this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
560 points (99.6% liked)
The Onion
5960 readers
175 users here now
The Onion
A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.
Great Satire Writing:
- The Onion
- Clickhole
- McSweeney's
- Reductress
- The Chaser
- The Hard Times
- The Needling
- Tattletale Times
- The Beaverton
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you are a passenger sitting behind someone and you don't use your seatbelt you crush the person in front of you in case of a frontal colision, and if you are sitting next to someone and get hit from the side you can break both your skulls on each other
Ah, there's the "what about the other passengers in the car" argument I've been waiting for.
The problem is that all other objects become deadly internal projectiles in the case of an accident as well. If we really cared that much about the danger from projectiles (human and otherwise), then by law, cars should come with multiple tie-downs all over the interior of the vehicle, and it should be illegal to have an object in the car over five pounds not firmly secured by them.
The reason, of course, that that isn't mandated is the same as the answer to all of the other questions in this thread: in the end it's really just about policing people's behavior and choices (and securing an additional revenue stream for cops, as well as a handy excuse to pull people over).
Not everything can become a deadly projectile lmao, that's not how basic physics works, a 60+Kg person does become a deadly projectile at a certain speed
From someone on your side of the argument lower in the thread.
Oops...
That's a laptop, it can have sharp, hard edges and can be quite heavy, you can literally die from falling over on the street, it also doesn't prove that "everything" can become a deadly projectile
And how far exactly would you like those goalposts of yours to be shifted?
There are no goalposts shifted, you should use seatbelts, if you want to go for a darwin award and kill yourself or someone in your car by not wearing one, then be my guest, I don't give a fuck
We seem to be in complete agreement then, except that I'm at least a little bit sad for the idiots that make this choice.
I just don't believe in forcefully preventing other people from making decisions I think are stupid, as long as those choices don't significantly affect others around them. And from the way everyone in this thread is grasping at straws to fabricate incredibly flimsy "harm" scenarios, I think we can safely conclude that that's not actually the case with seatbelts.
Not wearing seatbelts does significantly impact people around them.
How so?