"For payment of obligations incurred in carrying out the provisions of 23 U.S.C.
402, 405, 406, 408, and 410 and sections 2001(a)(11), 2009, 2010, and 2011 of Public Law
109-59, to remain available until expended, $619,500,000 to be derived from the Highway
Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account): Provided, That none of the
funds in this Act shall be available for the planning or execution of programs the total
obligations for which, in fiscal year 2009, are in excess of $619,500,000 for programs
authorized under 23 U.S.C. 402, 405, 406, 408, and 410 and sections 2001(a)(11), 2009,
2010, and 2011 of Public Law 109-59, of which $235,000,000 shall be for `Highway Safety
Programs' under 23 U.S.C. 402; $25,000,000 shall be for `Occupant Protection Incentive
Grants' under 23 U.S.C. 405; $124,500,000 shall be for `Safety Belt Performance Grants'
under 23 U.S.C. 406, and such obligation limitation shall remain available until September
30, 2010 in accordance with subsection (f) of such section 406 and shall be in addition to
the amount of any limitation imposed on obligations for such grants for future fiscal
years; $34,500,000 shall be for `State Traffic Safety Information System Improvements'
under 23 U.S.C. 408; $139,000,000 shall be for `Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures
Incentive Grant Program' under 23 U.S.C. 410; $18,500,000 shall be for `Administrative
Expenses' under section 2001(a)(11) of Public Law 109-59; $29,000,000 shall be for `High
Visibility Enforcement Program' under section 2009 of Public Law 109-59; $7,000,000 shall
be for `Motorcyclist Safety' under section 2010 of Public Law 109-59; and $7,000,000 shall
be for `Child Safety and Child Booster Seat Safety Incentive Grants' under section 2011 of
Public Law 109-59: Provided further, That none of these funds shall be used for
construction, rehabilitation, or remodeling costs, or for office furnishings and fixtures
for State, local or private buildings or structures: Provided further, That not
to exceed $500,000 of the funds made available for section 410 `Alcohol-Impaired Driving
Countermeasures Grants' shall be available for technical assistance to the States: Provided
further, That not to exceed $750,000 of the funds made available for the `High
Visibility Enforcement Program' shall be available for the evaluation required under
section 2009(f) of Public Law 109-59."
Thus, congress continues to appropriate hundreds of millions of
dollars a year to force this blood-soaked scam on the American people, thereby
guaranteeing that hundreds more will die and thousands more will be seriously injured.
These amounts are for the entire fiscal year. Because the fiscal year was almost half
over when this bill was passed, some of these funds had already been expended under the
previous continuing resolution. The appropriations reflect a $6 million dollar increase
for 23 USC 402 and a $1 million dollar increase for "Anton's Law" (forcing
mothers to strap their seven year olds into death-trap seats.) Notice also the $29 million
for "high visibility enforcement" (police harassment). Notice the inept
wording regarding the continuing availability of funds under section 406. The intent is
that if they can't get states to accept all the money in one year, they can add it to the
amount appropriated for the following years. The reason is that states are increasingly
refusing to take the money.
Just to refresh your memory, grants under 23 USC 402 must be spent on a program
approved by the Secretary of Transportation which includes measures "to encourage the
proper use of occupant protection devices (including safety belts and child restraint
systems) by occupants of motor vehicles".
To qualify for "occupant protection incentive grants" under 23 USC 405, a state
must meet four of six criterea, which include: primary seatbelt law, high visibility
enforcement (of seatbelt laws), mandatory booster seat laws, booster seat
"education" programs, and minimum penalty points for violation of seatbelt laws.
(It also used to include a provision "to educate the public about the benefits of air
bags", but they took that out).
To qualify for "safety belt performance grants" under 23 USC 406, a state must
meet one of two criterea: primary seatbelt law or a seatbelt use rate of 85% in the
preceding two years. (Note: this explains why seatbelt enforcement in states with
secondary seatbelt laws is often more draconian than in states with primary laws. If they
don't meet the 85% use rate as the end of the year approaches, the police tend to get
hysterical because they stand to lose millions of dollars).
To qualify for grants under section 2011(a)(11) of P.L. 109-59, a state must raise the
maximum age at which booster seats are required from 5 to 7 years.
This section of HR 1105 is identical to that which was reported
out of Patty Murray's transportation subcommittee of the senate appropriations committee
in 2008. The total amount for this section is up from $599,250,000 last year, with the
amount for 23 USC 402 up from $229,000,000. The amounts for 23 USC 405 and 406 are
unchanged, as is the amount for police harassment, otherwise known as "high
visibility enforcement". The amount for Anton's Law, otherwise known as "child
safety and child booster seat safety incentive grants", is up from $6,000,000 last
year.
Notice the provision that "unobligated balances (i.e., from previous years)...may be
made available...in fiscal 2010". What is behind this is that states are
increasingly unwilling to accept this money, so that there is money left over from
previous years. That means that the total NHTSA has available to offer states in bribes to
pass and enforce these laws is greater than the amounts stated above. Readers of this
web-site will recall that senator Patty Murray, the sponsor and manager of this
bill, berated the then Secretary of Transportion, Mary Peters, and the then NHTSA
Administrator, Nicole Nason, for giving away only $3,000,000 of the $6,000,000
appropriated for Anton's Law. She also demanded that they not rest until every state
has a primary seatbelt law.
Seatbelts kill. To understand what is going
on here, you might want to read, or re-read, our essay, Seatbelts Kill
More 2009 legislation:
Colorado: Sanity prevails in Colorado. The
school bus seatbelt bill, SB09-029, has been "postponed indefinitely". SB09-029
would require seatbelts on school buses. Sent to transportation committee on 1/07/09.
Passed by senate, 2/23/09. Sent to House education committee, 3/05/09.
Texas: HB 529 is Anton's law. SB 61 is the
same as HB 529. HB 529 was "left pending" in the transportation committee on
3/3/09, which means that Anton's law is probably dead in Texas, at least for this year. HB
537 would penalize "a person" for allowing a passenger less than 17 years of age
to ride in a van without wearing a seatbelt. Which person is not stated. Sent to
transportation committee, 2/18/09.
Wyoming: HB 0310 missed the cutoff date and
hence is now dead. HB 0310 would have made the Wyoming seatbelt law primary.
Referred to the transportion committee on February 3, 2009. HB 0126 died in committee. The
vote was 9 to 0. HB 0126 would have repealed the ban on introducing evidence regarding
failure to wear a seatbelt in civil cases. What is significant about this is that
Wyoming has such a ban. So do many other states.
Arkansas: Governor Beebe has, apparently,
either signed or not vetoed SB 78, the primary seatbelt law bill. Under Arkansas law, a
bill becomes law if, within five days of being presented to him, the governor does not
veto it. SB 309 has also become law, either with or without the governor's
signature. (See below for details).
South Dakota: The South Dakota legislature
has adjourned without pass SB 79. On March 2, 2009, the judiciary committee of the South
Dakota House of Representatives rejected SB 79 by a vote of 9 to 4. SB 79 would make South
Dakota's seatbelt law primary. Passed by senate on 2/03/09, by a vote of 21 to 13.
This bill makes no claims for seatbelts but simply removes the restriction to secondary
enforcement in the existing law. A similar bill, SB 103, was, apparently, set aside in
favor of SB 79.
Arkansas: The Arkansas House passed SB
78 on February 25, 2009, by a vote of 60 to 31 with 5 not voting and 2 voting
present. You will notice that the bill was rushed to the floor less than 24 hours after it
came out of committee. However, the emergency clause failed by a vote of 64 to 28 with 6
not voting and 2 voting present. The House then reversed itself and passed the emergency
clause by a vote of 94 to2. The reason for this little bit of theater was that the
sponsors had neglected to explain to the House that NHTSA had put a deadline of June 30,
2009 on the $9.5 million dollar bribe they offered Arkasas to pass this bill.
In other words, the law had to go into effect before that date in order for Arkansas to
qualify for the money. Without the emergency clause there would have been a 91 day delay
after the governor signed the bill (assuming he signs it) before the law could go into
effect, thus missing the NHTSA deadline. The House, while agreeing to go along with the
bill, had enough common sense to realize that there was no "emergency". The
sponsors then explained to the House the real reason for the emergency clause, whereupon
the House reversed itself and agreed to the clause.
The House transportation committee voted to pass SB 78 on 2/24/09.
The Arkansas state senate voted to pass SB 78, the primary seatbelt law bill, on
February 17, 2009. The vote was 29 to 6. The six heroes, who voted not to sell out their
constituents for a federal grant, were Pritchard, Key, Taylor, Madison, Malone and
Whitaker. The senate went on to adopt and "emergency clause", which means that
the bill is to go into effect immediately upon signature by the governor. In addition, the
senate directed that the bill be transmited to the House "immediately". On
senses a certain hysteria here, to rush this bill through before the people of Arkansas
become aware of what is going on. See below for further details.
Also passed was SB 309. This bill was also ordered to be transmitted to the House
"immediately", but it was not declared an emergency. The House has also passed
this bill, which has now become law. While this bill concerns mainly teen-age drivers, one
of its provisions is that all passengers of these drivers, regardless of age, must
wear seatbelts. One of NHTSA's tactics this year has been to try to ram all these bills
though as fast as possible.
Arkansas: SB 78 was passed by the senate
transportation committee on February 16, 2009. SB 78 would make Arkansas' seatbelt
law primary. The preface to this bill, which was drafted by NHTSA, contains
the usual false and misleading statements:
The purpose of the bill is said to be: "To improve the safety of
motorists on roads and highways by making the seatbelt law primary for enforcement
purposes".
In addition, the bill makes the following claims:
1. "In 2007, five hundred twenty-five (525) people died while riding in passenger
vehicles in Arkansas and 65% of those who died were not wearing a seatbelt."
Safetychoice comments: 1. Notice the attempt to create
the impression that if more had been wearing seatbelts, fewer would have been killed. We
carefully examined this argument, which seatbelt advocates have been making for years, and
found it to be without merit. (see "The Truth About Seatbelts" elsewhere
on this web site. 2. The percentage of vehicle occupants killed wearing seatbelts varies
from state to state and ranges from around 47% to about 65%, according to the FARS data
base. It is higher in states that have primary seatbelt laws or where seatbelt laws are
more rigidly enforced. 3. Most fatal accidents happen to reckless drivers (64% according
to NHTSA) and reckless drivers are less likely to wear seatbelts. 4. According to NHTSA,
police reports about seatbelts may not be reliable (see footnote in Traffic Safety Facts,
put out by NHTSA). 5. The figure of 65% not wearing seatbelts is not consistent with the
national data.
2. "In 2007, sixty-one (61) people died after being ejected from their vehicles
during a roll-over crash because they were not wearing seatbelts."
Safetychoice comments: 1. From an exhaustive study of all
the evidence, including the FARS data base, published accident reports, photographs and
physical analysis, we know that a vehicle occupant has a better chance of surviving a
roll-over if he is ejected than of he is trapped in his vehicle by his seatbelt. 2. People
who are trapped in their vehicles by a seatbelt during a rollover are generally crushed or
burned to death. 3. Roll-overs ejections happen almost exclusively to people who are
driving high c.g. vehicles in a reckless manner. The average driver couldn't roll his car
over if he tried. 3. An exhaustive examination of claims of ejection shows that most of
these claims are unverified and, in many cases, are physically improbable or even
impossible.
3. "By adopting a primary seatbelt law, Arkansas can expect an increase in the
use of seatbelts by motorists of of approximately 12%"
Safetychoice comments: 1. There is no question that more
rigid enforcement of seatbelt laws results in higher seatbelt use. Because many people do
not wish to use seatbelts (which is wise of them) seatbelt use falls off when it is
not enforced. 2. All independent studies agree that enforcement of seatbelt laws results
in a higher fatality rate (see "The Truth About Seatbelts" elsewhere on this
web-site). 3. It is not possible to predict the increase or decrease of seatbelt use to
within plus or minus one percent. The 12% figure is pure speculation.
4. "Adopting a primary seatbelt law could save as many as forty-seven (47) lives
each year, prevent approximately five hundred four (504) serious injuries each year, and
save an estimated one hundred four million dollars ($104,000,000) in economic costs each
year"
Safetychoice comment: This statement is totally and
demonstrably false. (see "The Truth About Seatbelts" elsewhere on this
web-site.)
5. "The adoption of a primary seatbelt law will entitle the State of Arkansas to
receive approximately nine million five hundred thousand dollars ($9,500,000) in federal
grant funds to implement highway safety programs"
Safetychoice comments: 1. Now we see the real cause for
this bill: NHTSA is offering Arkansas a bribe of $9.2 million dollars to pass this law. 2.
The so-called "highway safety programs" referred to consist mainly of massive
police harassment programs to force people to wear seatbelts.
In addition to SB 78, SB 309 was also heard at the meting of the
Arkansas state senate transportation committee on February 16, 2009. This bill, which was
the principal item of business at a meeting at which many other bills were considered,
relates to special licenses for teenagers. While this bill is mainly obesessed with the
issue of teenagers using cell phones while driving, it also repeals the very strong and
specific restriction to secondary enforcement of the seatbelt law for holders of such
licenses and their passengers. (Similar bills are appearing in other state legislatures,
almost identical in wording, so it seems clear that these bills were written by NHTSA and
sent out to various legislators as "suggested legislation". While these bills
are mainly about cell phones, they all contain a provision to make the seatbelt law
primary for drivers under 18 and their passengers. This is in line with the NHTSA policy
of "gradualism" and trying to sneak primary provisions into other bills.)
Kansas: The Kansas
state senate passed SB 59, the primary seatbelt bill, on February 19, 2009, by a vote of
23 to 17, with a speed that is almost unprecedented and in violation of all regular
procedure. The sponsors know that they must get these bills passed before the public finds
out what is going on or face defeat. It's hard to believe that this is the same
Kansas where, two years ago, the senators were so enraged when they found out the truth
about seatbelts that they ordered the bill stricken from the record. Assigned to House
transportation committee, 2/24/09.
SB 59 was passed by the senate transportation
committee on February 18, 2009. A note on what went on there has now been published. One
reads the proceedings with a certain sadness because it is the same old story. The bill
was "requested by the Kansas Department of Transportation". Of course the reason
they did it was because NHTSA told them they could get over $11,000,000 if they got it
passed. The witnesses at the hearing were (you get one guess) the head of the State
Department of Transportation, the head of the Health Department, the Chief of the State
Police, the Head of the Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police, the Head of the
Kansas Police Officers association and the Head of the Kansas Nurses Association - in
other words, all the people who would get some of the money. Written testimony was
received (according to the committee report) from AAA Kansas, State Farm Insurance
Company, and a local hospital. In addition, written testimony was received from
"SafeKids Kansas", and you can pretty well figure out where that came from.
The report goes on to state "the points made
by the conferees" (since this is not a conference report the use of the term
"conferees" is not clear) were (and we paraphrase for brevity)
1. Kansas could get lots of money if they pass this
bill.
2.Motor vehicle accidents cost Kansas an
"estimated" $1.9 billion dollars a year (a statement which is not relevant to
the bill and is presented without evidence)
3. "Safety belt use is the single most
effective countermeasure available to passenger vehicle occupants in preventing
fatalitites and injuries in traffic crashes". (There are not words adequate to
describe this statement. "Out and out lie", "demonstrably false",
"absurd on the face of it", would not do it justice.)
4. Kansas seatbelt use is below the national
average. (So what?)
NHTSA has offered Kansas a bribe of $11,665,000 to pass a primary
seatbelt law. The bill is SB 59. So far, no member has dared to put his name on it. The
bill is simply described as having been introduced by the senate transportation committee.
There was a hearing on this bill in the committee on January 29, 2009. In the
past year, Kansas collected 14,646 seatbelt fines at $30 a piece on secondary enforcement.
It's clear that if this bill were to pass, seatbelt citations would triple or quadruple
and thus represent a goldmine for the police.
North Dakota: The North Dakota House has
defeated HB 1197 on second reading by a vote of 58 to 34. The transportation committee of
the House recommended "Do Not Pass" on HB 1197. The vote was 8 to 6.
One of those voting in the minority was the sponsor of the bill, representative Gruchalla,
a retired state trooper. HB 1197 would make North Dakota's seatbelt law primary. There was
a hearing on the bill in the House Transportation Committee on January 30, 2009 at 9
a.m. This bill merely stated that secondary enforcement is to be changed to primary.
Mississippi: SB 2599, SB 2252, HB
1583, and SB 2207 are all dead. All were killed in committee on February 3, 2009. The word
"dead" is printed in red on the report. SB 2599 and HB 1583 would have
limited the total amount that a violator of the seatbelt law would have to pay to $25. It
specifically mentioned court costs, fees and local assessments, in addition to
fines. Sent to transportation committee on 1/22/09. SB 2207 would have
extended the seatbelt requirement to all passenger vehicles holding 15 passengers or less.
SB2252 would have required seatbelts on all school buses weighing less than 10,000 pounds.
It seems as though the committees are saying "We are sick and tired of seatbelt bills
and we don't want to hear any more about it". It's too bad they couldn't have decided
this sooner.
Montana: The Montana state senate defeated
SB 237, the primary seatbelt law bill, on a tie vote, on February 5, 2009. They then
proceeded to pass a resolution postponing further consideration of this bill indefinitely.
The resolution passed by a vote of 25 to 24. See below for further details on this bill,
which is now, hopefully, dead.
Montana: SB 237 has been defeated by
the Montana state senate. Still, we thought we would leave this up to show what sort of
material NHTSA is sending to the states. Remember, this was written by the bureaucrats at
NHTSA, in Washington, D.C., under pressure from senator Patty Murray, and not by anyone in
Montana. The material below was contained in the preamble to the bill, sent out as
"suggested legislation" by NHTSA.
"WHEREAS, Montana spends $36.7 million each year on
direct health care costs for patients who were unbelted and injured in motor vehicle
crashes; and"
SafetyChoice Comment: 1. Notice the implication that the
alleged expense is due to the fact that the person was unbelted. Notice that they don't
have the nerve to actually come right out and say so. As they well know, and as we
know from six years of research, the implication is false. 2. They are still playing
the numbers game, however, hoping that no one will call them on it. No source is
given for the dollar amount stated. Nor do they say what they mean by
"Montana", whether it is private or public money. Notice they do not say
"the government of Montana". As NHTSA has a record of making false statements
about statistical and financial data, this figure must be viewed with grave
suspicion. 3. In any case, the argument is monstrous. It says that the state has the right
to restrict the liberty of the people under the pretext of saving a few dollars.
"WHEREAS, uninsured and Medicaid-covered unbelted
occupants cost the state of Montana over $14 million annually for hospital care of their
preventable injuries; and"
Safety Choice Comment: 1. Notice the attempt to create
the false impression that the injuries would have been less severe had the subject been
wearing a seatbelt. Notice that they are careful not to actually come right out and
say so, however. They know, as do we, that the implication is false. 2. No source or
evidence is given for the stated dollar amount, which must be viewed with grave suspicion
for the reasons stated above. 3. The overwhelming majority of motorists have health
insurance, usually through a private insurer. Their healthcare costs are, therefore, not
the business of the state. 4. The chance of an average driver being in an accident severe
enough to require hospital care is miniscule. The overwhelming majority of serious
accidents happen to reckless drivers. 5. The percentage of motorists uninsured
and/or eligible for medicaid is small. Yet all are to be forced to wear these dangerous
devices.
"WHEREAS, unbelted occupants are more likely than
belted occupants to require hospitalization following a motor vehicle crash, with an
average cost of $52,993; and"
Safety Choice Comment: 1. The dollar figure is pure
fabrication. Their data on injury accidents is so bad it is all but worthless. There is no
way they could have gotten such a precise number from the available data. They simply made
it up. 2. No evidence is presented for the above statements. The severity of the
injuries would depend on the severity of the accident. Our research indicates that for any
given accident, a person wearing a seatbelt would suffer more severe injuries than a
person who is not. 3. Since most people pay their medical costs either out of their
own pocket or through private insurers the argument is a non sequitur. It is not the
business of the state.
"WHEREAS, the average unbelted occupant has a longer
hospital stay, requires more intensive care, and has hospital charges that are $16,573
higher than a belted occupant who is hospitalized; and"
Safety Choice Comment: This is pure fabrication. The only
global data they have on injury accidents is the so-called General Estimate System, and
that is such a mass of confusion and contradiction that it is all but worthless. Think of
the gall of these con artists, the contempt they must have for the intelligence of
the average legislator, to make up these numbers and these assertions and present them as
fact.
"WHEREAS, Montana is the only state in which the
child restraint law can only be enforced secondary to some other traffic violation;
and"
Safety Choice Comment: While severe or fatal injuries to
small children in traffic accidents are rare, this provision is particularly vicious,
because putting a child in a booster seat increases its chance of being killed or severely
injured in an accident. In addition to all the cases and evidence presented on this
website, the recent evidence showing that a child in a booster seat can be killed by the
whiplash alone even in a low speed collision, makes the defeat of this bill particularly
urgent.
"WHEREAS, Montana will receive an additional $4.8
million in federal funds for highway construction and safety programs if a primary
enforcement seatbelt law is enacted."
Safety Choice Comment: Ah, now we come to the real crux
of the matter. NHTSA is offering Montana a bribe of $4.8 million dollars to pass this law.
Notice that the arguments, such as they are, are based entirely on the pecuniary interests
of the state. In a democracy, government is supposed to be of the people, by the people
and for the people. This bill was not written by and for the people. It was written by a
handful of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. Should not the people be consulted as to
whether they want this law or not?
For more on 2009 legislation, visit leg2009.htm
New seatbelt commercials. NHTSA has begun
airing a new series of seatbelt commercials. We should not be surprised because they are
required to do this by law and, because the congress is funding the government by
continuing resolution, the money just keeps flowing in. In their previous series, which as
a long time ago now, they had given up making claims for seatbelts and resorted instead to
threatening people with the police. In this new series, however, they have thrown
all caution to the winds and have reverted back to the big lie technique. This
undoubtedly reflects the decision of the new acting administrator, Mr. David Kelly. Given
Mr. Kelly's background, we should not be surprised.
Seatbelt whiplash: An interesting story on
ABC news on December 23, 2008. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=6515671&page=1
A car slammed into a dump truck. The neck of a nine year old boy sitting in the back seat,
strapped in by a seatbelt, was broken as a result of his head having snapped forward. The
story gives few details, but the accident must have taken place at a relatively low speed
because the mother was not, apparently, seriously injured. The story dwells on the fact
that the doctors were able to save the child's life even though such injuries are usually
fatal. The story is important because of the dearth of real world data on this type of
accident. It shows that even in the type of accident for which NHTSA promotes seatbelts,
even at low speed, the whiplash alone can prove fatal to a child.
Note: Since younger children are more vulnerable to such injuries, and booster seats strap
the child in more firmly than seatbelts, this story illustrates the extreme danger that
booster seats pose to small children in the type of accident envisaged by NHTSA. (cf.
"Anton's Law").
From KIDO radio in Boise Idaho, December 1,
2008. KIDO radio reports that a woman "lost control of her car" and smashed into
a tree. The car was so badly crushed it took the paramedics two hours to extract the
woman's body, according to KIDO radio.
FROM YAHOO AND AP, November 27, 2008. www.yahoo.com "SUV plunges off Colorado
highway, killing 7". We quote from the article in case it has been removed by the
time you see this. We trust Yahoo and AP will forgive us. "Johnstown, Colorado - An
SUV plunged off an overpass and hit a concrete embankment in a fiery crash Thursday
morning, killing all seven people inside it......'Not only is the SUV burned, it has a lot
of crushed deformation from hitting the concrete' (Colorado State Trooper Gilbert) Mares
said". Think about this. Those who were not killed instantly as a result of being
crushed to death were burned alive.
Seatbelts, anyone? Dummy tests anyone? Welcome to the real world,
senator Murray.
Rollover accident in France, November 8, 2008:
Driver killed. Head bashed in by collapsing roof. Seatbelt made it
impossible for him to evade the blow. We have so many of these pictures now that this is
deja vu, but we need to keep reminding people until the seatbelt laws are repealed.
(France2 TV screen shot).
LUNACY MARCHES ON: On October 15, 2008, the
Secretary of Transportation, Ms. Mary Peters, announced that the government would be
requiring seatbelts on small school buses. (see www.dot.gov).
Apparently, the reason that Ms. Peters made this announcement rather than the head of
NHTSA, is that the former head of NHTSA, Nicole Nason, has left, and the agency now has an
acting head (see below). The new rule was issued in the form of a 152 page report
(available on the dot web site) which makes fascinating reading, if you have a strong
stomach. It is rather as if the government had issued a 152 page report gravely
considering the question of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
The report is a combination political/bureaucratic document most of
which is dedicated to a discussion of the various "comments" which were received
during the "comment period" leading up to the "rule making".
The respect accorded to the various commentators varied in proportion to
their political importance. The discussion is mainly an effort at self-justification by
DOT (i.e., by Mary Peters) to justify the action which they have taken in light of the
comments which they have received from various politically important groups (or groups
which they consider to be politically important). Needless to say, none of these groups
have any technical expertese or are in any way qualified to discuss the matter. There were
groups of local school officials concerned about the expense, mothers of school children,
self-appointed "safety" vigilantes, and so on. In fact, the usual cast of
characters.
In this connection it is worth pointing out that the issue of putting
seatbelts on school buses has been considered, and rejected, by almost every state
legislature in the country, even in states normally supportive of seatbelt laws.
Since Ms. Peters, like Ms. Nason, is a lawyer with no professional
expertise in the field of automotive safety, extensive reference to legal documents, as
opposed to technical documents, is made in the report. Of course Ms. Peters is in a
difficult position since she is sworn to uphold the law, and in this case the law, 23 USC
402, 405 and 406, as well as the FMVSS contained in CFR 49, is the most absurd
nonsense. So she is trying to reconcile the the legal requirements and political
pressures to which she is being subjected.
We have to consider the possibility that some of the groups commenting
on the proposed rule were not, in fact, what they claimed to be, but fronts put up to it
by the seatbelt industry or the misguided insurance industry. We have no proof of this,
but the whole history of government involvement in seatbelts, airbags and booster seats is
one that is so shot through with lies, fraud, deceit and corruption that one cannot rule
it out.
NICOLE NASON OUT. On October 8, 2008, the
Bush administration announced that Nicole Nason was leaving her post as NHTSA
administrator and that her chief of staff, David Kelly, would become acting director. Mr.
Kelly was formerly the director of the "Seatbelt and Airbag Campaign of the National
Safety Council" which was created, funded, and run by NHTSA. In promoting
the seatbelt and airbag scams, the SAC-NSC used tactics that went beyond what even
NHTSA was willing to use, which may be why they were created.
Ms Nason is remembered by reporters mainly for instituting a rule that no one
at the agency could speak to the press except herself. She was a shrewd operator who
got the hell out while the getting was good.
Automobile
seatbelts, air bags and booster seats are crackpot inventions thought up by amateurs
who didn't know what they were doing.
 This van ran into a bus. Driver and passenger
crushed to death
(france2 TV screenshot, 3/15/08) |
 Collision in France. Seven crushed to death.
Remains of minibus
(france2 TV screenshot, 3/24/08) |
 Collision in France. All occupants crushed to
death.
(france2 TV screenshot, 5/11/08) |
This is what happens to real cars in real fatal
collisions
 Fatal collision in France on June
10, 2008. It's the same
in every country. We show these pictures from France2 because they are the best source of
such pictures.
|
 Here is another fatal collision which took place
on 5/11/08.
All occupants crushed to death. |
 This fatal collision took place near Eagle, Idaho on
August 3, 2007. Doesn't look much like the dummy
tests, does it.
|
seatbelts, anyone?
According to the FARS data base, 90% of all cars involved in fatal
accidents are "severely crushed". This information is in the public domain and
can easily be verified by applying an SAS filter to the data. The FARS data base is the
official United States Government record of all fatal accidents which have taken place in
this country since l975.
In addition, another car went into a pond on May 11, three occupants, only
one got out. The others almost certainly trapped by their seatbelts, as we have seen so
often before.
Solar energy is nonsense. Wind power is nonsense. The only way this
country can meet its energy needs without polluting the air is with dams and nuclear power
plants.
If Patty
Murray's seatbelt money passes again this year, it is likely that the seatbelt
scammers (NHTSA's nationwide lobbying machine) will be up to their old tricks
again next year, to promote the seatbelt scam - the lies, the bribes, the false witnesses,
the phony front organizations, the fake videos, the false stories planted in the media,
the phony demonstrations, perjury and subornation of perjury, and all the rest of their
bag of tricks. No doubt they will act "agressively" and "with zeal",
to quote from Patty Murray's instructions.
Comment:
It seems strange that a government which is spending hundreds of billions of dollars to
protect us from "terrorists" is at the same time spending hundreds of millions
to force us to do something which has killed more people than all the world's terrorists
put together.
Patty Murray Biography: We have been looking into the biography of senator
Patty Murray, one of the chief advocates of seatbelt coercion in the United States Senate.
According to her biography, as published by the United States House of
Representatives, Office of History and Preservation, "Women in Congress
1917-2006" (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 2006) she received a
B.A. from Washington State University in l972, but her major field is not specified.
Apparently, the only paid employment
experience she has ever had outside of politics was as an instructor at
Shoreline Community College from 1984 to 1987, but it does not say in what field, nor does
it explain how a someone with only a bachelor's degree could teach at a college, nor does
it say if the job was full time or part time. Wikepedia gives her profession as
"teacher", but the only other educational experience listed in her biography is
"education volunteer" from 1977 to 1984. It seems to us that this does not
qualify her as an expert on automotive safety.
Seatbelt
kills girl on Christmas eve:
http://www.northumberlandnews.com/news/article/91401
Another "ejection" story: On April 11, 2008, CBS news reported that the driver in the
Caldwell accident was "ejected". Unfortunately for CBS news, this accident
happened just down the road from our office and there was an eye witness who actually saw
the accident. The witness stated that the car was on fire and that she found the driver
behind the car. Naturally the driver would have gotten out of the car if she was able,
seeing that the car was on fire. There is not a shred of evidence that she was
"ejected" , and if she had been ejected it would be very hard to explain how she
wound up behind the car, consistent with the laws of physics. Notice that the toddler
would have burned to death, trapped in his death-trap seat, if our heroine had not been on
hand to pull him from the flames. We don't know where CBS news got their misinformation,
but we can guess. For the full story, including a video link to the eyewitness account,
click on the link below:
http://www.idahostatesman.com/newsupdates/story/350107.html
Speaking of rollovers: From the Idaho
Statesman, April 24, 2008: Two people died and one was severely injured in a single car
rollover of a Jeep Cherokee, on Idaho 55, a little after 1 a.m., Wednesday. "Everyone
in the car was wearing a seatbelt". "Police suspect alcohol was
involved".Later in the morning, "McDaneld died after his pickup truck rolled
over several times on I-84.....McDaneld was wearing a seatbelt". In another accident,
a 16 year old boy drove "a sports utility vehicle (at) about 70 mph through a red
light and into a semi truck....was pulled from the burning wreckage... died from injuries
sustained in the fiery crash". No mention of seatbelts for this one but we know from
having seen many such accidents that he would have been crushed as the vehicle was stove
in and trapped in the wreck. (Note: the Statesman on line edition does not mention
seatbelts, but the print edition does.)
News Item: Accident in Fresno, California. From CNN, Novermber 3, 2007.
FRESNO, Calif. -- A man was arrested Saturday on a drunken driving charge after two people
were killed and dozens more injured in a massive morning pileup in dense fog that involved
more than 100 cars and trucks, the California Highway Patrol said.....CHP Officer Paul
Solorzano Jr. described the scene as "something out of a movie, walking up and seeing
all the cars mangled and crushed." (emphasis added. ed.)
NOTE:
NTSB is headed by General Mark
Rosenker, a former Air Force public relations officer with no professional knowledge of
transportation safety.
NHTSA is headed by Nicole Nason, a lawyer and former congressional
staffer with no professional knowledge of highway safety.
Update: Nicole Nason has resigned and David Kelly has been named acting head.
CPSC is headed by Thomas Moore and Nancy Nord, both lawyers and former
congressional staffers with no professional knowledge of consumer product safety.
Are these the people you want to trust with your life?
Take note:
An air bag is like a bomb. If it goes off it can kill you.
Beware of "safety"
devices invented by amateurs.
Booster seats claim two more
victims (from www.cnn.com, October 18, 2007):
Two children trapped in a sinking minivan are alive (but in critical condition, ed.)
thanks to the efforts of five good Samaritans who jumped into a retention pond near Walt
Disney World and saved them. "The van completely became submerged. It was really,
really scary," one of the rescuers said."For the quick reaction that these good
Samaritans had, they saved these kids' lives," Florida Highway Patrol Trooper Kim
Miller told CNN affiliate WKMG-TV of Orlando."It is anyone's worst nightmare. We know
what can happen if kids are under water."The Nissan Quest plunged into the pond off
U.S. Highway 192 on Wednesday afternoon when a spare tire blew out, causing the driver to
lose control, the highway patrol said.The westbound van was carrying five people. The
driver, Ermarie Otereo, 24, and two passengers, Sulane Suero, 21, of Orlando, and Ivan
Rivera, 6, of Kissimmee, were able to escape the submerged minivan, WKMG reported.But
Niomy Rivera, 3, of Kissimmee and Derek Rivera, 1, of Kissimmee, were trapped under water
for as long as seven minutes, the station said.Witnesses said Otereo was screaming for
help, saying her babies were in the car, The Associated Press reported.The good Samaritans
saw the sinking van and jumped in to save the children."I screamed for a knife ...
and I went in and cut up the seat belts on the car seat to get the baby out," rescuer
Elliott Ramos told WKMG. "I was feeling the baby's body. He was motionless, so I'm
trying to put my hand underneath the belt, so I could cut it without injuring the
baby," Ramos told CNN affiliate WESH-TV of Orlando. "I was just fearing for
somebody's life ... I was praying to God, please let these babies live, please let these
babies live. Thank God we got them in time."Another rescuer, Robert Wright, told WESH
he was on his way to pick up his children when he saw the van go out of control and plunge
into the pond. Wright said he didn't think twice about stopping to help."The mother
was yelling that her babies were in the car," Wright said. "The van completely
became submerged. It was really, really scary. You couldn't see anything. It was totally
black underwater. We couldn't get the seat belts loose from the kids. It was pretty
bad," Wright said. All of the occupants were taken to hospital, AP reported. Niomy
and Derek Rivera were in critical condition at Florida Hospital South on Thursday.
Here is what the
Senate Appropriations Committee had to say in their report:
"The Committee
believes that it is critical that the Secretary and the Administrator be engaged in this
effort and directs the agency to submit quarterly reports on the actions taken by the
agency to work towards the implementation of primary seat belt laws in all States."
Take note: If you are wearing a seatbelt and you are involved in a head
on-collision like the ones shown in the NHTSA crash test videos, the seatbelt will exert a
force on you equal to 30 times your body weight. That means that if you weigh 150 pounds,
the seatbelt will exert a force on you of 4,500 lbs. Fourthousandfivehundred pounds.
In other words, YOU WILL DIE.
Newton's
Laws of Motion have been officially repealed by the United States Congress.
It's true. Read 23 USC 153, 157, 402, 405 and 406. Nevertheless, they
continue in force. Since Isaac Newton is dead, he cannot be forced to recant, as was
Galileo. So the Congress is taking refuge in denial.
Comment: Why are the two most important data points, the cause of death and
the cause of the accident, missing from the FARS data base? Surely, if you want to find
ways to save people's lives in auto accidents, the first thing you want want to know is
what caused their death. Yet NHTSA has not done this. Surely it would be better,
rather than spending billions to promote crackpot schemes, to prevent the accidents from
happening in the first place. In order to do this, would you not want to know what is
causing the accidents? Yet NHTSA has not done this. If you are going to create
an agency to improve highway safety, would you not want to have a director who knew
something about highway safety? Yet, in its entire fortyone year history, NHTSA has never
had a director who knew anything about highway safety.
| August 5, 2007 was the fiftieth anniversary of the first seatbelt
hearing held in the U.S. Congress. This
hearing set the tone for most of the subsequent hearings on this subject which have been
held since then. The witnesses were carefully chosen for their willingness to say
that it was a great idea and their readiness to state the most absurd falsehoods
under oath in support of that idea. |
From the House Appropriations Committee
report on HR 3074:
"Child safety
and child booster seat safety incentive grants.--Section 2011 of SAFETEA-LU
established a new incentive grant program to make grants available to states that are
enforcing a law requiring any child riding in a passenger vehicle who is too large to be
secured in a child safety seat to be secured in a child restraint that meets the
requirements prescribed under section 3 of Anton's Law (49 U.S.C. 30127 note; 116 Stat.
2772). These grants may be used only for child safety seat and child restraint programs.
The Committee is
disappointed that NHTSA failed to determine state eligibility in a timely fashion and, as
a result, awarded less than half of the authorized funds for this program in fiscal year
2006. The Committee encourages NHTSA to work aggressively to award available Section 2011
funds to all qualified states.
Actually, the only state which passed
Anton's Law last year was Hawaii. It certainly wasn't for want of trying by NHTSA. The
total amount appropriated for this "law" for fiscal 2006 was $6,000,000.
Half of $6,000,000 is $3,000,000. Did Hawaii get the whole $3,000,000?
The corresponding
senate bill is S.1789
The sponsor of S.1789 is senator Patty Murray of Washington, the
same Patty Murray who chaired the transportation sub-committee of the senate
appropriations committee, which reported out this bill. (See excerpt below).
HR 3074 was only introduced in the House on July 18, 2007 so its passage on July 24
represents something of a speed record for this type of bill. Since this is the biggest
pork barrel in the budget, there is usually a bitter fight over who gets what.
Here
is what the senate appropriations sub-committee (chaired by senator Murray) wrote in their
report:
"Seat Belt Usage.--Seat belts have proven to be one of
the most effective tools in reducing highway fatalities. NHTSA estimates that seat belts
saved 15,632 lives in 2005 and that an additional 5,328 lives could have been saved if
motor vehicle occupants had been wearing seat belts. Strong seat belt laws coupled with
strong enforcement has proven effective in improving seat belt usage and saving lives.
However, today only 26 States and the District of Columbia have primary seat belt laws.
The enactment of primary seat belt laws has been on the National Transportation Safety
Board's `Most Wanted' list for States since 1998. Under a provision in SAFETEA-LU, the
Secretary and the Administrator have the ability to go to States to work for the
implementation of primary seat belt laws. In testimony before the Committee, the Secretary
stated that she had personally gone out to States to encourage the enactment of primary
seat belt laws.
The Committee believes that it is
critical that the Secretary and the Administrator be engaged in this effort and directs
the agency to submit quarterly reports on the actions taken by the agency to work towards
the implementation of primary seat belt laws in all States."
This statement is absolutely staggering in
its falsity, mendacity, and arrogance. Let's just take their statements one at a time:
1. “Seatbelts have been
proven to be one of the most effective tools in reducing highway fatalities.” As we,
and others, have shown, with massive evidence and documentation, based on years of
research, which you can find on this web-site, seatbelts increase, not decrease the
fatality rate in automobile accidents. As we know after the most careful and exhaustive
investigation, the “proof” that the committee report refers to does not exist.
The statement is an out and out falsehood.
2. “NHTSA estimates
that seatbelts saved 15,632 lives in 2005 and that an additional 5,328 lives could have
been saved if motor vehicle occupants had been wearing seatbelts.” A careful
investigation of this “estimate” reveals that it is purely a product of the
writer’s imagination. It is an out and out fabrication based on nothing but thin air.
3. “Strong seatbelt
laws have proven effective…in saving lives”. In four years of research we have
not been able to find a single verified case of a person’s life ever being saved by a
seatbelt in an automobile accident. As best we can tell, based on the available evidence,
seatbelts kill approximately 2,000 people a year in this country. (See our report,
“The Truth About Seatbelts”, on this web-site).
4. “The enactment of primary seatbelt
laws has been on the National Transportation Safety Board’s Most Wanted List since
1998”. According to the NTSB web-site, “State Mandatory Seatbelt Use Laws”
was added to their “Most Wanted List” in l991 and removed in l994. Nowhere
does it indicate that it was put back in 1998, or at any other time.
5. “Under a provision
in SAFETEA-LU, the Secretary and the Administrator have the ability to go to States to
work for the implementation of primary seat belt laws.” We have read
“SAFETEA-LU” very carefully and have not found such a provision, which
would, in any case, violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the congressional ban on
federal employees lobbying state legislatures.
6. “In testimony before the Committee,
the Secretary stated that she had personally gone out to States to encourage the enactment
of primary seat belt laws.” We were not aware that she had done so, but if she did,
we believe it would be in violation of federal law. It would certainly be inappropriate,
in our opinion, and exceed her mandate.
Notice that, as before, the subcommittee took it upon itself to lecture and
instruct NHTSA in its duties before the full committee, let alone the full senate, never
mind the House of Representatives or the President of the United States, had a chance to
consider their report.
Re Anton's Law in the U.S. Code: You may think this is all legastistic gobblediguk,
but this is what leads to that flashing red light in your rear view mirror and that siren
telling you to pull over.
We thought you might like to read what your congress has enacted into law. This is from 49
USC 30127 note. This stuff isnt easy to find. In fact, they would probably rather you
didn't find it. This note was referenced in House report 109-203, which was the
final conference report on HR 3, and is now P.L. 109-59. You will find the reference in
section 2011(a).
"(h) Booster seat
study. .....not later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of this Act (Nov. 1,
2001) the Secretary of Transportation shall initiate and complete a study, taking
into acount the views of the public, on the use and effectiveness of automobile booster
seats for children, compiling information on the advantages and disadvantages of using
booster seats and determining the benefits, if any, to children from use of booster
(seats?) with lap and shoulder belts compared to children using lap and shoulder belts
alone, and submit a report on the results of that study to the congress "
Well, now isn't that nice.
What could be fairer than that. Unfortunately, our euphoria is cut short by the next
paragraph:
"(i) Booster seat
education program. The Secretary of Transportation within one year after the date of the
enactment of this act (Nov. 1, 2001) shall develop a 5 year strategic plan to reduce
deaths and injuries caused by the failure to use the appropriate booster seat in the 4 to
8 year old age group by 25%"
Note: We have already shown how booster seats kill children in fire, in
water, and in head-on collisions, as shown in the famous NHTSA dummy test videos. See THE GREAT BOOSTER SEAT SCAM below for more.
THE GREAT
BOOSTER SEAT SCAM
Child
death-trap seats: As we have shown (see Puzzles, above and below), the straps
on a booster seat will kill the child in even a medium speed head-on collision of the type
shown in the NHTSA videos. A booster seat puts the child's head closer to the
roof of the car, thus making it more likely that its head will be crushed in a roll-over.
Elevating a child makes it more likely that the child will be killed in an override, while
it might have survived lower down. A strapped in child may suffer serious injury or death
from the straps in case of other types of collisions, as well as head-on. Strapping in a
child makes it more likely that the child will be crushed when the vehicle is stove in,
since the child cannot avoid the blow or be pushed aside. Strapping in a child makes it
more likely that the child will be burned to death if the car catches fire because it may
not be possible to release the child in time, or at all - and we have seen this in case
after case. Strapping in a child makes it more likely that the child will be drowned if
the car plunges into water for the same reasons, and this too we have seen in actual
cases. A study released on December 8, 2006 also shows the danger of leaving
children strapped into these seats for too long, even without an accident. CTV_ca.htm, Car_seats.htm.
NHTSA, under orders from congress, would have you believe that there is
this great national crisis of children being killed in head-on collisions, making
necessary draconian laws to force parents to strap their children into booster seats. As
we have shown below (see puzzle), strapping a child into a booster seat almost guarantees
that the child will be killed in a head-on collision. But let's just see if this is
a great national problem, based on the government's own data. According to the FARS data
base for 2001 (the last year the government listed head-on collisions as a separate
category), in that year, out of approximately 23 million children in the United States
under the age of 6, 128 were killed in head-on collisions. Of those, FARS states that 51
were definitely in booster seats, 15 may have been in booster seats but they're not
really sure, 6 were in booster seats but, according to FARS, the seat was
"improperly used", leaving only 56, out of 23 million, who were definitely
not in booster seats. As we have shown below, had those 56 been in booster seats, their
chances of survival would not have improved. You can check these numbers for
yourself by visiting ftp://ftp.nhtsa.dot.gov/FARS/
Seeing that the small number of head-on
collisions was undermining their case for seatbelts and booster seats, NHTSA, after 2001,
stopped listing head-on collisions as a separate category, lumping them together with
front end collisions, hoping that people would be too dumb to know the difference. But
front end collisions can be off center collisions at any angle so they are not quite the
same thing as the scenario shown in the crash test videos. Nevertheless, NHTSA hoped that
the fact that there are more front end collisions than head-on collisions would make
it seem like a bigger problem. It didnt work out that way. Let's just look at the data for
2005, the most recent year for which data is available:
In 2005, out of
approximately 25 million children in the United States under 6 years of age, 75 were
killed in front end collisions. We ran this through the SAS filter twice, just to make
sure it was not a mistake. Of those, only 16 were known not be in some kind of restraint.
39 were in booster seats (52%), 8 were in lap and shoulder belts, 4 were in lap belts, 2
were said to be in a restraint but the recording officer did not know what type, and for 6
they did not know if they had been in a restraint or not.
NHTSA then tried to claim that children should be placed in booster seats to
prevent them from being "ejected". Let's see what the FARS data base has to say
about it. In 2005, out of 25 million children in the United States under 6 years of age,
they say that 126 were killed by being "ejected". Of these, 89, or 71%, were in
high c.g. vehicles, mainly SUVs and vans. This is due to the fact that 79% of these
accidents were rollovers. Thus, only 37 children, out of 25 million, were killed by being
ejected from regular automobiles. In fact, even these numbers may err on the high side.
Out of the 126 cases for which they claim a child was killed by being ejected, in 98 of
those cases the officer could not say how, i.e. through what opening, the child was
ejected. Moreover, in 47 cases, the child was said to have been in a restraint prior to
ejection. Of these, 41 were said to have been in booster seats, 5 were said to have been
in seatbelts, and one in a restraint of unknown type. We know from long experience that
police claims of "ejection" are not to be trusted. FARS also tells us that out
of the 126 children supposedly killed by ejection, 103, or 82%, were killed in single car
accidents; that is, in most cases, the driver of the vehicle the child was in caused the
accident.
Anton's Law:
NHTSA this year has been trying to get states to pass "Anton's Law".
Under this so-called law, parents would be required to strap 6 and 7 year old
children into booster seats. Anton, it seems, was a four year old who was killed
when "his mother lost control of her car". How this translates into
requiring 6 and 7 year olds to be strapped into booster seats, they did not say. Congress
has appropriated $6 million dollars a year to promote this law. Let's just see
what the government's own data has to say about it: According to the FARS data base, out
of the approximately ten million 6 and 7 year old children in the United States in
2005, 19 were killed in front end collisions. Of these, 8 were in lap and shoulder
belts, 5 were in lap belts, one was in a booster seat, 4 were unrestrained and 2 were
unknown. All but three were riding in the back seat and most were, therefore, almost
certainly killed by their restraints. (cf. California AB 881 above which would
require all children up to 8 years of age to sit in the back seat).
Another argument that has been put forward for
Anton's Law is that it would save lives by preventing children from being
"ejected". As we know from our analysis, and actual accident reports, a vehicle
occupant has a better chance of surviving an accident if he is ejected than if he is
trapped in the vehicle by "restraints". But let's just see, from the
government's own data, how many 6 and 7 year olds are actually killed by being ejected.
According to the FARS data base, out of the approximately ten million children in that age
group in the United States in 2005, 42 were, supposedly, killed by being ejected.
However, this number may err on the high side. When asked, on the form, how the children
were ejected (i.e., through what opening), in 36 of the 42 cases the officers stated
that they did not know. Moreover, four of the children were said to be in lap and
shoulder belts, one was said to be in a lap belt, and one was said to be in a booster
seat. In most of these cases, had the child been trapped in the vehicle by a restraint, it
would have been killed anyway.
Finally, there is the question of how these accidents happened. Even SUVs dont just roll
over by themselves. A driver has to do something pretty unusual to get one to roll over.
And most of these were single car accidents. In other words, the driver caused the
accident. NHTSA does not tell us how these accidents happened, but they do tell us that in
64% of fatal accidents the driver was driving in an unsafe manner - speeding, drunk,
drugged, mentally deranged, and so on.
There is an old saying: "Accidents do not
happen; they are caused".
The new president of France: Nicolas Sarkozy was observed riding in his
automobile without a seatbelt. France has a primary seatbelt law. Sarkozy has said
that he wants to make changes in France, and this is a good start.
The new
energy bill: The energy bill passed by the U.S. Senate
contains a provision that the new mileage standards will go into effect unless NHTSA
recommends otherwise. Since NHTSA recommends whatever congress tells them to recommend, it
gives the politicians an out.
Read our paper:
"Seatbelts Kill: The True Story of the Seatbelt Scam" (html works rtf word text)
CORZINE ACCIDENT:
From the New York Times: (May 6, 2007) "....there are no records among the five
cassette tapes and three compact discs, totaling nearly two hours, of conversations
involving Mr. Corzine's driver , Trooper Robert J. Rasinski. Nor does anything refer to
the fact that the caravan was going 26 mph above the posted speed limit of 65, or that Mr.
Corzine was not wearing a seatbelt." They may have been careful to delete any
references to Trooper Rasinski, but they slipped up in one vital place: There was a
question of why, if the governor was wearing a seatbelt, there was no mention of an injury
to his stomach, which he surely would have suffered if he was wearing a seatbelt. The
tapes give us the answer. The EMT says, "he's complaining of excruciating pain in his
leg, abdomen and chest" (emphasis added).
New Jersey: 4/12/07: Governor
Corzine of New Jersey was critically injured in a car accident on 4/12/07. According to
news reports, he suffered a broken collar bone, six broken ribs on both sides, a broken
sternum, a broken lower vertebra, and a broken leg, but no head injury. Colonel Fuentes,
the head of the New Jersey state police was quoted as saying that he did not know if the
governor was wearing a seatbelt "but he often does not".
CORZINE ACCIDENT: 4/16/07. The
seatbelt scammers, in their desperate effort at damage control, are putting out so many
confliciting stories that they are undermining their own credibility. One report,
published in the New York Times, USA Today and Bloomberg, even asserted that
"the unbelted governor was thrown from the front seat to the back seat" which
would be very interesting, if true, since it would disprove Newton's first law of
motion. Another report stated that the SUV hit the guard rail sideways, even though
the pictures clearly show that it hit the rail head on. Another report stated that the
Dodge Ram hit the passenger side of the SUV, even though the pictures show no damage on
the passenger side except possibly at the very front, which cannot be clearly seen in the
pictures.
As to what actually happened, all we can say for sure, as shown in the photographs of the
accident, is that the SUV hit the guard rail head on and broke through it, and that the
SUV jack-knifed by about 15 degrees. (5/1/07: The media are now showing a doctored picture
of the SUV, making it look as though the accident took place in daylight, where the
retouch artist has taken out the 15 degree jack-knife).
4/30/07. A press report appearing in all the media at this time claims
that governor Corzine apologized for not wearing a seatbelt. If you read the quote
carefully, however, you note that all he said was that he set a bad example. In what way
he did not say. Driving at 91 mph is certainly setting a bad example. The problem for the
seatbelt scammers is that the governor's injuries are consistent with wearing a seatbelt
and not consistent with not wearing a seatbelt.
Notice that the upper body and waist injuries to
the governor, as described in the press and on the tape, coincide exactly with the seat
belt.
(The forces were calculated by accepting the published figure of 30 mph at which the SUV
hit the guard rail. This was based on the following considerations: The pictures clearly
show that the vehicle stopped in its own length, 17 feet, after hitting the rail.
According to our calculations, this means the vehicle stopped in 0.77 seconds after
hitting the rail for an average deceleration rate of 57 feet per second squared, or 1.77g.
However, the deceleration rate when the vehicle hit the guard rail must have been much
higher, so the maximum force on the governor would have been much higher).
Here's a little item
you might enjoy (or maybe not): Twin Falls, Idaho, May 4, 2007. Two canoeists went
out to retrieve the body of a suicide victim. When they came to shore with the victim the
sheriff was waiting for them. He wrote them a ticket for not wearing a life preserver.
Here's a little statistic you might not have been
aware of. Accoding to NHTSA, 55% of
drivers involved in fatal collisions have previous convictions for reckless driving. Since
there are usually two drivers involved in a fatal collision, that would indicate that most
fatal collisions are caused by drivers with previous convictions for reckless driving.
Cars do not cause accidents. Drivers cause accidents.
The following picture and story appeared in the
Idaho Statesman on April 21, 2007. Visit www.idahostatesman.com
It's hard to open your seatbelt when you're hanging upside down from
the belt (because of the pressure on the buckle).
Note: This is probably how Bethany Ashmoore's
babies died, trapped upside down in their "child safety seats" with their heads
under water (see our newspaper
gallery on this website). More such cases in our seatbeltvictims
file.
Thought for the day:
In the event of a side impact collision near the front or rear of a vehicle, an unbelted
driver or passenger may be thrown against the side of the vehicle and suffer a
bruised arm; a belted driver or passenger may be thrown against the shoulder belt and
suffer a broken neck.
Here's an interesting little fact you might not
have known. Today's "emergency locking retractors"
will not only lock up in a deceleration but also in a roll-over, thus preventing you from
taking any evasive action to prevent your head from being crushed as the roof caves in. Of
course roofs dont usually crush if you roll over into water, so the belt just keeps
you pinned upside down while you're drowning.
FMVSS
208: Since many seatbelt laws state that they apply only
to seatbelts meeting FMVSS 208, we thought we would post FMVSS 208 so you could read it
for yourself and determine if your seatbelts comply with FMVSS 208. Remember, though, that
FMVSS 208 has changed frequently over the years and most seatbelt laws do not state which
version of FMVSS 208 your seatbelts need to comply with.
Legislators: How many of you have actually
read the FMVSS that you are forcing on the American people? How many of you actually
understand them? You are taking them on faith. But they are not worthy of your faith. The
bureaucrats are making these standards so long, convoluted and incomprehensible that
you won't bother to read them and, if you read them, that you won't understand them. Most
of these so -called "standards" are both inane and insane. Some of it is
just plain gibberish.
Congress: Over the last ten years,
congress has spent more than a billion dollars to foist the seatbelt scam on the American
people. Is this really what we want congress to spend our money on?
23 USC 157. Over the years, the seatbelt scammers have gotten
their false claims enshrined in the U.S. Code in not just one, but five different
places - implicitly and explicitly - in order to sell seatbelts and justify ripping people
off for not wearing them. These are 23 USC 153, 157, 402, 405 and 406. 153 and 157 came
from earlier authorization bills but they have never been repealed. Since we have not
previoulsy posted 23 USC 157 we thought we would call it to your attention.
1. Although, when this section was drafted, they had not
yet thought of referring to seatbelts as "safety" belts, notice the heading:
"Safety incentive grants for the use of seatbelts". The psychological trick is
to state the falsehood as an accepted fact. Thus, the use of the word "safety"
is supposed to make you think that seatbelts will make you safer, and dissuade you from
questioning this assertion.
2.Notice the words "incentive grants". In other
words, they are offering bribes to states, using your tax money, to bamboozle and coerce
people into using seatbelts.
3. Notice paragraph (a)(6): "Savings to the federal
government". Again, the falsehood is stated as an accepted fact. This section goes on
to state: "The term 'savings to the federal government' means the amount of Federal
budget savings relating to Federal medical costs (including savings under medicare and
medicaid programs under titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act (42 USC 1395 et
seq)), as determined by the Secretary." This pseudolegalistic drivel is supposed to
make you think that forcing people to wear seatbelts is going to save the federal
government money. (Notice it doesn't say it will save you money). The false claim is made
explicit in paragraph (b) (2)(B) where it says, "The amount that is equal to the
savings to the Federal government due to any increase in State seatbelt use...." In
other words, take for granted that such savings exist. Dont try to present any evidence
(there isn't any), don't try to persuade people, just state the falsehood as an accepted
fact and hope no one will question it.
4.Notice the words, "as determined by the
Secretary". In other words, the Secretary (of Transportation) can give, or withhold,
millions of dollars in these pork barrel grants to states as he sees fit.
5. Notice section (f): "Innovative Seat Belt Project
Allocations". In other words, they are going to give states millions of dollars of
your tax money to think up new ways to bamboozle and coerce people into using seatbelts.
Sub paragraph (5) says the amount of allocation "shall not be less than $100,000 per
year". This is supposed to make you think it's small potatoes. But notice no upper
limit is given. And when you look at the totals authorized for Section 157, it came to fivehundredfortysix million dollars.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HR 5576:
Your attention is called in particular to the
Senate report, "Highway Safety Programs". Notice the following statements:
1. "Promote High Visibility Enforcement".
Police harassment required by federal law. Have the American people really sunk so low
that they are prepared to accept this?
2. "Educate prosecutors and judges". This is an arrogant interference by
the legislative branch in the judicial branch of government, in violation of the
separation of powers as provided by the U.S. Constitution.
3."To supplement NHTSA's overall safety belt effort, the Committee recommends funding
to continue the "Click It Or Ticket" national public service message
program". In other words, use taxpayer money to spread lying propaganda and threats
to bamboozle or intimidate people into using these dangerous devices.
Notice that the House report is much more guarded
in its language, referring only to the authority granted the committee under P.L. 109-59.
We need to be clear on where these "Click it
or Ticket" campaigns are coming from. They are not coming from your local police.
They are not coming for from your state police. They are not coming from your state
government. They are coming from the United States Senate.
The last report says "The federal government's
regulatory role in motor vehicle and highway safety began in September l966".
Since then, this particular federal bureaucracy has cost the American people thousands of
lives and billions of dollars.
We have added the full text of the revised version
of 23 USC 406
to our documents section. It
is important to study 23 USC 402, 405 and 406 carefully to understand what is motivating
state legislatures, state transportation departments, and state police, under
pressure from NHTSA, (which is under pressure from congress) to promote the seatbelt scam.
(23 USC 402 and 405 can also be found in our documents section).
We have also added a link to William Holdorf's
paper, The Fraud of Seatbelt Laws,
to our documents
section. We already have a link on this page. This paper is worth reading again just to
remind us of the sordid history of the seatbelt scam. Mr. Holdorf tells us how airbags
entered the picture. Air bags are every bit as dangerous and impractical as seatbelts.
Notice that congress took the advice of two lawyers, Elizabeth (now senator) Dole and Joan
Claybrook, neither of whom knew a stress tensor from a hole in the ground, and went
against the advice of competent engineers who tried to explain to them that airbags were
not a practical proposition.
From Friedl Pfeiffer's biography: "I had been driving through a downpour to Hailey, about 12 miles from
Sun Valley, when my car started to fishtail. I fought the slide until the car flipped
over, throwing me right through the convertible top and into the sage brush. I was lucky
to survive with only a few bumps and bruises.... but the yellow convertible was gone for
good". (From "Nice Goin" by Friedl Pfeiffer, p80)
Note: If Mr. Pfeiffer had been wearing a seatbelt, the car would have landed on top of him
and he would have been killed. As it was, he survived with only a few bumps and bruises. SEATBELTS KILL! Stop the seatbelt scam!
For the facts about seatbelts in school buses, click here
On July 18, 2006 the transportation subcommittee of
the Senate appropriations committee issued the following statement as part of their report
on HR 5576:
"National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration: $811 million; this amount is $5 million above the FY06 level.
These funds will maintain current programs and continue the mobilization and paid media
initiatives that have proven so effective in increasing safety belt use and impaired
driving awareness. "
On July 20, 2006, as expected, the full
committee rubber stamped the report of the subcommittee.
For those of you who may not remember, "mobilization" means
massive campaigns of police harassment and "paid media initiatives" means
massive campaigns of lying propaganda, threats and intimidation to try to bamboozle, or
coerce, the public into wearing seatbelts.
Under federal law, the Secretary of Transportation
is required to pressure, and offer to pay (bribe), states to run these campaigns
twice a year. But states are not required, by law, to do so.
FOR MORE ON
LEGISLATION, CLICK HERE
The ultimate source of all seatbelt harassment campaigns. We
thought you might like to see the High Visibility Enforcement clause of HR 3 as it finally
emerged from the conference committee. This is now the law of the land. See Sec.2009.
The Process:
1. Congress passes the
laws instructing the Secretary of Transportation to promote the seatbelt scam and other
Orwellian schemes, and appropriates hundreds of millions of dollars for the purpose.
2. The Secretary assigns the job to the Director (Administrator) of the National Highway
Transportation Safety Administration.
3. The Administrator carries out the instructions of the Secretary, organizing and
directing his huge propaganda and lobbying machine to try to get states to pass these
Orwellian laws, funded by hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money for bribes and
expenses.
Once again, please
tell your senators and representatives to repeal 23 USC 153, 157, 402, 405 and 406.
Nausea. This
NHTSA document, which is intended for state police and transportation departments, will
show you what is behind the "click-it-or-ticket" campaigns.
The Manitoba
study. Respectable scholars, working independently, have concluded, after
careful study of the available data, that seatbelts are harmful. They are: Professor Adams
of London University, based on the european data, Professor Schreier of the University of
Connecticut (retired), based on the American data, and Professors Levine and Basilevsky,
at the University of Winnipeg, based on the Canadian data. No government has put forward
any evidence to refute these studies.
Why is it important to fight the seatbelt laws? (Read on)
