Almost 30% of motor vehicle deaths because unbuckled seat belt

[Buckeyebowman]

No. He said "that" was stupid. He never delineated what "that" was! If "that" that I said was stupid, then I perforce must be stupid! This is so typical!

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Buckeyebowman said:

No. He said "that" was stupid. He never delineated what "that" was! If "that" that I said was stupid, then I perforce must be stupid! This is so typical!

That = what he quoted.

That != "You." If he wanted to say "you are stupid" he would have said "you are stupid." Smart people can say stupid things, so no.

Now stop.

[onthehunt526]

Not something to joke about. A close friend of mine  and I were traveling home from a golf tournament. My friend was not wearing a seltbelt, when we hit a guard rail, the car rolled down an enbankment and he was killed. I suffered life changing injuries myself. I always wear my seatbelt while riding in a car... Always.

[RussUK]

There is really no excuse for not wearing a seatbelt in modern cars (many older cars dont have them and cant be fitted so are exempt from current laws). It takes seconds to put a seatbelt on and as @onthehunt526has proved it can save your life.

We used to have a road safety campaign over here in the UK and it was simple, "Clunk, Click Every Trip". Sounds silly but its very true.

Im not sure if its the same over in the US but here taxi drivers are exempt from wearing seatbelts so they are able to escape violent passengers. Its the one part of the seatbelt law that im undecided on as on one hand its a safety thing during a crash and the other hand its a safety thing during a potential attack.

[Zekez]

On 10/26/2017 at 10:16 PM, iacas said:

That = what he quoted.

Just to clarify.  Anyone that doesn't buckle up is making a stupid decision..selfish too.  A lot of smart people make stupid decisions.

[Buckeyebowman]

I still don't understand the logic. All I know is they make me feel claustrophobic!

And to refer to the title of the OP, if "almost 30% of motor vehicle deaths are ascribed to people not wearing seat belts", what is the "greater than 70%" attributed to? It would seem to me, by any statistical analysis, that a greater than 70% chance would be "statistically significant"!

Edited October 29, 2017 by Buckeyebowman

[jsgolfer]

On 10/29/2017 at 7:28 PM, Buckeyebowman said:

I still don't understand the logic. All I know is they make me feel claustrophobic!

And to refer to the title of the OP, if "almost 30% of motor vehicle deaths are ascribed to people not wearing seat belts", what is the "greater than 70%" attributed to? It would seem to me, by any statistical analysis, that a greater than 70% chance would be "statistically significant"!

Here are the 2016 Stats:  https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/usdot-releases-2016-fatal-traffic-crash-data

  The number of vehicle miles traveled on U.S. roads in 2016 increased by 2.2 percent, and resulted in a fatality rate of 1.18 deaths per 100 million VMT – a 2.6-percent increase from the previous year.

The 2016 national data shows that:

• Distraction-related deaths (3,450 fatalities) decreased by 2.2 percent;
• Drowsy-driving deaths (803 fatalities) decreased by 3.5 percent;
• Drunk-driving deaths (10,497 fatalities) increased by 1.7 per­cent;
• Speeding-related deaths (10,111 fatalities) increased by 4.0 percent;
• Unbelted deaths (10,428 fatalities) increased by 4.6 percent;
• Motorcyclist deaths (5,286 fatalities – the largest number of motorcyclist fatalities since 2008) increased by 5.1 percent;
• Pedestrian deaths (5,987 fatalities – the highest number since 1990) increased by 9.0 percent; and
• Bicyclist deaths (840 fatalities – the highest number since 1991) increased by 1.3 percent.

 

 

[Eric C]

I'd like to see the statistics broken down to front seat vs. rear seat passengers.  In modern cars you almost have to put your seatbelt on, otherwise the warning sensor 'dings' endlessly - correct?

[saevel25]

13 minutes ago, Eric C said:

I'd like to see the statistics broken down to front seat vs. rear seat passengers.  In modern cars you almost have to put your seatbelt on, otherwise the warning sensor 'dings' endlessly - correct?

For the front seat, yes. I haven't been in a car that beeped for the back seat.

On ‎10‎/‎29‎/‎2017 at 7:28 PM, Buckeyebowman said:

I still don't understand the logic. All I know is they make me feel claustrophobic!

And to refer to the title of the OP, if "almost 30% of motor vehicle deaths are ascribed to people not wearing seat belts", what is the "greater than 70%" attributed to? It would seem to me, by any statistical analysis, that a greater than 70% chance would be "statistically significant"!

The OP was posting a topic that showed that if you look at all vehicle fatalities, the primary influence of the fatality would be 30% for not wearing a seat belt. I presume there is some overlap in some of the statistics. The industry has been studying vehicle fatalities for decades now and have a good grasp on what would be the primary reason a person died in a vehicle crash. Even if a person is speeding the primary reason the person died could be not wearing a seat belt.

 

[nevets88]

6 hours ago, Eric C said:

I'd like to see the statistics broken down to front seat vs. rear seat passengers.  In modern cars you almost have to put your seatbelt on, otherwise the warning sensor 'dings' endlessly - correct?

I guess people bypass by keeping belt latched and then sitting over it? Which strikes me as uncomfortable feeling something uneven underneath.

[Buckeyebowman]

Well, I've seen a bunch of "talk arounds", but I haven't seen anything that directly opposes my last post!

If "nearly 30%" of traffic accident deaths are due to unfastened seat belts, then what are the "greater than 70% survivals" attributed to?!

This is nothing more than more "jiggery, pokery" by the stats fiends!

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Buckeyebowman said:

If "nearly 30%" of traffic accident deaths are due to unfastened seat belts, then what are the "greater than 70% survivals" attributed to?!

Huh?

If 29% of traffic accident deaths are due to something, that doesn't mean "71% of survivals." It means 71% of deaths are from other things.

[Vinsk]

Statistics in this area can be difficult to obtain. I do believe testing shows that the chance of survival is better with seatbelts used properly. However, I was a paramedic for 11 years and have worked hundreds if not thousands of MVA’s and there were plenty of deaths while wearing seatbelts and plenty of survivors without. Head on collisions almost always favor a seatbelt. Roll overs can be the tricky ones. I personally have been in 2 serious MVA’s, one in Africa. Both were impressive roll overs and had I been wearing a seatbelt I would’ve been killed. In both cases I was jolted with some of my own manipulation to the back of the SUV (I was riding shotgun both times) and the roof above my seat was caved in all the way to the seat coushin which would’ve killed me instantly. Scary stuff. 

[Buckeyebowman]

On 11/4/2017 at 10:52 PM, iacas said:

Huh?

If 29% of traffic accident deaths are due to something, that doesn't mean "71% of survivals." It means 71% of deaths are from other things.

OK, I may have misstated it a bit, but what are the vast majority of "deaths from other things" due to!

I think this post reminded me of some radio ads I heard. They seemed to suggest that if you wore your seat belts you would come out of any accident without a scratch! But, if you didn't have your belt on, you were as good as dead! Such ads strain one's credulity!

On 11/5/2017 at 1:20 AM, Vinsk said:

Statistics in this area can be difficult to obtain. I do believe testing shows that the chance of survival is better with seatbelts used properly. However, I was a paramedic for 11 years and have worked hundreds if not thousands of MVA’s and there were plenty of deaths while wearing seatbelts and plenty of survivors without. Head on collisions almost always favor a seatbelt. Roll overs can be the tricky ones. I personally have been in 2 serious MVA’s, one in Africa. Both were impressive roll overs and had I been wearing a seatbelt I would’ve been killed. In both cases I was jolted with some of my own manipulation to the back of the SUV (I was riding shotgun both times) and the roof above my seat was caved in all the way to the seat coushin which would’ve killed me instantly. Scary stuff. 

True! I was involved in a double roll over on the Ohio Turnpike because a college girl cut me off while texting! I didn't have my belts fasted and just hung on for dear life! I wound up with ears and hair full of broken glass, and some bruised ribs, but nothing worse than that.

[nevets88]

 but WTF? No airbags, we die like real men.

 

[Fourputt]

On 10/19/2017 at 8:04 PM, Buckeyebowman said:

Excellent post! There are additional factors, which I noticed today while driving. The Sun is getting lower in the sky and causing more glare.

As far as the "automatically reaching for the seatbelt" posts, I learned to drive 50 years ago when there were no seatbelts in cars! And I don't like them! They constrict me and are uncomfortable. And I survived a double rollover on the Ohio Turnpike due to being taken off the road by a college girl who was texting while driving!

Which brings up another point. The auto industry's response to all this is to introduce more things that take your attention away from the road in front of you! Add cell phones into the mix.

To hear people today, I'm amazed that I, and my siblings, made it to adulthood! But then, our parents were taught to pay attention to the road in front of them. This seems like the best advice!

 

I learned to drive 55 years ago, and yet, I wear a seat belt religiously.  I had an accident in 1969, self caused, speed induced.  I was racing a Mustang in my '63 Impala and lost it on a curve at more than 100 mph (yeah... I was young, stupid, and living in Montana where there was no daytime speed limit).  My girlfriend and I were buckled in and only got jolted around a bit as we bounced over boulders through a dry creek bed.  The gas tank caught fire, but since we were both uninjured, we had plenty of time to safely exit the vehicle (gas tanks don't typically explode like they do in Hollywood, they just burn).  I credit the seat belt with keeping me behind the wheel so that I was able to keep the car mostly on the pavement (I was doing 360's like in a NASCAR wreck) to burn off a lot of speed before we finally went into the ditch on the wrong side of the road. 

On 10/27/2017 at 2:47 AM, RussUK said:

There is really no excuse for not wearing a seatbelt in modern cars (many older cars dont have them and cant be fitted so are exempt from current laws). It takes seconds to put a seatbelt on and as @onthehunt526has proved it can save your life.

We used to have a road safety campaign over here in the UK and it was simple, "Clunk, Click Every Trip". Sounds silly but its very true.

Im not sure if its the same over in the US but here taxi drivers are exempt from wearing seatbelts so they are able to escape violent passengers. Its the one part of the seatbelt law that im undecided on as on one hand its a safety thing during a crash and the other hand its a safety thing during a potential attack.

The catch phrase here in Colorado is "Click it or ticket". 

On 11/4/2017 at 7:22 PM, Buckeyebowman said:

Well, I've seen a bunch of "talk arounds", but I haven't seen anything that directly opposes my last post!

If "nearly 30%" of traffic accident deaths are due to unfastened seat belts, then what are the "greater than 70% survivals" attributed to?!

This is nothing more than more "jiggery, pokery" by the stats fiends!

That 70% is all other factors combined.  One cause vs. all others combined, and the simplest solution is to just buckle up and take a big step toward preventing 30% of all fatalities?  I call that a no brainer.  I have yet to hear a valid reason for not wearing one - excuses I hear, reasons, not one.  I don't even back out of the driveway without buckling.

[jkelley9]

If I were a life insurance company and had definitive evidence that someone wasn't wearing their seat belt... I would be pretty damn against paying up - as much as I would sympathize for the family.

I always wear a seat belt. 

If I ever catch my kids not wearing a seat belt... that's no car for 2+ weeks. Period. Even if I had to drive them to school every day and take them to/from work or something it'd be worth the lesson. 

And to anyone claiming "yea, but seat belts have been known to kill people who would have otherwise survived," no safety system on the planet doesn't have backward causality. It's about putting yourself in the best POSITION, statistically, to avoid an incident. I hate when people make that argument.