Why can you get ticket for no wear SeatBelt when motorcycle are legal in all states?

sdfsdfsdfsdfsdfsdfsdf wrote:

The exact same argument applies to support banning motorcycles though. They really are far more dangerous than driving a car with no seatbelt if you look at the numbers.

Really, there is no reason from a safety standpoint why anyone should be riding a motorcycle with regular automobile traffic. I think motorcyclists are generally pretty passionate and protective of their current rights to ride a motorcycle, and they protest/vote at a high enough rate to keep current laws in place. It's the same reason they can have those d*pshit mufflers or whatever that make 100+ db of 'look at rebellious me!' noise, but the cops will fine you if your music is audible at your neighbor's place or your car stereo is too loud.

If your car physically doesn't have seatbelts (eg, older cars), you don't get a ticket for not wearing one. Similarly, since motorcycles physically don't have seatbelts, you can't be ticketed for not wearing one.

i just sew a section of seatbelt onto the shoulder of all of my jackets and shirts so it looks like i'm wearing a seatbelt but i'm not.totally fool the cops ALL THE TIME hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

car w/o SB still safer than mc wrote:

a car without a seatbelt is safer than a motorcycle

I got a ticket for not wearing a helmet in my car!

they show up and vote wrote:

sdfsdfsdfsdfsdfsdfsdf wrote:

The exact same argument applies to support banning motorcycles though. They really are far more dangerous than driving a car with no seatbelt if you look at the numbers.

Really, there is no reason from a safety standpoint why anyone should be riding a motorcycle with regular automobile traffic. I think motorcyclists are generally pretty passionate and protective of their current rights to ride a motorcycle, and they protest/vote at a high enough rate to keep current laws in place. It's the same reason they can have those d*pshit mufflers or whatever that make 100+ db of 'look at rebellious me!' noise, but the cops will fine you if your music is audible at your neighbor's place or your car stereo is too loud.

Yea it's more dangerous. Also cheaper, less gas, use the HOV lane and in California lane splitting saves an unbelievable amount of time. The risk trade off is acceptable.

There is no benefit to not wearing a seatbelt and plenty of cost.

They aren't equivalent situations.

The risk trade-off is acceptable? LOL??? BIASED MUCH? going from 35+ mpg (modern sedan) to 45 (sports bike) doesn't justify the major sacrifice in collision protection that a car provides.Did you honestly believe that as you typed it...?!?! Is this how people in California process the world? No sooner the state is in such a mess.

Yea it's more dangerous. Also cheaper, less gas, use the HOV lane and in California lane splitting saves an unbelievable amount of time. The risk trade off is acceptable.

There is no benefit to not wearing a seatbelt and plenty of cost.

They aren't equivalent situations.

my mom makes me wear my helmut 24/7, so do the other kids in my class

Here is what bothers me.

There is a law that requires you to wear a seat belt while driving or riding in a car.

Yet there is no law that prevents adults from smoking in a car with all windows up and a young child in the back seat.

Sanddddders wrote:

The risk trade-off is acceptable? LOL??? BIASED MUCH? going from 35+ mpg (modern sedan) to 45 (sports bike) doesn't justify the major sacrifice in collision protection that a car provides.

Did you honestly believe that as you typed it...?!?! Is this how people in California process the world? No sooner the state is in such a mess.

Yea it's more dangerous. Also cheaper, less gas, use the HOV lane and in California lane splitting saves an unbelievable amount of time. The risk trade off is acceptable.

There is no benefit to not wearing a seatbelt and plenty of cost.

They aren't equivalent situations.

Make your own choice. SF to Mountain View is about 30 miles. 60 miles round trip. I probably save 30 minutes a day when I ride. I just got two hours of my life back every week.

That's worth the risk. I have a nice motorcycle but you could buy a reliable commuter bike for $3k, an impossibility for a car.

And yea, California sucks, that's why real estate is so expensive. People hate it so much.

Right. So it's okay for you to accept the risk of riding a motorcycle, but people that ride in cars shouldn't be able to accept the risk of not wearing a seatbelt?

There is no proof that helmets are "safer" for motorcyclists. In fact, they often significantly reduce hearing and field of vision having a negative affect on motorcyclist safety. It's the same reason there is significant debate on whether bicyclists should wear helmets or not.

There IS significant proof that seatbelts save lives however.

Talk about stupid wrote:

Here is what bothers me.

There is a law that requires you to wear a seat belt while driving or riding in a car.

Yet there is no law that prevents adults from smoking in a car with all windows up and a young child in the back seat.

My dad rolled his window down when he smoked in the car, with us kids in the back seat. And if you weren't paying attention and forgot to roll your window up when he started ashing, you were liable to get hots in your eyes.

Guess who's fault that was, when it happened (and it did, more than once)? Hint: not the driver's. Things were different back then

I love how you're trying to sound sane, and you're telling us that 2 hours a week is worth risking your life over. Can't you afford a nice place near your workplace? Why would you accept such a horrible commute, and feel content with that? Move or something, jesus.

....??? wrote:

Sanddddders wrote:

The risk trade-off is acceptable? LOL??? BIASED MUCH? going from 35+ mpg (modern sedan) to 45 (sports bike) doesn't justify the major sacrifice in collision protection that a car provides.

Did you honestly believe that as you typed it...?!?! Is this how people in California process the world? No sooner the state is in such a mess.

Make your own choice. SF to Mountain View is about 30 miles. 60 miles round trip. I probably save 30 minutes a day when I ride. I just got two hours of my life back every week.

That's worth the risk. I have a nice motorcycle but you could buy a reliable commuter bike for $3k, an impossibility for a car.

And yea, California sucks, that's why real estate is so expensive. People hate it so much.

pathfinder wrote:

Right. So it's okay for you to accept the risk of riding a motorcycle, but people that ride in cars shouldn't be able to accept the risk of not wearing a seatbelt?

That's not what I'm saying at all. There is a benefit to a motorcycle that comes with the increased risk. There is not a benefit to not wearing a seatbelt while there is a significant cost.

But whatever, not worth explaining cost benefit to idiots.

CA Nuts on LR wrote:

I love how you're trying to sound sane, and you're telling us that 2 hours a week is worth risking your life over. Can't you afford a nice place near your workplace? Why would you accept such a horrible commute, and feel content with that? Move or something, jesus.

....??? wrote:

Make your own choice. SF to Mountain View is about 30 miles. 60 miles round trip. I probably save 30 minutes a day when I ride. I just got two hours of my life back every week.

That's worth the risk. I have a nice motorcycle but you could buy a reliable commuter bike for $3k, an impossibility for a car.

And yea, California sucks, that's why real estate is so expensive. People hate it so much.

U mad brah?

motorcycles are Darwin's way of thinning out the herd

Wrong. You're saying your idea of what a cost/benefit is should apply to everyone else. Maybe not everyone sees the benefit in wearing a seat belt. Let me guess, they're idiots because they don't accept your benefit. And if they don't accept your risk on the motorcycle, they're idiots.

Whatever.

pathfinder wrote:

Wrong. You're saying your idea of what a cost/benefit is should apply to everyone else. Maybe not everyone sees the benefit in wearing a seat belt. Let me guess, they're idiots because they don't accept your benefit. And if they don't accept your risk on the motorcycle, they're idiots.

Whatever.

Never said everyone should accept the risk of a motorcycle. Up to an individual. But I spelled out the benefits.

What's the benefit of not wearing a seatbelt? Downside is higher rate of dying, higher auto and medica insurance for everyone, longer traffic delays for when you do die, and making minor accidents serious ones. What benefit is there?

areusure? wrote:

I got a ticket for not wearing a helmet in my car!

I got a ticket for being in my car!