August 26, 2008 at 7:41 pm
#11212
WeaponZero
Participant
What I meant was that a person not wearing a seatbelt could never be the cause of the accident, thus not presenting a danger to other vehicles on the road, while a rider not wearing a helmet could be the cause of an accident, endangering others on the road.
If the law were to start worrying about things like remorse and how it affects the family, then they might as well ban motorcycles, bungee jumping, skydiving, or eating fattening foods, because those can be a lot more hazardous than making the morning commute without your seatbelt on.
My point of view in this matter comes from where the law should be looking: immediate danger to other motorists.