When I began driving, wearing seatbelts ( or seat belts) was not compulsory in the eyes of the law and besides, most cars did not have seatbelts installed. I freely admit that it took me a while to get used to wearing seatbelts. I am grateful for bleepers in cars that admonished me whenever I had forgotten to put my seatbelt on. Like one of Pavlov's dogs those bleepers eventually taught me to comply with the law.
Taxi drivers, delivery people, emergency service drivers and drivers of public buses do not have to wear seatbelts. I would ask - why not? And I would ask the same question of passengers on public buses. Why don't they have to wear seatbelts? Okay there are usually no seatbelts fitted but why not?
Tonight I was the only passenger aboard the 10.48 Number 88 bus home from Bents Green. The young driver was racing along like Max Verstappen while I gripped the grab rail in front of me. I would have clicked a seatbelt but there wasn't one.
If I had been driving a car, the police could have charged me and I might have received an automatic fine of up to £500 ($US 585).
What is the point of seatbelts from a governmental point of view? One would think that it's to save lives. Saving people from themselves. It's in the public interest.
Okay if that really is the case, then why are people allowed to ride around on two-wheeled vehicles? I am mostly thinking about motorcycles but also bicycles. Obviously it would be verging on the technically impossible to fit seatbelts on such vehicles but if that is the case, shouldn't they simply be banned?
In 2021, 280 British motorcyclists were killed in road accidents and 14,690 casualties were recorded overall. None of them were wearing seatbelts.
Another point I reflect upon is the absence of seatbelts on British railways. You can thunder along at 170mph but no one in your carriage will be wearing seatbelts - because, of course, there aren't any! How can the law insist on seatbelt wearing in cars but not on trains? It seems so contradictory and therefore so wrong. But one day we shall reach The Promised Land.
Cost benefit ratio I suppose. How many are killed in train and bus crashes compared to car crashes? I can't remember if it was England or Canada but we had to wear seat belts in touring coaches.
ReplyDeleteYes. In England you do have to wear seatbelts on long distance coaches but not on public bus routes. You might pass a car driver who has just been pulled up for failing to wear a seatbelt even though you are not wearing one yourself.
DeleteI rarely take public transport but did twice in August. Yes, I found out very quickly that I had to hang on. Now I expect you to find out why buses don't have seat belts.
ReplyDeleteI guess it is about the cost and practicality of installing them.
DeleteThe reasoning might be that cars crash more often than buses and trains. I remember when seat belts were first introduced and all the advertising that went with it. One such ad reminded people to "belt up your kids!" If you are an Aussie, getting belted meant getting beaten with a belt or other strap. That particular ad didn't last long.
ReplyDeleteHere in England telling somebody to belt up is another way of asking them to keep quiet. The notorious sex offender Jimmy Saville led Britain's seatbelt campaign...."Clunk, Click - Every Trip!"
DeleteBack in 1989, Australia suffered a couple of large bus crashed with large numbers of casualties and a lot of trauma. After that, buses had belts fitted.
ReplyDeleteYou're right though, there's some inconsistency.
I don't love seatbelts but I sure wouldn't like to not have them
Do you have seatbelts on urban public buses?
DeleteI have never seen a public transport bus with seatbelts. I believe the long distance coach companies have them, the Greyhounds and Premier Stateliners and others.
DeleteYour young driver of the 88 bus probably imagined himself being Sandra Bullock in (not on) "Speed".
ReplyDeleteAs someone who travels far more often on trains (rarely on buses) than in cars, I can testify to how useless seat bealts would be on trains. Not only do trains normally not drive such curvy tracks as cars have to handle on roads, they also are not supposed to break as sharply as car drivers often have to do; in the normal course of a train journey, your train won't have to compete at crossroads or traffic lights with other trains, or allow for people suddenly crossing the tracks etc. Also, trains already run late because passengers take longer than expected to get on and off. How much longer would it all take if they would have to unbuckle first, and how many would refuse buckle up in the first place, causing even more unpleasant arguments with the staff than what is already happening?
As for buses, they often swerve and break suddenly, causing people who have not found a seat to fall or bump into someone else. But I have not heard of anyone falling off their seat in a bus because there are no seat belts.
Your points have all been recorded by The Committee.
DeleteDon't you find that your man boobs get in the way?
ReplyDeleteWell-sculpted pectoral muscles are not man boobs.
DeleteMy humble opinion is that they should be optional. We are all losing our choices in life at the rate of knots and I don't like it.
ReplyDeleteBriony
x
They force us to wear seatbelts but it is okay to go rock climbing and hang gliding.
DeleteMost of the newer smaller vans here have seat belts as do the long-distance coaches and buses.
ReplyDeleteAt some time in the future, I'm sure someone will successfully design a motor bike with seat belts, as well as one that's driven by an app on a mobile phone!
I can remember the first car I had with pre-fitted seatbelts - a VW Polo I think, and in those days only in the front seats. They were viewed as something of a novelty. I remember giving my mother-in-law a lift and she refused point blank to belt up (literally and metaphorically!) and asked me why on earth I'd wasted money on "these things". In spite of my trying to explain their safety aspect, she said she didn't know why I needed them when no-one else had them (her attitude to most things)! That was quite a popular opinion of some of the older generation back in the early 70's!
What a charming and sweet little old lady your mother in law must have been. I imagine you miss her terribly.
DeleteWhen it became known that seat belt wearing was going to be made compulsory in a lorry, I started belting up long before it was the law. I felt as a professional driver, it seemed a sensible thing to do. As a coach driver I did the same, the passengers making their own minds up even though they were fitted.
ReplyDeleteLooking back, wearing seatbelts is as sensible as giving up smoking. Lives are involved.
DeleteOh to have public transport. If they reduced the speed limits a lot of lives would be saved. Particularly pedestrians and cyclists on unlit rural roads.
ReplyDeleteOr on The Dingle Way!
DeleteWhen I knew it was about to become law, I began belting automatically, and now it's second nature.
ReplyDeleteI agree with he other commenter about the lack of belts on trains and buses due to the rarity of those accidents.
A train is derailed and ten people are killed. Dozens of others are injured. One of them says, "My body is broken but I do not resent the fact that there were no seatbelts as such rail accidents are rare."
DeleteYou make great points about seat belts but what gobsmacked me is the current exchange rate. Back in the days when I was traveling England fairly regularly, it was close to .5!
ReplyDeleteMy parents forced me to wear my seatbelt long before laws so it is most definitely a habit to the point if I'm on a vehicle without them, I feel almost naked.
Not a good idea to drive naked Ed! What if the cops pull you over?
DeleteWhen I used to load my students on school buses for school trips, I was always a bit stunned by the absence of seatbelts. School buses, or any buses for that matter, don't come with seatbelts in Canada. The reason given by Transport Canada is that the padded seat backs in front of passengers protect them as well as seatbelts would. I question that! Since when is a bus full of unbelted children flying down a highway over 100 km/hr a good idea? It made no sense to me.
ReplyDeleteYou are on my wavelength Melinda.
DeleteBicycles generally don't go as fast as motorcycles or cars, and there ARE usually helmet laws. So I'm cool with bicycles, although I wouldn't ride them in city traffic. Motorcycles, on the other hand, are death traps and there's no way in hell I'd ever ride one.
ReplyDeleteSeat belt laws were the subject of a lot of debate in the USA when they were enacted. Many people felt the laws infringed on their libertarian right to risk their lives if they so desire. Of course, this ignores the insurance risks and public health costs.
Good job the legislature are not pushing through seatbelt laws right now! The Trumpians would be sure to object.
DeleteA woman I know was in a train accident at the end of June. The train she was on crashed into a dump truck that was stalled on the tracks. She was sitting on the upper level of the train car and was thrown down to the bottom level when the train derailed and the train cars tipped. Luckily, she survived; some did not and many were injured. She had broken ribs, broken leg, many bruises and abrasions. I am not sure if a seat belt would have held her since the car flipped over on its side.
ReplyDeleteSurely, she would have remained in her seat and so would other passengers who were killed or injured in this awful accident.
DeleteUpper level? Trains have upper levels? In which country?
DeleteIn the US - she was riding on an Amtrak train outside of Kansas City, Missouri on her way home to Chicago.
Delete