Pope falls foul of German hosts by shunning seat belt

[LilyM]

That would depend upon who had the guns and who didn’t.

Moot point in America - EVERYONE would’ve had guns, and there would’ve been plenty of victims on all sides. Not my idea of a sensible resolution to the problems that sparked the riots.

 

[purplesunshine]

Moot point in America - EVERYONE would’ve had guns, and there would’ve been plenty of victims on all sides. Not my idea of a sensible resolution to the problems that sparked the riots.

I don’t think so. Again, look at the OWS “rebel without a cause” vs the london riots “rebel without a cause”.

They knew they couldn’t get away with that kind of nonsense in America.

 

[LilyM]

I don’t think so. Again, look at the OWS “rebel without a cause” vs the london riots “rebel without a cause”.

They knew they couldn’t get away with that kind of nonsense in America.

Yep, those LA rioters after the Rodney King decision (yes, I’m old enough to remember those) sure knew they couldn’t ‘get away with that kind of nonsense’

Not to mention the looters after Hurricane Katrina in NO

Just because it’s not currently happening doesn’t mean it can’t and doesn’t happen in the US, with just as much ease and ferocity.

 

[purplesunshine]

Yep, those LA rioters after the Rodney King decision (yes, I’m old enough to remember those) sure knew they couldn’t ‘get away with that kind of nonsense’

Not to mention the looters after Hurricane Katrina in NO

Just because it’s not currently happening doesn’t mean it can’t and doesn’t happen in the US, with just as much ease and ferocity.

i am not adressing civil rights rioting…i am adressing “civil” movements that have NO cause. Citra OWS and london riots.
can you name a time people rioted and shat in the park for fun like they are doing now?

An FYI…ows page was developed the same time the london riots occured

 

[LilyM]

i am not adressing civil rights rioting…i am adressing “civil” movements that have NO cause. Citra OWS and london riots.
can you name a time people rioted and shat in the park for fun like they are doing now?

An FYI…ows page was developed the same time the london riots occured

Firstly - says you they don’t have a cause.

For one, people such as the OWS campaigners are sicked of being screwed by banks on interest rates, bank fees, and the like, over which they have no control, for the sake of fat executive bonuses and shareholder profits. And sick of being screwed by government on the other hand, over which they also have precious little control, with more and more taxes going towards fewer and fewer social services, for the sake of fat bureaucratic salaries and perks.

I call that something of a cause.

Not that I by any means approve of violent protest, and I’ll admit I don’t know enough about the rest of what OWS and the London protesters were doing to evaluate all their non-violent actions.

All of this is entirely beside the point. You’ve said in so many words that America is a society less prone to violence (eg violent protest) because widespread gun ownership means no-one could ‘get away with’ it. That has nothing to do with the motivation, or lack thereof, of the protest. You’re saying that in any event it simply wouldn’t happen, essentially.

I’m simply pointing out that you’re very wrong. It has happened, and could easily happen again.

 

[vz71]

For one, people such as the OWS campaigners are sicked of being screwed by banks on interest rates, bank fees, and the like, over which they have no control, for the sake of fat executive bonuses and shareholder profits.

If that is really the case, then the OWS crowd is much more ignorent then I thought.
Interest rates and bank fees everyone has control over.

Don’t like the interest rate? Don’t take the loan.
Don’t like the fee? Don’t use the service.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I dont live in a communist nanny state that requires concenting adults to wear seatbelts.

It IS easy to disable the seatbelt bell. Its called the fuse to which you simply look at the diagram.

I choose …MY CHOICE…to wear a seatbelt. But I also respect the choice of my five friends who dont wear one.
1-whose friend was killed by a seat belt in a low speed colision
2-my friend who lost his near full term sister in a low speed colision due to the seatbelt, (and his mother.)
3-my friend’s aunt who lived ONLY because she didnt wear a belt when she was t-boned on a highway.
4-my friends g-pa who survived only because he wasnt wearing a belt in a drivers side collision.
5-a local garbage man whos truck caught fire due to spontaneous combustion and was thrown through the windshield when he slammed on his breaks. The truck exploded seconds later. He did not think he would survive but had given his life so no families in their homes would die. Had he been wearing his seat belt he would of.

And alll of the fatalities that I know of first hand include people who died with seatbelts who would of died anyway.

I believe it is a free choice not the job of the government or hyperactive people with sob stories.

You could simply make one of two statements:

1. Statistically, wearing belts saves more lives.
   2 Statistically, not wearing seat belts saves more lives.

Are you for 1? or for 2?.
Is your statement scientifically tested or made about dubious examples (you say that not wearing seat belts saved lives in your examples but I am not sure.

What surprises me is that the whole world, the scientists, the lab technicians are all dumb and you are the smart one.

It would need the lab tests, the scientific data, with numbers like accelarations, braking, mass on movement, shock on belt, torso injury sustainable rate and so on. You did not present any scientif data: number of accidents in America, role of the seat belt and so on.

Free choice to poligamy, to respect or not the USA flag, to go naked in Manhattan, to have sexual relations in public, to wear or not wear seat belts in plains, to enter the plains without being searched, so start shooting in the air inManhattan, to drink in public, to pass red lights if nocar is crossing the road, to drive in the left side when there is no car coming towards you, and so on and on and on.

 

[purplesunshine]

You could simply make one of two statements:

1. Statistically, wearing belts saves more lives.
   2 Statistically, not wearing seat belts saves more lives.

Are you for 1? or for 2?.
Is your statement scientifically tested or made about dubious examples (you say that not wearing seat belts saved lives in your examples but I am not sure.

I’m not “for” either. 1 is true. HOWEVER. Seatbelts do not save ALL lives. Far from it. The best statistics I can find is that its about 70/30 in favor of seatbelts. But that’s still a percentage of people who would of been better off without a seatbelt. Yes, there are twice as many. But I’m not dilluded to believe that it’s 99% as you seem to indicate/feel.

What surprises me is that the whole world, the scientists, the lab technicians are all dumb and you are the smart one.

It would need the lab tests, the scientific data, with numbers like accelarations, braking, mass on movement, shock on belt, torso injury sustainable rate and so on. You did not present any scientif data: number of accidents in America, role of the seat belt and so on.

Forcing people to do something under pains of fines or lisence revocations isn’t the way to go. Infact, the fatality trend in states with no or light seatbelt laws is that LESS people are dying per capita. Those states who nanny are loosing more people.

Free choice to poligamy, to respect or not the USA flag, to go naked in Manhattan, to have sexual relations in public, to wear or not wear seat belts in plains, to enter the plains without being searched, so start shooting in the air inManhattan, to drink in public, to pass red lights if nocar is crossing the road, to drive in the left side when there is no car coming towards you, and so on and on and on.

You now proceed to toss out a bunch of things that don’t make sence.
1)poligimay is immoral for the same reason gay marriage is, however, as gay marriage is leagal I make no differents.
2) seat belts in planes should be optional, as they are in busses and trains
3) there was a time when you didn’t have to be strip searched to enter a plane…and there are some smaller airports that service people who don’t want to be electronically nude.
4) comparing not wearing a seatbelt to shooting in a crowded city…I’m not even going there
5) Drinking in pulic laws HAVE gone too far. I know business shut down becuase they can’t serve alchol on their decks. Public intoxication laws should only pertain to those so smashed they will hurt themselves or others.
6) Red lights are red lights for a reason. And being in a rural area we have many red blinking lights at night that I stop and proceed through.
7) Driving on the wrong side of the road IS wrong for a reason. Making a judment not to wear saftey equiptment and intentally putting yourself in a position to kill others is different.

 

[kelvinf]

It is not compulsory to wear a seatbelt when driving at “walking speed”. Walking speed is not defined but some courts have put it between 4 - 10 km/h, another “clearly under 20 km/h”.

 

[Catholic90]

“repurposed seatbelts” can be made into amazing things!

http://http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WvuRMdyreEk/R_gZJgaw4KI/AAAAAAAAAEQ/_ZuZqzCuVP4/s320/tingsling.jpg

 

[LemonAndLime]

Yeah…the rioters were a bunch of innocent kids.

OWS in America was disgusting enough, but atleast the violence was kept to a minimum and they had “reasons” albeit foolish ones. But they didn’t rob people of their livelyhoods and strand tourists without phones and personal items becuase they happeend to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Having guns is a GOOD thing.

You stay on your side of the pond and I’ll stay on mine as you watch your civilization fall to “innocent”.

Having guns is a GOOD thing only when you’re not the one staring down a barrel of a gun.

Riots/unrest/robbery/crime + access to guns = accidents/murder.

My civilisation has been going on for much longer than yours without needing guns, thank you.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I’m not “for” either. 1 is true. HOWEVER. Seatbelts do not save ALL lives. Far from it. The best statistics I can find is that its about 70/30 in favor of seatbelts. But that’s still a percentage of people who would of been better off without a seatbelt. Yes, there are twice as many. But I’m not dilluded to believe that it’s 99% as you seem to indicate/feel.

Forcing people to do something under pains of fines or lisence revocations isn’t the way to go. Infact, the fatality trend in states with no or light seatbelt laws is that LESS people are dying per capita. Those states who nanny are loosing more people.

You now proceed to toss out a bunch of things that don’t make sence.
1)poligimay is immoral for the same reason gay marriage is, however, as gay marriage is leagal I make no differents.
2) seat belts in planes should be optional, as they are in busses and trains
3) there was a time when you didn’t have to be strip searched to enter a plane…and there are some smaller airports that service people who don’t want to be electronically nude.
4) comparing not wearing a seatbelt to shooting in a crowded city…I’m not even going there
5) Drinking in pulic laws HAVE gone too far. I know business shut down becuase they can’t serve alchol on their decks. Public intoxication laws should only pertain to those so smashed they will hurt themselves or others.
6) Red lights are red lights for a reason. And being in a rural area we have many red blinking lights at night that I stop and proceed through.
7) Driving on the wrong side of the road IS wrong for a reason. Making a judment not to wear saftey equiptment and intentally putting yourself in a position to kill others is different.

Oh! Now I see. You are from the Far West. I know some villages like that: kids with everlasting wounds in the knees driving bykes without helmet, motorbyke people driving like crazy with the helmet in the arm, kids jumping to the trees and falling and no cry, and of course you cross the red light because you know that Ole Joe’s car only will come 3 hours later. If you use a seat belt, evrybody will laugh at you at the bar…

Ok. But please when you go to the city, use a seat belt !!!

 

[AHapka]

For one, people such as the OWS campaigners are sicked of being screwed by banks on interest rates, bank fees, and the like, over which they have no control, for the sake of fat executive bonuses and shareholder profits.

Honestly, they do have control. They could have done what me and my wife did a very long time ago and went with their local credit union.

The fact that people still bank with these big banks makes me wonder where they lack in intelligence?

 

[AHapka]

One thing in this whole seat belt debate you guys are forgetting to mention is that it holds you in place during hard cornering manuevers.

Take a 90 degree corner at 35mph, and you’ll know why you should wear your seatbelt…

 

[purplesunshine]

Oh! Now I see. You are from the Far West. I know some villages like that: kids with everlasting wounds in the knees driving bykes without helmet, motorbyke people driving like crazy with the helmet in the arm, kids jumping to the trees and falling and no cry, and of course you cross the red light because you know that Ole Joe’s car only will come 3 hours later. If you use a seat belt, evrybody will laugh at you at the bar…

Ok. But please when you go to the city, use a seat belt !!!

I live around 1 and 3 hours from the biggest cities in the northeast. I drive daily along with over a million of the US most aggressive drivers.

Dispariging my character…that i go to a bar, basically am a stupid redneck…is silly. As I stated before I do wear a seatbelt. But I do not feel the government should control it.

And its ok for kids to have skinned knees…but the last time I checked helmets dont prevent skinned knees. And helmets shouldnt be law either.

 

[LemonAndLime]

I live around 1 and 3 hours from the biggest cities in the northeast. I drive daily along with over a million of the US most aggressive drivers.

Dispariging my character…that i go to a bar, basically am a stupid redneck…is silly. As I stated before I do wear a seatbelt. But I do not feel the government should control it.

And its ok for kids to have skinned knees…but the last time I checked helmets dont prevent skinned knees. And helmets shouldnt be law either.

Helmets should be law as well as seatbelts, cause it’s clear that people need to be told to do it otherwise they won’t take care of themselves.

The people I know who are in favour of it are paramedics, doctors, nurses and victims of coming off their bike or crashing their car. I think we should listen to them.

 

[purplesunshine]

Helmets should be law as well as seatbelts, cause it’s clear that people need to be told to do it otherwise they won’t take care of themselves.

The people I know who are in favour of it are paramedics, doctors, nurses and victims of coming off their bike or crashing their car. I think we should listen to them.

We’ve established that people in the UK can’t deal with freedom. But in America we can and we do. And again, statistics show a LOWER morbidity rate for those who are given the free choice to do so. States who are UK wannabees and like to legislate anything have a higher death rate per capita than those who leave it up to the consumer.

Helmet laws, especially for bicycles…and especially for those biking on private property at that…are overreaching.

As one person stated, children get a lot of skinned knees. Are you going to start regulating knee pads for children who play on a playground?

 

[LemonAndLime]

We’ve established that people in the UK can’t deal with freedom.

Hey, I like my commune! No, we prefer being told what to do.

I found your comment a little offensive. You should respect your landowners…

But in America we can and we do.

Your history of freedom isn’t exactly in a good shape either though, is it?

And again, statistics show a LOWER morbidity rate for those who are given the free choice to do so. States who are UK wannabees and like to legislate anything have a higher death rate per capita than those who leave it up to the consumer.

That’s a big claim, source?

Helmet laws, especially for bicycles…and especially for those biking on private property at that…are overreaching.

As one person stated, children get a lot of skinned knees. Are you going to start regulating knee pads for children who play on a playground?

No, but skinned knees tend to kill less people than cracked skulls with their brains spilling out.

 

[purplesunshine]

Hey, I like my commune! No, we prefer being told what to do.

I found your comment a little offensive. You should respect your landowners…

Uhhh…I think who owns the land was determined in 1776. Besides, you never owned it in the first place, it belonged to someone already.

Your history of freedom isn’t exactly in a good shape either though, is it?
That’s a big claim, source?

The US. gov statics keeps records. I had a professor who authored a paper on it and I believe that AAA magazine also had an article in the fall of 2006.

No, but skinned knees tend to kill less people than cracked skulls with their brains spilling out.

First of all, falling from a bicycle may crack your skull if you run into a concrete wall or are going 20mi an hour, however your brains will not spill out.

One could argue that a skinned knee is potentially life threatening as we now have things like MRSA and other superbugs that can make even a papercut deadly.

Infact, on a bicycle you’re more likely to break your wrist/arm.

My point was that you cannot decided where to start and end regulations…because really it’s a matter of perception.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Uhhh…I think who owns the land was determined in 1776. Besides, you never owned it in the first place, it belonged to someone already.

Kettle-black [British slang for, you’re no better]. Didn’t you see the decree from Her Majesty I posted a while back? We’re waiting for our uncollected taxes dating back since then! Now I’m having fun, but you were trying to insult me. I’ll accept an apology by cheque.

The US. gov statics keeps records. I had a professor who authored a paper on it and I believe that AAA magazine also had an article in the fall of 2006.

Not good enough. Either post it here where I can see it or all I’m going on is your word, which isn’t proof of anything so I don’t believe you.

First of all, falling from a bicycle may crack your skull if you run into a concrete wall or are going 20mi an hour, however your brains will not spill out.

Depends on how young you are. You can crack your head open on the concrete not just by going fast or into a wall, you’re forgetting about the ground. Your head is like an eggshell, and head injuries are a very very common injury in people who cycle without a helmet, and they’re the hardest to treat.

One could argue that a skinned knee is potentially life threatening as we now have things like MRSA and other superbugs that can make even a papercut deadly.

MRSA is already living on your skin. It lives on the skin of 33% of people, harmlessly and quite happily. No need to believe the papers. It’s only a problem if it not only gets into your blood but in such a high amount that you get sepsis.

Infact, on a bicycle you’re more likely to break your wrist/arm.

My point was that you cannot decided where to start and end regulations…because really it’s a matter of perception.

However, I percieve that it is prudent to take all necessary precautions.