage for their news story about him. Accidentally created more news though, lol.
Win and lose the ticket. Murphy's law.
"What are you gonna do, advocate stabbing me?"
Then you're likely going to die from lack of advocation
Didn't the same happen to an anti helmet motorcyclist in Florida?
This guy knows his ironic deaths
Thing is, it may seem ironic at first glance, but if you think about it a bit deeper it's actually the exact opposite. This guy promoted the idea of free will "no matter the consequences." And then he went forward and represented exactly what he espoused, a person doing what they wish in the face of injury or death. If he was out there saying "not wearing seatbelts isn't dangerous" and then went out that way then it'd be a wholly different story.
In other words, while he WAS a fucking moron, his death isn't so much ironic as it was entirely appropriate and predictable.
There's a simple principal involved here: when your foolishness costs the public purse money, such as for EMTs and ambulance, replacement of the sign you hit - and if you don't live in the US, medical expenses - you can expect the government to start imposing measures that will reduce the costs involved. Workplace safety, bike helmets, car impact standards, seatbelts, and gun laws are all examples.
Insurance companies want these laws more than the government.
Individuals also want these laws.
If I'm in an accident and it's my fault, I can only hope that the other person is using the recommended safety equipment so as to minimize their injuries, or I'll be responsible for their medical bills.
Edit: Not to mention the guilt I would face if the other person was permanently seriously injured or killed.
Or, as in most things, the blame for injuries known to happen with certain behavior shift over to the person engaging in said behavior.
If you get into an accident that's your fault, but the guy wasn't wearing a seatbelt (and laws know about them, but don't require them), then he takes responsibility for injuries beyond the normal scope that he would have suffered if he'd had one on.
Let's say he breaks eight ribs, but as a healthy male with a seatbelt on, he normally would have only broken two on average, you're not responsible for about seventy percent of the cost of those broken ribs to care for. Fractured skull on windshield, wouldn't have happened with a seatbelt on, not your problem, etc.
They already have the data necessary to determine average damage for accidents given a swathe of scenarios, including those without seatbelts. The fact they're pushing police to fine individuals who doubt buckle is revenue generation at this point.
Not to mention, enforcing said laws also costs money. It's just a matter of who you're passing those costs onto.
You can only collect taxes from a dead man once. A person who is alive will pay taxes every year for the rest of his life.
Also preventive action is cheaper than reactive action.
Sure, but not really. If you enforced these rules by means of ticketing (not sure how else you would reasonably enforce it) then the state generates more revenue. While still paying the officers the same hourly/ salary. Maybe they have to higher more officers or other civil servants to deal with the increased number of tickets but I can't imagine that would out weight the volume of possible income.
It happened to actor Gary Busey, who campaigned against the California helmet law in the mid 80's, then got in a horrific crash on his motorcycle a year or two later. He was not wearing a helmet, and speculation is that his strange behavior since then is the result of brain damage from the accident.
But of course it's up to him how to handle his condition. I wish him the best.
Speculation is someone perpetuating extreme conspiracy under lacking awareness that invites outrageous notions!
- Gary Busey probably
That, or chronic cocaine usage
I thought it was at an anti-helmet rally in New York.
How do you... deny AIDS?
"Nah it's just a lie from the government"
"Nah it's just a lie from the government"
Essentially yes. One of the most common conspiracy theories about AIDS is that HIV isn't the cause and that AIDS was actually manufactured by the US government to kill homosexuals and black people. That conspiracy theory showed up real early in AIDS' history, and it wasn't til after the Cold War that we found out that it was the Soviets who invented that rumor in the first place. (The KGB invented the rumor to distract everyone from the Soviet Union's illegal chemical weapons program).
Some things never change I guess.
The Russians create and spread fake news to sow discord within the United States? Color me shocked...
Black person here. This is the first time I’ve heard that the Soviets invented that rumor.
I remember when the rumor was bouncing around the community. The reason it got traction was because of the history of human experimentation in the United States on black people, such as the infamous syphilis experiments at Tuskegee and J. Marion Sims’ surgical experiments on slave women.
I appreciate learning the truth about the source of the rumor.
The best propaganda has some kernel of truth to it. Same reason why so many anti-authoritarian protests are dismissed by those governments as US interference, because even if they're legitimate, we still do have a history of doing that.
There was a magazine called Continuum that pushed that conspiracy theory, claiming that AIDS was a conspiracy and was totally unrelated to HIV. I say that there was a magazine, because they eventually shut down after their editors kept dying of AIDS-related illnesses.
Proof that not all placebos work because you believe in them.
Dale Earnhardt Sr. refuse to wear the HANS device which was designed to prevent the type of injury that he sustained when he died at Daytona in 2001.
To be fair, the majority of drivers at the time refused to wear it.
Same thing with professional cyclists. They refused to wear helmets for the longest time (unaerodynamic, ‘uncomfortable to wear’). Then, in 1995 25 year old olympic gold medal winner Fabio Casartelli crashed during a descent in the Tour de France. His head struck a concrete block lining the road, and he died about an hour later from severe head injury.
It did not take long for helmets to become mandatory after that, but that doesn’t change the fact that it should not have taken someone dying for them to realize wearing helmets was necessary.
Meanwhile, there are anti vaxxers rallying BECAUSE OF the current measles outbreak that is affecting their own children...
At what point does a government step in and stamp out such a clear and present danger to people beyond those engaging in dangerous behavior.
The people in charge here aren’t too keen on science
The fact that this is true is so fucking depressing
Edit: here is trump showing skepticism about vaccination after starting with “autism has become an epidemic”
We literally changed the definition of autism a few years ago to better reflect reality. And classified several things together as autism spectrum disorders. Yea no shit diagnosis went up. That was the point
Can we put anti vaxers under the diagnosis umbrella? Our unvaccinated children under the umbrella. That way we can claim not getting vaccinated causes autism?
What better way to ensure you got the idiots hooked from the get go? A dog whistle like that will get all the evidence deniers on your side, which is exactly the only type of people that still support his cult.
some people look at the data, science and all logic as conspiracy fuel. They should have their children taken away. Fun fact most of those humans are vaccinated while their children aren't and they are dying.
Absolutely. It should be treated just like faith-healing parents who refuse to seek medical care for their sick children. Even more so, because YOU CAN KILL OTHER PEOPLES’ CHILDREN.
It's that shitty "That's what they want you to think" mentality. Or should I say mental disability. Either one works.
Sounds like a perfect place to catch measles.
Nah, all the anti-vaxxers are vaccinated, it's their children who'll face the consequences of their dumbassery.
For real. Wouldn’t it be a huge slap to the face if an anti vax rally was ground zero for an outbreak of some other disease like polio or some shit.
Vaccines are much different than helmets.
If you don't get your vaccines you will put people around you at risk.
If you don't wear a helmet you are only hurting yourself.
This is no different than passing a law requiring people to work out or eat a certain diet or do any one of a number of healthy activities. Obesity kills FAR more people every year than a lack of helmets. Obesity costs Americans far more each year than a lack of helmets.
Edit: I can't believe I have to say this but yes I'm pro vaccine
Vaccines are much different than helmets
But they're not too dissimilar to seatbelts. A passenger in a car who isn't wearing a seatbelt is a huge risk to the other occupants, even if they're wearing seatbelts. One giant fleshy pinball ricocheting against everyone else.
Helmets in cycling can often lead to heated discussions of those for/against.
I personally always wear one (I forgot mine once on a trail ride and felt weird the entire time) in part to set an example for my kids and because in general it isn't going to make a crash worse even if it won't necessarily help.
Helmets are great at protecting you from really dumb falls at slow speeds, because while you may not die from falling over at a stoplight forgetting to unclip, you can definitely get concussed. Or if you lose traction on some gravel and just sort of fall over. Or if you're on the trail with your kid and he does something stupid and cuts you off. Stuff like that.
But bombing a descent and hitting your head on a rock at 50+ mph? Yeah, the helmet may save your life or it may not. But again, it's not going to make that impact any worse. A helmet may not make the difference if you get hit by a car, but it certainly isn't going to make it worse.
So I think they just make sense.
However, there is research that shows that drivers actually drive more carefully around a cyclist who isn't wearing a helmet than those that do. And if the cyclist is in kit that goes up even more, which is ridiculous, but no one ever said people's decisions made sense.
Those against helmets will often point to places in Europe, talking about how Dutch cyclists never wear helmets and all that jazz, but you really can't compare a small country with incredible bike infrastructure where most people ride bikes to one which is huge, has no cycling infrastructure, and where drivers are often hostile to cyclists.
I mean, I've had three incidents on my bike this far. One was a guy in an SUV who was aggressively honking at me for stopping at a stop sign. A second was a soccer mom type in an SUV who rolled her window down at a stoplight and accosted me saying I really need to signal where I'm going, except I'd been on a single road for the last 20 miles going straight until the left turn lane opened up (where I was) -- I'd think it was pretty apparent at that point my intention was to turn left. The third was actually the first to happen. I was waiting at a red light to turn left (single lane) and a high school-ish aged girl went around me to me left then cut in front of me to turn right and hit me and somehow claimed to have not seen me while also saying she didn't know which direction I was going.
I appreciate your comment.
Its true that Casartelli could very well have died even if he wore a helmet, but it should be noted Casartelli did not instantly die from the impact (meaning he did not crash at a speed where a helmet wouldve been useless), and the point of impact was on top of his head. Both of these facts strongly suggested he most likely would not have died if he had worn a helmet.
Still, professional cyclists expose themselves to far more risky and dangerous situations than commuters and hobbyists, so wearing a helmet should’ve been a given, pure common sense.
Forgot mine on a trail ride once as well. The whole time I thought something felt weird but couldn't figure out what. Got to my favourite part of the trail that's a sudden quick downhill into a series of sharp turns.
Was right about to get into it when my brain was like "oh fuck helmet!" And I hit the brakes. Turned around a rode much more carefully back to my truck to get my helmet.
I've literally never heard of any kind of debate about helmets and bicycles, outside of a) riding bikes as kids in the 90s or earlier or b) commuters in small European cities.
Every trail rider I've ever met wears a helmet, and everybody on downhill wears a full face.
You roadies are fucking weird, man. Literally everything around you is a rock.
They refused to wear it not on a basis of safety, but competition. The HANS device limits your ability to turn your head, meaning you have less information in the car. At that level, they will always take competition over safety without a rule in place. Its the governing body's fault.
Its the governing body's fault.
They attempted to make it mandatory, and Dale Earnhardt Sr. was the head of the campaign to stop them. It was because of his efforts that they were optional and he died because he didn't take the option.
And by making it optional, he endangered the lives of others because they were forced to go without or be at a disadvantage.
Well, at least he's the only who paid the price, no? After his death they mandated them.
Unfortunately, 3 racers died of the same injury that killed Earnhardt just the year before. Adam Petty, Tony Roper and Kenny Irwin Jr all died of Basilar Skull Fractures in 2000.
So more than just Dale Sr, sadly.
That's shitty. Safety should always be a priority.
It kind of worked out, in a dark way.
It's true. Never driven a race car, but my coworker races Late Models and Open Wheels across the southeast and let me wear his HANS/helmet. Being fully strapped into a car with both on, you can turn your head left to right maybe two inches and lean forward about as far. It gets very claustrophobic with the narrow foot box, the bolsters on the seat and door sill coming up to your shoulder.
Wow! That was THAT long ago?
His son has already retired as well. So .. time flies
At a much younger age tho.
Didn't Jr retire because of traumatic brain injury causing (hard concussions) leaving him missing large portions of his memory and various other problems.
Yes. He did a great interview on JRE about it. Turns out his dad was also less than-- supportive...
Can you elaborate a bit on that last part?
He and his dad didnt have the greatest relationship. Sr was a superstar who transcended the sport so there was a lot of pressure placed on Jr that he didnt feel like he was able to live up to. Sr never encouraged his kids to go into racing as he wanted them to finish HS before they did anything (Sr didnt finish the 8th grade and it was always an embarrassment for hime). When Jr started racing Sr never went to any of his races until Jr moved up to NASCAR and drove for his dad (one of his drivers retired and the crew chief recommended Jr despite Sr not believing in him). It wasnt until Jr started racing in the big league that Sr finally opened up as they did everything together. Jr describes the last three years with his dad the highlight of their relationship.
I thought he wore the shoulder support but didn't wear the helmet restraint which kept his shoulders and torso restrained when he impacted the wall but his head and neck snapped forward ultimately killing him.
So he was wearing a hans but unhooked the helmet part.
Not only did he refuse to wear it, but a year or two before he basically shut down an effort to make the device mandatory. I forget the details, but there is an article about how they were trying to push for the device, and the drivers didn't like it, and then one day Dale came in and said, "Don't you think it's time to drop it?" and because he was THE Dale Earnhardt, that was that.
was there a practical reason for why they were against it?
Yeah, it's harder to see around you since it's considerably harder to move your head. People nowadays will talk shit all day long, but refusing to pretty significantly reduce your competitive ability to get a bit more safety was far from exclusive from NASCAR.
You can't turn your head to see beside you.
Reading some of these comments (not yours) would be like shitting on NFL players who wouldn't want to wear a neck brace while they were on the field.
Sadly the inventor of the HANS Device, Dr Robert Hubbard, passed away just last week.
Wow, I completely missed that. My dad worked for his company for a few years before he sold it. That's too bad.
As a massive Formula 1 fan and a fan of motor racing in general, that man is a hero. His invention saved a countless number of lives.
Shout out to the F1 Halo for keeping my main boi Charles Leclerc alive last year.
And now he’s the reason “that damn noose” is required wearing.
And NASCAR hasn't had a death in any of the national touring series (Cup, Xfinity, or trucks) since.
In Vanuatu, seat belts are optional by law. I choose to wear mine tho.
hi there from your neighbor New Caledonia!
Send pics of your incredible tool-wielding crows, please.
In Argentina people don't really wear their seatbelts because they cops don't really give a fuck. I put mine on every time and get laughed at.
I hear living let's you get the last laugh.
Even if you're seatbelted but other people in the car aren't they still pose a big risk to you because in the case of a crash they'll go flying around the car and might hit you.
Same in china(some parts) and hong kong.
In fact in hong kong they may take offense to you putting on a seatbelt since it shows that you dont trust their driving.
Still put mine on.
He died doing what he loved. Ignoring basic physics.
In highschool many years ago, I had a physics exam where one of the questions was to calculate the acceleration on your body with and without usinga seatbelt.
Pretty mind opening.
Because of how I was raised, it was never a question of wearing my seat belt. I do it automatically when I get in the car. But man, when I was rear-ended in a car accident, it really drove home how important seat belts are. At best I would have crashed against the steering wheel, at worst I would have gone through the windshield. I don't get how some people were/are against them.
I am the same. My mom made me wear them even in the 70's when so many people never did. I was in an accident with an 18 wheeler when I was about 17. I'm sure that I would have had much worse injuries than some glass in my hand had I not been wearing a seat belt.
My grandpa was an early adopter--he had seatbelts installed in his truck before they were even standard in new cars. That truck rolled completely over with his wife and three kids in it, and everyone was totally fine. They just kept driving.
Just kept driving? How did he manage that with pants full of terror shit?
Oh man I wish i was raised like that. My parents still act like I am ridiculous when I put on my seat belt. They both use that card thingy you slip into the belt nest so the car doesn't make a fuss.
that card thingy you slip into the belt nest
I had no idea such a stupid invention existed. I mean it's smart insomuch that the inventor will definitely make some money, but stupid because the entire market for the product is comprised of people making an extremely stupid decision that will almost certainly result in an unnecessary injury at some point in their life. It's like if you were at a full solar eclipse and people were passing out those sun viewing glasses and you were like "nah i'm good i'll just stare at the sun directly."
Also I had never heard the term 'belt nest' but I have no more concise way of describing it. I guess maybe 'female part of the belt' like when describing cables and stuff. Doesn't really come up I suppose and pretty unnecessary knowledge . Like how the word for the thing that goes around a coffee cup to keep your fingers from being burned is called a 'zarf,'
Like how the word for the thing that goes around a coffee cup to keep your fingers from being burned is called a 'zarf,'
In my language it's called "cup's ear".
Latch or catch is what I've always heard. Female end seems like it should be acceptable too, though..
If you are driving them anywhere, try going a leisurely 20 miles per hour or lower, then braking hard. Something along those lines might get the point across, without injury hopefully.
I don't get how some people were/are against them.
I would kill for a reasonable answer to this. I can understand not wanting to wear a helmet on a motorcycle. But seatbelts are ALREADY IN THE CAR. All you have to do is put them on. They aren’t uncomfortable unless you’re really short, and they make seatbelt clips that fix that issue.
My mother in law goes one step further and holds the seat belt across her body in taxis that enforce seat belt. So it occupies one hand for her the whole trip but she laughs when I tell her to just put it on "not necessary".
I hope he had a moment, before being thrown from the vehicle and mashed, where he felt dumb.
“Oh, I get it now”
The last thought that went through his head before it smashed like so many watermelons at a Ghallager show
the second-last thing to go through his head
I’d like to think that the last thing that went through the warden's head, other than that bullet, was to wonder how the hell Andy Dufresne ever got the best of him.
It's his god given rights to live as a living missile at least once before dying.
I didn’t know being an anti seat belt advocate was a thing.
Plenty of people against having to wear Helmets when riding motorcycle. Similar thing
You’ve never met a libertarian???
Yea, but what does it have to do with books?
That's a librarian. You're thinking of the pianist.
You're thinking of Liberace. A libertarian is a resident of the fourth largest nation in Africa.
I always think about my pianist.
Now that's the dedication to a cause. Not likely planned but give him respects. p.s. he dumb
Dang, most of that sub is just sad, not really the funny darwin award content I expected.
Yeah, it’s mostly just sadistic creeps who think people deserve to die for getting drunk or making a dumb mistake.
You've hit the nail on the head about something that bothers me quite a lot about Reddit. There's this horrible attitude that peoples' stupidity or mildly bad character means that they deserve to die for their mistakes. Like somebody ignoring a red light at a level crossing means that they deserved to die by getting hit by the train. Was their death predictable and a result of their own actions? Yes. Did they deserve it? No, they were foolish and impatient, but that's not enough for a fucking death sentence.
I realise I'm just repeating what you said pretty much, but you're the only person I've ever seen challenge this.
I... regret visiting that sub. The guy falling in the manhole breaking his ankle was the NOPE moment.
Brian bosworth was a anti helmet advocate for motorcycles, he crashed, almost died, came back and advocated for helmets.
He died the way he lived, in defiance of Uncle Sam regulating every facet of his life.
Uncle Sam can't regulate every facet of your life if you don't have one.
Ironically the government was no doubt involved in cleaning his dead ass off of whatever it landed on, as well as hauling off his busted ass vehicle, and in general cleaning up his mess.
I guess that would be a facet of his death though.
When I saw the link I was expecting an older man during the dawn of seatbelt laws, not a college student from relatively recently.
Remember the cliche saying that parents on TV always told their kid? "Driving is a privilege not a right"?
You have no right to drive on tax payer funded streets. You are granted that privilege by showing you can abide by the safety guidelines ( laws ) that you're bound to abide by participating in this behavior.
I'll just ride my horse then. Harumph
I dunno about the rest of the world, but in Japan, horses are classified as light cars
Same as Australia, I think someone went to the maccas drive through and they didn't serve him, and I think another time the rider got done for drink driving.
Not sure if these are old wives tales or not though.
Maccas = McDonalds
Got Done = Was punished by law enforcement
Thank me later rest of the world
I met a guy from Australia once, and the only Aussie phrase I learned from him was "Flat out like a lizard drinking" which means you're really busy.
That's the only one I learned, but I'll never forget it.
I’m not driving I’m traveling /s
I don't get it.
"I'm not driving, I'm travelling" is something stupid I've seen sovereign citizens say in videos of them being pulled over. I think the implication is that the government can't violate your right to travel freely, but I don't know any more than that tbh.
Thats literally never worked once, why the fuck do they keep saying it
Because sovereign citizens are an intensely stupid group of people who believe the law is made of magical incantations where saying the special words can get you out of everything.
Because there's the people who lie about it working and then the rest take it as scientific law.
In their universe 'driving' is what you do when moving things for commerce. You drive cattle to market, or you drive a stagecoach or something. When you are operating a motor vehicle to get from one place to another it's not a commercial venture, it's just you traveling, and the gubbmint has no authority to intervene in your basic human right to move around. They can regulate commerce, but not lunatics, so go ahead and open fire if they pull you over for driving with no license plates. Something like that.
Most of these laws use terms like, ' while in charge of/operating a vehicle' to get rid of ambiguities like that.
It's particularly stupid as they are not blocking you from travelling at all - there's nothing stopping you getting out and walking.
"yes, you are traveling, and how are you traveling?"
"And what do you do to make a car go?"
"...you travel in it"
Look up sovereign citizens.
I think the articles of confederation granted the right to freely travel. Wackjob knuckleheads who think laws are loophole-filled hocus pocus take this to mean that even though the articles of confederation were completely replaced when we signed the US constitution into law, that all anyone has to do is call it "travelling" to go anywhere without a licence.
I mean. He was right in that goverment shouldnt regulate every facet of life. People should be free to win a darwin's award if they want to.
EDIT: I have no idea how my attempt to make a joke created so many different discutions in the comments. People talking about individual freedom, healthcare cost, overpopulation, laws, collectivism and liberty and even some saying I am a cold sadist because my joke about darwin's awards obviously is a serious attempt of mocking dead people and not, you know, just a joke.