Seabelts in cars are not unlike the “vaccines” in that those pushing both of these things say we ought to have no choice about such things. It’s especially obnoxious as regards seatbelts because it is impossible to make even the cloying argument that someone else’s not “buckling-up” threatens the “safety” of anyone else.
Keeping people “safe” – especially from themselves – is the proper business of the parents of minor children. When it becomes the business of government, the government has become the parent.
That is no way for grown-ups to live.
Seat belts are not objectionable, as such. Although that is how opposition to forcing people to “buckle up” is generally framed. Because it is much easier to shut people up by framing them as being opposed to something that might be reasonable and sensible, as such.
Like seat belts.
They can decrease your chances of being hurt – or hurt more seriously – if you crash your car. Wearing a seatbelt may even save your life, if the crash is severe enough. No one possessed of any sense questions this – because sensible people do not question objectively true things.
But note the italics above.
The words “can,” “if” and “may” have been italicized to emphasize another thing that is objectively true about seatbelt-wearing.
Or not.
It is that seabelts are a potential benefit. “Buckling up” can decrease your chances of being hurt – if you crash your car. Wearing a seatbelt may even save your life, if the crash is severe enough.
But if you do not crash, “buckling up” makes no difference. This distinction is important. It is the difference between something actually happening and something that might happen. Put another way, it is a risk-reward evaluation. The kind of judgment call it was once generally understood adults had a right to make. If you choose to enlist in the Marines because you want to receive the rewards that attend being trained and acquiring marketable job skills, you run the risk of being sent into a combat zone in the event there’s a war.
You might be killed.
But you run the risk because you decide that – on balance – it is worth taking.
Seatbelts are not dissimilar. Some prefer to run the risk of not “buckling up” because they just don’t want to buckle up – and that ought to be enough. Adults – in a free society – ought to have and once did have the right to just hop in their car and go for a drive without having to worry about being forced to “pull over” by a “buckle up” enforcer.
There was a time – it was not so long ago – when the very idea of being parented in this was regarded by most adult Americans as preposterous; the worst sort of effeminate tyranny.
But that was before America became an effeminate police state. On in which “safety” is of more “concern” than crime.
That happened because “for your own good” (and “the good of society”) was accepted by too many Americans. Once an adult submits to being parented on this basis he can expect to be parented further. There is no end-point to it because risk attends life and so there is always something the tyrants who think of themselves as our parents can claim will make things less “risky” – “safer” – for us. And so they have – and will continue to do – until enough of us decide we have had enough of being parented by tryrants, including within our own cars.
At some point – probably not far off – the nannies will say it is too risky to allow people to drive when it is raining. Certainly when it is snowing. If that sounds silly – think about it.
It is time to unbuckle.
More finely, it is time to get the government out of the business of forcing people to “buckle up.” And not just because forcing people to “buckle up” is a petty tyranny but because of the greater tyranny it has empowered. If the government has the rightful authority to force grown adults to “buckle up” then it also implicitly has the same authority to impose a million other tyrannical things, too.
During the “pandemic,” people were subjected to effronterous tyranny in the name of “health” – a working synonym for “safety.”
Observe the two words are often used together.
It is not a stretch to argue that “masking” was enabled by the whole “buckle up” thing by habituating the populace to this sort of thing. The slippery slope isn’t a cliche. It’s a truism. It ought to be etched in stone.
It ought to be taught to kids.
“Masking up” would have never been the thing it became if enough of us had refused the tyrannical orders to to “mask up.” If enough of us had found the balls to ignore signs and defy teenagers peddling “masks” at the entrances to stores, the “masks” would have come off a lot sooner than they did.
It is important to be clear here: Refusing to wear the “mask” if you did not want to wear a “mask” was not a repudiation of “masking” as such. Just the same as not “buckling up” does not mean you are demanding others not “buckle up.”
It is a stand against everyone being forced to wear both of them. As far as the “masks,” those of us who did not want to wear one never went after the people who did. It was always the reverse, which is very telling about the actual motives of the people who insisted everyone else “mask up.”
Of a piece with the motivations of those who insist everyone else “buckle up.” We who prefer not to are targeted – but do not support targeting those who “buckle up,” if they want to. Because we regard them as adults who have a right to decide for themselves and not as our children over whom we (or the government, on our behalf) have parental authority.
If enough of us refuse to be forced to “buckle up,” it will become harder to enforce “buckle up” laws. Those who think otherwise ought to remember that it was mass disregard for the 55 MPH National Maximum Speed Limit (NMSL) law that eventually led to its repeal after 20 long years.
Mass disregard causes whatever-the-edict-is to appear absurd after a time – because most people are reasonable and (ipso facto) if most people scorn and ignore an edict, the obvious implication is that the edict is absurd. The event styled “Prohibition” furnishes another example. Back in the 1920s, the government – effeminate neurotics – tried to force people to stop drinking alcohol, even a glass of beer, on the basis of absurd claims that even a glass beer led to alcoholism, wife-beating and worse.
When people had enough, it was over.
As easy as that.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
If you like items like the Baaaaaa! baseball cap pictured below, you can find that and more at the EPautos store!
Here in California, seat bet laws are not considered “primary enforcement,” which means a cop (necessarily going the opposite direction) is not going to hang a U-ie and pursue at high speed to write you up for not being “in harness.”
What it *does* mean, is that if you are pulled over for some other traffic violation, the bureaucrat from the Department of Collections who showed you his bubble gum machine can, and will, add a “seat belt violation” to your “traffic ticket.”
IOW, “seat belt laws” are a “revenue enhancement tool,” nothing more.
BTW, I am heavily in favor of seat belt use, because I do not like the idea of my face flying through the windshield in case of a collision, which is what *will* happen if you are not buckled up.
Ever hear of a race car driver who insisted on being “brave” and not wearing a harness? I thought not.
Are they going to manage my diet too? And how much liquor I drink? And how often I have to perform which exercises? We are actually already headed there.
Personally, and privately, I like seatbelts. They keep me in the driver’s seat in an accident, giving me a chance to drive out of it. Also keeps my front seat passenger out of my lap in such incident. But it is in no way the state’s business.
Have they installed seat belts in school buses?
Follow the money – enact the “law”, then it has to be enforced of course. Another revenue generator for the system (fines). Then comes the feather bedding of the state government employment. New law? Well, we need to educate the public! So, another state gov dept with managers, assistants, staff, researchers, etc getting the word out to those ignorant tax slaves. “Click it or ticket” PSAs, car seat PSAs, drunk driving PSAs on and on. Any born and raised American citizen already knows all this well before they get a driver license.
It’s all just a giant grifting scam. The mayhem here in Washington State is majority illegals. This is a sanctuary state so nothing is done to rein it in. Repeat drunk drivers out and about unless they kill someone in a wreck, then it’s a short stint in the slammer. Yet, the PSAs continue to be broadcast burning up our tax money with nothing to show for it. You’re either a sensible responsible adult or you’re not, no PSA is going to change that.
“Oh Sparkey, you’re just a xenophobe where is your proof?” You can start with the “most wanted list” via the State police. Here is ours for WA:
https://wsp.wa.gov/crime/wsp-most-wanted/
Tucker & Vivek discuss the nanny bureaucrats:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukZB0w76Q6o
A number of years ago, a Michigan State Police trooper was killed in an rollover auto accident. The concern for this trooper was not only lavish but was also effective in removing blame from himself for his own actions.
I posed a question on various sites about this incident with one simple question: “Was the trooper wearing his seat belt?” (He wasn’t)…
The vitriolic responses I received for posing such a simple question ranged from mild to outright threatening. To wit: “How DARE you question the trooper’s actions. He’s DEAD”.
Once again, the “double standard” rears its head. We are told that police officers are “specially trained” to drive and look at their computers and cell phones (yeah, right…) while us “unwashed masses (who pay their salaries and bloated pensions)” would be cited and heavily fined for the same actions.
This is merely more proof that the “sheeple” have been conditioned to accept their third-class status.
One phrase that emerged from the Covid calamity was “with an abundance of caution…”. With this phrase comes the tyrannical Marxist edicts they wish to impose.
Why are the cops exempt from seat-belt laws?
Doesn’t the government care about the “safety” of the “heroes”?
On a sunny but a bit chilly day like today in my neck of Dixie, I’d jump on the Sportster. It’s the perfect kinda day to go two wheelin’. Me ‘n’ Jezebel (cuz she got around) would ride maybe 100 miles throughout the Alabama countryside. It was a risk. Motorcycles are dangerous compared to passenger cars. But I accepted the risk because those rides cleansed my soul.
Life is about risk. I choose which risks are too risky and which I can (hopefully) overcome. It’s the freedom of choice that the overlords & nannies detest. I own me. Since I own me, I and I alone decide for me.
Jefferson said he would rather attend to the inconveniences to too much liberty than too little.
We are in the opposite position now. Safety is paramount to freedom and choices.
Seems like an extension of the scientifically managed society.
You can live to 100, but if you spend all that time being badgered and controlled, is it worth it?
Suffice to say most grownups are not adults and it’s fer sure this ain’t no “free country”
The Nanny State has no bounds. Intoxicants, cigs, “safety”, is their mealy mouthed cry.
Interesting you should bring up the Marines (now the Queen Berets). Here’s the AI response to death rates for combat:
“According to available data, the average combat death rate per 100 million soldiers varies greatly depending on the war and historical period, but a rough estimate could be around 1-10 million deaths per 100 million soldiers, with some wars seeing significantly higher rates, particularly during World War I and World War II.”
Yet, we allow people to entice 17 year olds to join in the fun. Note that the same safety nannies now proclaim that the human brain is not fully mature until 25 years of age. They assert that as such those under 25 do not have the mental maturity to make proper decisions when it comes to risky behavior. Hmmm.
As you point out, Eric, it’s always “for your own good”. This is the line uttered by The Captain (Strother Martin) in Cool Hand Luke to which Luke replies, “I wish you’d stop bein’ so good to me Cap’n”. Martin the proceeds to hit him with a blackjack and deliver his iconic “failure to communicate” lines. (As a side note, Martin went on to play TT Flowers in a two part Rockford Files. As he’s being hauled away from his home to be involuntarily committed to a mental ward Rockford asks his daughter how she can do this. She replies, “It’s for his own good.” I have to believe the writers knew what they were doing.)
Which brings up the point that anyone who now objects to all this “protection” is labeled as having ODD. Again, AI’s take:
“Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) is a behavioral condition that involves a pattern of negative reactions to authority, frequent temper tantrums, and difficulty managing emotions”.
These authoritarian pricks must be dealt with else we should just admit we’re living in a prison mental ward against our will.
Figures that the PTB would come up with ODD to label anyone who thinks for themselves as having a medical condition. How dare they!
Mark in BC: “Yet, we allow people to entice 17 year olds to join in the fun. Note that the same safety nannies now proclaim that the human brain is not fully mature until 25 years of age. They assert that as such those under 25 do not have the mental maturity to make proper decisions when it comes to risky behavior. Hmmm.”
But that is exactly why they want them!
Eric, quoting Orwell, has written about the astonishing ability of leftists to turn on an ideological dime in nanoseconds, unburdened by what has been. A case in point:
‘The [Democrat] party’s early preparations to oppose the next Trump administration are heavily focused on legal fights and consolidating state power.
“States in our system have a lot of power — we’re entrusted with protecting people, and we’re going to do it,” said Keith Ellison, the attorney general of Minnesota.
‘The Democratic effort will rely on the work of hundreds of lawyers, who are being recruited to combat Trump administration policies on a range of Democratic priorities.’ — NY Slimes
https://archive.ph/Vbtaa#selection-919.0-919.169
When Democrats rule the fedgov, they gleefully annihilate the role of the states. But turn the tables, and suddenly Democrats talk like Southern plantation owners in 1861 — states’ rights, baby!
For the most part, Democrats are going to get hoist on their own petard by the sweeping powers they illicitly granted to the Leviathan fedgov. US ‘justices’ will shut down their blue state defiance.
Trump’s War on CARB looms as the Fort Sumter event of the 21st century. If Commiefornia gets shot down on its exorbitant regulatory privilege — running an unconstitutional rump group of 15 states which presume to write their own environmental regs — then Gavin the Great will reach another states’ rights insight: SECEDE.
As ideological chameleons, the Left will have no difficulty advocating secession. It has nothing to do with tariffs, and 1861, and suchlike, you see. It’s not illegal when we do it.
“The power confided in me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property, and places belonging to the government, and to collect the [tripled] duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion –- no using force against, or among the people anywhere.” — Ape Lincoln, March 4, 1861
When the bureaurats decide that driving is too dangerous for humans they will replace it with self driving cars. You may laugh but didn’t they tell us Tesla’s are safe?
And while we’re at it screw Arnold.
All this safety bullshit seams to me started with the nonstop badgering of smokers.First thrown off airplanes then restaurants ..then bars of all places.If daddy govco can do all that to “free” adults whats next force you to take a clot shot? Me? I drink alone.
I agree, Zane –
The assault upon smokers began right around the same time as “buckle up,” too. A first, these things were put up with as minor annoyances. But they metastasized into omnipresent insufferability. It is high time to stop appeasing these neurotics.
And second hand smoke wasn’t what they said.
https://slate.com/technology/2017/02/secondhand-smoke-isnt-as-bad-as-we-thought.html
Why do we have to buckle up when we have airbags to protect us? Can we buy a car without airbags and promise that we will buckle up?
What master are you going to promise to be safe to, brother? The whole point of constitutional republic America was that the people rule themselves. As distinctly opposed to a god damned democracy (AKA communist totalitarianism) where the people rule each other in the least free/most schizophrenic possible mode of running a society.
You dont need to beg permission or promise massage to be good. Your choices and the consequences are your own. Right up until an actual unwilling or unwitting victim is involved.
Massa, not massage. F@#k autocorrect.
‘If enough of us refuse to be forced to “buckle up,” it will become harder to enforce “buckle up” laws.’ — eric
By far the most obnoxious aspect of seat belt enforcement is the fedgov-funded ‘Click It or Ticket’ campaign:
‘As you head out around the Memorial Day holiday, you’ll likely see more law enforcement on the roads as part of Click It or Ticket. This campaign, from May 20 – June 2, reminds drivers and their passengers of the importance of buckling up and the legal consequences – including fines – for not wearing a seat belt.’
https://www.nhtsa.gov/campaign/click-it-or-ticket
Like the families of Chinese death row inmates, who are obliged to pay for the bullet that gets fired into the back of the convict’s head, we are dunned for our own oppression.
Abolish the NHTSA. Send its former ‘workers’ to re-education camps, so that they can be reintegrated into civil society without resorting to their customary compulsion and threats.
‘Sophie Shulman,’ acting administrator of the NHTSA, apparently has been a tax feeder for her entire career. Get a job, Sophie. Stop being a predator.