THE SAFETY CHOICE COALITION

DEDICATED TO THE PROPOSITION THAT  WHAT YOU DO FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY SHOULD BE DECIDED BY YOU AND NOT BY THE GOVERNMENT

WE ARE FIGHTING TO REPEAL:

• MANDATORY   SEATBELT LAWS

• MANDATORY   MOTORCYCLE HELMET LAWS

• MANDATORY BICYCLE HELMET LAWS

• MANDATORY AIR BAG LAWS

• MANDATORY PERSONAL FLOTATION DEVICE LAWS

• AND ALL SIMILAR   LAWS

WORKING TOGETHER WE CAN BE MORE EFFECTIVE THAN  WORKING SEPARATELY

LINKS TO OUR  PAGES:

                                                  DOCUMENTS:              MESSAGES:               LINKS:              QUOTATIONS:            

Visit our Picture Gallery and take a look at what happens to real cars in real fatal accidents

Seatbelts have been killing people for more than thirty years. Read some of their stories.

If you still think seatbelts are a good idea you need to read our report

Read published accounts of what seatbelts do to real people in real accidents

Read what other people think of mandatory seatbelt laws

IF YOU HAVE NEWS ABOUT THE FIGHT FOR LIBERTY, PLEASE SHARE IT WITH US

webmaster

editor

info

Letters to the editor     Newspaper gallery      Picture gallery      Seatbelts Kill

This site is dedicated to the memory of Commander John C. Waldron and the men of Torpedo Squadron 8, and to all others who gave their lives to preserve that liberty which some are now trying to take away from us.
"We here highly resolve that these honored dead shall not have died in vain".

This web-site was last updated on March 10,  2010

"People are tired of being pushed around, tired that we aren't smart enough to know what is good for us, that the only solution is the government, when it isn't the government that knows anything!" Posted by "Mario" on FOX News.

Seatbelt theory. Any physicist can show you the fatal flaw in the seatbelt theory in five minutes on the back of an old envelope. See puzzle1 solution.

Fun with air bags: The best remark we have heard about air bags so far came from a spectator after watching an air bag blow a stove to smithereens. "Holy shit!" he exclaimed, "you mean they put those in cars?" To watch the fun, visit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CzyOtuF_SA&feature=related

By the way, we have   learned that azide, like nitro-glycerin, can be set off by shock. That may explain why air bags blow up in some rear end collisions (according to the FARS data base) when they aren't supposed to. Of course that would defeat the so-called "smart air bag" computer programs, since these would only work if the bag is set off by the computer, not by the shock. We are continuing to investigate this matter.

Legislative update:

Arizona: SB 1010 is showing feeble signs of life, having been referred to the House transportation and rules committees on 3/08/2010. The bill refers to CFR 49, Section 571.208. The sponsors have no idea what this section means and neither does anyone else because it is meaningless gibberish. SB 1010 would impose Anton's law on Arizona. This bill would have required motorists to strap children up to nine years of age into a death trap seat! This was the age limit in the original NHTSA bill (all these bills are written by NHTSA in Washington D.C.) but in every other state where this bill has been introduced they lowered the age limit to 8 years of age. The bill would also make it illegal for hospitals to release new born infants to their parents without first informing the parents of all the provisions of this law. This bill was reported out by the Public Safety and Human Services Committee on 1/13/2010 by a vote of 6 to 0. Passed by rules committee, 1/19/10. The bill was amended on the floor with two major changes: The first would make the law secondary, and the second lowers the age limit from 9 to 8. The bill was then approved by the committee of the whole by voice vote (no roll call) on 9/21/10. Passed by senate, 20 to 8, and sent to House, 1/25/2010.

West Virgnia: SB 130 has was introduced in the House on March 4, 2010 and assigned to the transportation committee. The West Virginia state senate passed SB 130 by a vote of 27 to 5 on 3/3/2010. Two senators were absent. The five senators who stood up for  the people of West Virginia and voted no were: Boley, Bowman, Chafin,  Deem and Sypolt. With the legislature due to adjourn on March 13 the bill is unlikely to be enacted. Nevertheless we are going to continue to keep a close eye on this bill and will continue to keep you, and the media, informed.

No word on how big a bribe NHTSA has offered West Virginia  to pass this bill, but of course that's what this is all about.  SB 130 was passed by the judiciary committee on 2/26/2010 , first reading on March 1, second reading March 2. HB 4005 and SB 130 would make West Virginia's seatbelt law primary. Introduced 1/13/2010. Both assigned first to Roads and Transportation Committee, then to Judiciary Committee. SB 130 passed by Transportation, 1/27/2010, and sent to judiciary. West Virginia  had a primary seatbelt law years ago and repealed it. NHTSA has been trying to get them to re-enact it ever since.  Primary seatbelt laws are mass murder and NHTSA's proferred bribes are blood money.

Colorado:  SB 110. The Colorado state senate failed to take up SB 110 on March 3, 2010. According to the rules, this was the last day to pass a bill in the house of origin. The bill is, therefore, theoretically dead. Nevertheless, we have learned from experience that a seatbelt bill is never dead until it has been buried with a stake through its heart. So we are going to continue to keep a close eye on this matter.
    The  bill would make Colorado's seatbelt law primary. It begins with the usual lies and absurdities which we have dealt with so often before over the last seven years that it is hardly worth going over again.  It also makes the booster seat provision primary and removes certain exemptions, but does not raise the age limit as required by "Anton's law" The bill concludes by declaring that "it is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety". This time, NHTSA  offered Colorado a bribe of $14 milion dollars to pass this bill. The emergency clause indicates that NHTSA told them they must enforce by a certain date or lose the money.
    As in Missouri, the sponsors managed to keep this bill secret for over a month. This seems to be the new strategy. Keep the public from knowing what is going on. Introduced in the senate on January 20,  to transportation committee 2/09/2010, amended, laid over, voted out by transportation committee 2/18/2010, referred to the Committee of the Whole, 2/23/2010 second reading, laid over daily.
The vote in the transportation committee was 4 to 3.

Wyoming: On the last day for third reading, the Wyoming House defeated SF 0064 by a vote of 17 to 41. A revised version of SF 0064 was passed by the Wyoming state senate on 2/18/2010 by a vote of 21 to 9. The bill would have raised the seatbelt fine from $25 to $75, but lowered other traffic fines by $10 if the person was wearing a seatbelt.  Enforcement remains secondary. No word on how much, if anything, NHTSA offered Wyoming to pass this bill.

Kansas: SB 483: In an uparalleled act of cynicism and hypocrisy, the Kansas state senate, on February 16, 2010, by a vote of 26 to 14, voted to sell out the people of Kansas for a federal grant.   The bill has been sent to the House and assigned to the transportation committee.

SB 483 would make the Kansas seatbelt law primary, extend the seatbelt requirement to all passenger car occupants, raise the fine from $30 to $60 and make seatbelt evidence admissible in court in certain cases. Introduced in, and by, the senate transportation committee. To no one's great surprise, the committee recommended passage of their bill on 2/10/2010. Members of the committee are: Senator Dwayne Umberger, Chairman, Senator Bob Marshall, Vice Chairman, and Senators Apple, Donovan, Huntington, Peterson, V. Schmidt, Kultala and Hensley. Kultala and Hensley are the only democrats on the committee.

NHTSA has offered Kansas $11.2 million dollars to pass this bill under 23 USC 406 and $465,000 a year under 23 USC 405. The amount under 23 USC 406 is the same as last year, which is surprising because NHTSA usually ups their bid in case of failure. The $465,000 a year under 23 USC 405 is new. NHTSA is promising Kansas money in perpertuity, which they have no authority to do, since money for 405 has only been appropriated by congress for this year. NHTSA has told Kansas they must enact this legislation by June 30, 2010. As a result, the Kansas state senate has "declared an emergency" to rush this bill through.
The hearing on this bill was orchestrated by NHTSA through the Kansas Deparmtent of Transportation. Testifying were representatives from the Kansas Department of Transportation, the  Kansas Health Department, the Kansas Highway Patrol, the Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police, the Kansas Peace Officers Association, the Kansas Sheriffs Association, and the Kansas State Nurses Association. Notice the heavy police presence, and the fact that all of these people are on the public payroll. Not a single private citizen testified for this bill. The people of Kansas were not represented.
    In addition, the "supplementary statement" on the bill also stated that written testimony was received  from AAA Kansas, "Safe Kids Kansas" the "Alliance of Auto Manufacturers" and the State Farm Insurance Companies. Both "SafeKids (insert name of state)" and the "Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers" are phony front organizations created by NHTSA and their "written testimony" came straight out of NHTSA headquarters in Washington, D.C. The insurance companies have been bamboozled by NHTSA into believing that this kind of legislation will save them money.
Most of the money for passing this bill, as well as some of the fine money, would go to the police, which explains the heavy police presence at the hearing. It is greed for money and power. In testifying for this bill, the police are not telling the truth.   They   know full well what seatbelts do to motorists in automobile accidents.  The second largest amount of the money would go to the health department. This does not explain the interest of the Kansas Departmentof Transportation. Not mentioned in the fiscal or supplemental note is that fact that Kansas DOT would receive additional money under 23 USC 402, which   exceeds the money Kansas is getting under 23 USC 405 and 406.  This is a long, complicated story, but Kansas DOT has a major fiscal interest in this and is responsible for orchestrating this in Kansas under both federal and state law.
The only other noteworthy development to report here is that the delegation NHTSA through DOT managed to round up to testify at the hearing was somewhat lower level than last year, when the heads of the department themselves showed up at the hearing. Two members of the committee, senators Marshall (the vice chairman) and Peterson, voted against the bill.

There is something bizarre in NHTSA, 47 years after the first seatbelt law was passed and 26 years after the first mandatory seatbelt law was passed, to still be going to this much   trouble to force this blood soaked scam on the American people. It is all very well to say that they are required to do this by federal law. But it seems there is something more going on here - a kind of desperation, a kind of emotional hysteria - which is understandable because in forcing seatbelts on the American people NHTSA is responsible for the death of thousands of Americans. The truth is too terrible. They don't want to face up to it.

Missouri: It now appears that a primary seatbelt bill was introduced in the Missouri House of Representatives on January 28, 2010 and read the second time on February 1. However, notice of this bill only appeared in the public record yesterday, February 17, 2010, which is probably a violation of Missouri law. Apparently, the sponsors hoped to keep the word from getting out. The bill is HB 1877, but so far has not been assigned to any committee and is not on any calendar.

Wyoming: HJ0002 has been reported out of committee and placed on the general file for consideration by the committee of the whole. This is one of the states' rights resolutions which have been introduced in a number of states this year. (See below for similar resolutions or bills introduced in Arizona, Missouri and Rhode Island).  HJ0002, section 3, reads:
        "That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed".
        The resolution thus seems to address only stick legislation, not carrot legislation; it does not seem to bar federal legislation offering states rewards to pass certain bills as long as it does not threaten to withhold funds if a state legislature does not comply. This is not entirely clear, however, because if a state legislature does not pass a bill for which a reward is offered, then it would lose the federal funding it would otherwise get. The problem is that states are now so financially dependent on the federal government that they are in a poor position to refuse federal funding, even if onerous conditions are attached. The rest of the resolution, however, uses some pretty strong language to assert state sovereignty. At any rate, it seems to be a step in the right direction.
        For the entire resolution, visit:

http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2010/Introduced/HJ0002.pdf

Arizona: A similar resolution has been introduced in Arizona. Broadly interpreted, these resolutions would require the repeal of all seatbelt laws, since all such laws were passed by states only under intense pressure from, and offers of federal funds by, the federal government. Some of the earlier seatbelt laws are in direct violation of the resolutions, since initially the congress threatened states with massive loss of federal highway funds if they did not pass laws forcing motorists to use seatbelts. For the full text of the Arizona resolution, visit:

http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/hcr2001p.htm

Oregon: SB 579, which went into effect in January, holds the driver of a vehicle and/or the guardian of a child under 16 years of age responsible if the child "is not properly restrained by a seatbelt or booster seat". A child up to 40 pounds and up to 4 feet 9 inches tall must be restrained in a death-trap seat. Beyond that, a seatbelt is required. The penalty is not stated.  The beauty of the word "properly" is that the police can always allege that the child was not "properly" restrained.

Minnesota: We forgot to mention  that Anton's law, SF 99, was also passed by the Minnesota state legislature last year. They probably got another million from NHTSA for that.  It was a bad year for Minnesota, as they passed both the primary seatbelt law and Anton's law.   We shall never know how many men, women and children are going to drown, burn to death or be crushed to death as a result, because the police are required by law to promote seatbelts and booster seats.

New NHTSA administrator. David L. Strickland has been appointed NHTSA administrator. Mr. Strickland is a lawyer who majored in political science as an undergraduate, thus keeping intact NHTSA's record of never having had an administrator who knew anything about highway safety. Mr. Strickland is a former congressional staffer, thus continuing the practice of past  congresses and administrations of appointing congressional staffers to head government agencies. Mr. Strickland was on the staff of the senate commerce committee, which, over the years, has been instrumental in trying to force the seatbelt scam on the nation.

Dramatic accident videos:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yYtZsKq0AI    and  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7XZy0rZ_dQ

    These videos bring to life the full horror of what happens in accidents where the vehicle catches fire. Such accidents are not rare. According to the FARS data base, in 2001, 1339 vehicles caught fire as a result of collisions or rollovers with fatal consequences,  in which 1629 vehicle occupants lost their lives. In 2005 the numbers were  1444 and 1766 respectively.
    Actual accident reports (see our seatbelt victims file) indicate that vehicle occupants almost invariably have trouble opening their seatbelts after  a severe collision or rollover.  In case of fire, unless the occupants are first crushed to death or killed by their seatbelts,  they almost invariably burn to death unless someone is around with a knife to cut them free before it is too late.
    Notice that in the videos, while no one mentions seatbelts, in the second video you can hear one of the rescuers shout "Get a knife!", which pretty much tells the story.
According to the FARS data base, since l996, when every state but New Hampshire had enacted a primary or secondary seatbelt law, approximately 19,600 vehicles have caught fire as a result of collisions or rollovers with fatal results, with approximately 23,800 fatalities.

No seatbelt saves lives: From Driving Freedoms, January/February 2010: "I know of someone who lived through a T-bone precisely because he was not wearing a belt. The incoming car punched through the driver's side, continuing clear through the center of his car and, had he been belted in, he would have been crushed. He was unhurt because of being unbelted and thrown to the passenger side of the car".( Letter from Warren Woodward)

A (not so) small victory in California: Ordinary citizens have successfully challenged the police on two issues: 1. The right of citizens to video record traffic stops by police and 2. The right of citizens to wear motorcyle helmets of their choice (but not yet not to wear helmets). For the full story, click on this link: Folsom. For a related video, see California Motorcycle Helmet Stop further down on this page.

Pennsylvania: SB1220 would make Pennsylvania's seatbelt law primary up to 18 years of age. The bill sets a fine of $10 for a violation. This "gradualism" at work. If this bill passes they will come back next year and try to raise the fine and the age. The bill also sets a fine of $100 for failure to strap a child into a death-trap seat. No word on how much NHTSA offered Pennsylvania to pass this bill. Introduced 2/1/2010 and sent to the transportaton committee.

Virginia: SB 219. An amendment in the nature of a substitute was reported out by the senate transportation committee on 1/28/2010. All this does, basically, is to raise the age below which a person is considered a child, for the purposes of the seatbelt requirement, from 17 to 19. However, it retains the secondary enforcement provision. Passed by the senate on 2/3/2010 by 39 to 1. A motion to reconsider passed by 40 to 0. The vote was then retaken and the bill once again passed by 39 to 1. Sent House  on 2/8/2010 and referred to the Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety.

Rhode Island: Rhode Island has joined the states introducing a bill or resolution asserting state sovereignty against the federal government. H 7030 states, in part,

RESOLVED, That this House of Representatives hereby respectfully requests the  President and Congress of the United States to refrain from enacting or imposing any law or  regulation that is beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers or that would  diminish the rights of the people of Rhode Island to govern themselves as a free, sovereign, and  independent state;

For the full text, visit:

http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/billtext10/housetext10/h7030.pdf

This bill was considered by the House Corporations Committee on 1/19/2010 and "held for further study" which, in Rhode Island, usually means the bill is dead.

Idaho tells NHTSA to go to hell: Representative Barrett tells us how NHTSA called her up and threatened to withhold $2,000,000 dollars in federal highway funds if Idaho did not pass a motorcycle helmet law. The legislature refused and the feds sent Idaho the money anyway. The moral of this story is: If you stand up to the bastards they will back down.

Vermont: H.147, which was passed by the Vermont House last year, has been revived by senator Shumlin and assigned to the senate transportation committee of which senator Shumlin is a member. This bill would, among other things, make Vermont's seatbelt law primary. We fought this bill as hard as we could last year. The high point of the debate came when representative Rodgers introduced an amendment which would have made wearing a seatbelt illegal in Vermont. Unfortunately, the amendment failed, but it was nevertheless a notable first in this long war against madness. The House subsequently passed the bill, but it was not taken up by the senate. The bill is a classic production of the NHTSA lobbying machine, filled with false and misleading statements, made up statistics, and non sequiturs.

Vermont: The senate transportation committee is scheduled to hear testimony on January 27, 2010, on request number 10-0503, "An act to prohibit texting while operating a motor vehicle". No bill number yet. Numerous other bills have been introduced in Vermont to prohibit texting, cell phone use and "distracted driving" while operating a motor vehicle. All this is due to lobbying by the insurance industry who have, apparently, completely flipped their lids. It's just too bad that they are able to drag state legislatures down into the well of insanity with them.

Missouri: The following bill has been introduced in Missouri:

Atwater vs. Lago Vista: In all the long history of seatbelt litigation, perhaps no case is more important than the case of Atwater vs. Lago Vista
(532 US 318 (2001)). In l997, a gentle lady, Mrs. Gail Atwater, driving her kids home from soccer practice, was arrested for not wearing a seatbelt and subjected to verbal and physical abuse by the police. Neither before, nor after her arrest, did Mrs. Atwater do anything to bring this on, only asking the officer politely to please lower his voice as he was screaming at her, as he was frightening the children. You can find the full story by clicking on this link: LagoVista
    After four years of appeals and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, Mrs. Atwater's case reached the United States Supreme Court, which ruled against her 5 to 4 in a split decision. The majority opinion was written by Justice David Souter, who is, mercifully, no longer on the court. The minority, dissenting  opinion was written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who has also retired. Justices Stevens, Ginsberg, and Breyer, all of whom are still on the court, joined Justice O'Connor in dissenting. In writing for the majority, Justice Souter not only ruled against Mrs. Atwater, he basically spit in her face. We would urge everyone who is interested in this issue, and who thinks they can obtain justice in the courts, to read Justice Souter's opinion. You don't have to read all of it. It's all in the same vein so after a few pages you pretty much get the idea. We know it's hard going, we know it will make you sick,   but it's a real eye opener and well worth the effort. You can find it at

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/boundvolumes.htm/532bv.pdf

The case starts on page 416 and Justice Souter's opinion starts on page 421.

Police lie about ejections, again: June 24, 2008. CBS News: "A U.S. Postal Service Worker was killed in a crash Tuesday in a crash involving her postal service truck and another vehicle.... Maria F. Gutierrez...died at the scene....Los Angeles police officer...said Guttierez was ejected from the truck...(U.S. Postal Service spokesman Larry Dozier) insisted she was not thrown from the truck.

Same old story: February 1, 2008: "Man, 22, killed in expressway rollover crash...Joshua Eugene Fuller was pronounced dead at the scene of the crash...failed to negociate a curve and lost control....Fuller was wearing a seatbelt, according to the Riverside County Coroner's Office". Note: if Fuller had not been wearing a seatbelt, he might have lived.

No seatbelt saved Tiger Woods: According to an Associated Press report out of Orlando, Florida, Woods smashed into a tree at 30 mph. Woods was not wearing a seatbelt and was not seriously hurt. Had he been wearing a seatbelt he would almost certainly have been seriously injured or killed (see Corzine accident and Puzzle no. 1 below).

Same old story, again: CBS News, 2008 (note: we are trying to get an exact date for this one) "Man, 23, killed in rollover crash... single vehicle rollover-crash...driving at 80mph to 90 mph...according to (CHP Police Officer) Low, who said the victim was wearing a seatbelt".  Note: This is a typical rollover fatality. Single vehicle accident, excessive speed, reckless driving. Type of vehicle not specified but probably an SUV.

Mandate alert: It looks as though the NHTSA mandate to put automatic stabilization systems on all new cars by 2011 still stands. In addition to driving up the price of new cars, these devices represent a clear and present danger because if they malfunction, as some of them will, they can throw a car out of control and cause a serious accident. These devices are advertised as preventing roll-overs, but we know from the government's own data that roll-overs happen mainly to drivers driving vans and SUVs in a reckless manner. There can, therefore, be no justification for forcing these devices on the entire motoring public.
   
    New video: They say California is the future. Take a look at what the future looks like if we don't stop them:

California motorcycle helmet stop

Note: We edited this video to show only a small part of the stop. The "criminal" was actually detained for about a half hour. The arresting officer obviously thought that anyone who would wear a motorcycle helmet which did not, in his opinion, conform to California state law, must be a dangerous criminal, and so he called for backup. The backup officer made his contribution to the proceedings by glaring at the offender in a hostile and threatening manner while the first officer was filling out the paper work, taking photographs, and going through all the other lengthy procedures necessitated by such a serious crime.

The police are doing this because the California state legislature passed a motorcycle helmet law. The reason they passed this law was because they received massive bribes (federal grants) from NHTSA for doing so. NHTSA did this because they were ordered to do it by congress. Congress ordered them to do it because they received massive bribes (campaign contributions) from the insurance industy. The reason they did it in this roundabout way was because they hoped we wouldn't be able to trace it back to them. Otherwise they could just have passed a federal motorcycle helmet law.

The police state at work. If you don't know what "primary seatbelt law" means, take a look at this video. (Remember, if you get in an accident wearing a seatbelt, your seatbelt can kill you).

Congress passes H.R. 3288. In an extraordinary Sunday session, the United States Senate  passed H. R. 3288, the omnibus appropriation bill for fiscal 2010.  This is the biggest pork barrel bill in all of recorded history. We are trying to get a clarification because some of the appropriations, specifically those relating to 23 USC 402, 405 and 406 were not authorized.  It probably won't make much difference because in the atmosphere of total cynicism and corruption which prevails in Washington today, no senator is likely to object on a legal technicality and thus delay getting billions of dollars of pork barrel money.

Specifically, the bill appropriates $235,000,000 for 23 USC 402, $25,000,000 for 23 USC 405 and $124,500,000 for 23 USC 406. In addition , it appropriates $29,000,000 for "high visibility enforcement" (police harassment) and $7,000,000 for "Anton's Law". NHTSA will use this money in January to bribe states to force motorists to wear seatbelts and strap their kids into death-trap seats. Many will die as a result.

H.R. 3288 was expanded from merely including HUD and DOT to including all agencies and departments for which money for fiscal 2010 has not yet been appropriated.  The conference report made no change in the money appropriated for 23 USC 402, 405 and 406. Thus. while Americans, especially women and children, continue to die in the most horrible ways as a result of government interference in highway safety,   congress continues to appropriate money to fund this interference. We are, basically, being ruled by a gang of murderers.

For the legislative background on this bill go to leg2009

Congressional interference in highway safety has now cost the lives of around 40,000 Americans. Because of bureaucratic lies, cover-up, fraud and deceit, the exact number will never be known. But that the number is large is not in doubt. This is what happens when legislators think that we the people are children and they are our parents. Politicians are not necessarily smarter than the rest of us. A little humility will go a long way toward preventing this kind of thing in the future.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your congress at work:  The United States senate banking subcommittee is held a hearing on public transportation safety. (Why is the banking subcommittte holding a hearing on transportation safety?) Only four senators were present: Menendez, Warner, Reed and Vitter. Only one, senator Vitter, is a republican. (Senator Dodd came in later).The principal witness was Ray LaHood, the present Secretary of Transportation.  In their opening remarks, the democratic senators dwelt on how much they love Ray LaHood, how they'd all served in the House together, and how they're all old pals. It didn't take long to figure out what was going on here.  LaHood has sent a bill to the congress to increase his money and power, specifically by increasing federal authority over "public transportation safety", including both railroads and public transit. It seems that this authority is now limited by statute (what a shame) and Mr. LaHood was incensed by this limitation on his authority and wants it removed. He also wants lots more money for federal grants (which he would have the power to give or withhold).  All the democratic senators shared Mr. LaHood's outrage over this limitation of the authority of the federal government.
We cannot honestly say that this hearing set a new high (or low) for nauseating hypocrisy. The existing standard for this critereon would be hard to beat.  But clearly, these people have got to go. If you have a strong stomach and have the time, visit www.cspan.org and listen to this hearing.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While congress continues to appropriate money to force Americans to wear seatbelts, Americans continue to be killed by seatbelts.

School bus accident: Idaho Statesman, September 24, 2009. "...On Wednesday,  the 17 year old senior (Heckathorn) died when his pickup truck hit a school bus head-on....Police chief said   neither the bus driver nor any of the...kids on the school bus were hurt...It does not appear that excessive speed was a factor...ISP Captain Steve Richardson said...Heckathorn was wearing a seatbelt and his airbag deployed, according to ISP (Idaho State Police) reports". Note: As usual, the report does not say what the cause of death was. Heckathorn could only have been killed by one of three things: The seatbelt, the air bag, or being crushed to death as the truck was stove in. Because of the great difference in momentum between the school bus and the pickup truck,  the rate of deceleration of the bus would have been much less than that of the truck, crushing the truck and even pushing it backward (or aside), depending on the speed of the two vehicles, which is not specified. Needless to say, none of the kids on the bus were wearing seatbelts, since there weren't any.  If the bus driver was wearing a seatbelt, we're willing to bet you he has a tummy ache, at the very least. For the full story, visit

http://www.idahostatesman.com/newsupdates/story/910823.html

Seatbelts kill: NewsOK, the Oklahoman, and KXII Channel 12 News Oklahoma, November 10, 2009. Dale Bannister, 73 was fatally injured when his car, a 2008 Chrysler, went off the road, struck a guard rail, rolled over twice and hit a bridge support. Bannister was wearing a seatbelt. Note: If the car rolled over twice, Bannister must have been travelling at a high rate of speed when his car left the road. He would have been fatally injured when the roof caved in, crushing his skull and breaking his neck. The seatbelt would have acted like an anvil, holding his body in place as the roof caved in.

Seatbelts kill: (from myspace death.com, November 14, 2009) "Police suspect (that Carey) fell asleep at the wheel on October 21, 2009, causing him to overturn the Jeep Wrangler (he was driving). The belted (Sean K.) Carey died  at the scene as a result of his injuries, according to Idaho State Police". (Carey was killed when the jeep fell on top of him, crushing him to death. If he had not been wearing a seatbelt he would have been thrown clear and would almost certainly have survived.)

http://www.mydeathspace.com/.../Sean_Carey_(19)_fell_asleep_at_the_wheel_of_his_Jeep,_causing_it_to_overturn

Seatbelts kill: (from the Del Valle News (Texas), October 21, 2009) "Edwin Aviles....failed to yield to a Chevy van....the van struck Aviles...who was pronounced dead at the scene. (Aviles) was wearing a seatbelt, DPS officials said. The driver of the van was not injured." (If the driver of the van had been wearing a seatbelt, you may be sure that the police would have said so, and he would have been seriously injured.)

Seatbelts kill: (from Richmond Times Dispatch, October 26, 2009) Jeronimo Mendez, drunk and speeding, crashed into a sign and was killed. Medez was wearing a seatbelt, police said. For the full story, visit

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/site_elements/tags/tag/virginia+state+police

Ejections save lives: (from NewsOK, The Oklahoman, November 10, 2009). Nicole Venegas was driving her pickup truck down the street at a high rate of speed when she struck a group of parked cars. The truck became airborne, flipped over, and landed on its top. Four of the five occupants were thrown out (they were probably riding on the bed of the truck) and survived, but Venegas remained in the truck and was killed (No doubt she was crushed to death when the roof caved in). The survivors were taken to a local hospital and treated (which sounds as though their injuries were not serious). For the full story, visit

http://newsok.com/separate-wrecks-claim-4-in-oklahoma/article/3416083?custom_click=pod_headline_northeast-oklahoma-news#ixzz0XYGA9ILG

Collision in South Dakota: A Toyota pickup truck driven by Richard Chell collided with a Jeep Cherokee driven  by Nicholas Helgeson. Helgeson was uninjured, Chell was killed. Guess which one was wearing a seatbelt. That's right, Chell, who was killed, was wearing a seatbelt. Helgeson, who was uninjured, was not.  For the full story, visit

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_4eaf5f64-cbe2-11de-a3de-001cc4c002e0.html

Head-on collision in Minnesota: In one car the driver was wearing a seatbelt and a small child was strapped into a booster seat. In the other car neither of the two occupants were wearing seatbelts. Guess who died and who survived. That's right - the driver wearing the seatbelt and the child in the booster seat were killed. The two men who were not wearing seatbelts survived. Police claim that one of the two survivors was "ejected" and taken to the hospital "in critical condition". The other suffered only minor injuries. We are always suspicious of police claims of "ejection". We've seen too many that turned out to be false. For the full story, visit

http://www.startribune.com/local/69533172.html

Boise mother backs over toddler: (Boise TV 2 news flash, November 4). No, this isn't last week's. This is a new one. That's the second one in as many weeks, that we know about, both likely the result of the mother's visibility being blocked by the government mandated head-rests.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mother backs over toddler (ABC news headline). You have to wonder how many others have been run over because the driver's vision was blocked by the government mandated headrests. The trouble with the people who write these mandates is that they are just plain stupid. They don't stop to think.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Crushed to death

Burned to death - trapped by their seatbelts and booster seats

This accident took place on the Taconic State Parkway on Long Island, New York, On July 26, 2009.

    As you may recall. "highway traffic safety grants" is a euphemism for bribes paid to states to force their citizens to use seatbelts, booster seats and motorcycle helmets, as demanded by the insurance industry. It's rather interesting that they no longer mention air bags.  Apparently, after air bags had killed hundreds, and probably thousands, of motorists, it finally dawned on them that air bags are not a good idea. Since seatbelts have killed more people than air bags, one has to wonder why they have not given up on seatbelts as well.

    To read the legislation, visit http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/b_three_sections_with_teasers/active_leg_page.htm and click on H.R. 3288.

    To see how much the insurance industry is paying members of congress, visit http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F09

The entire United States Congress is in the pay of the insurance industry. It now looks as though all of these so-called "safety laws" (bicycle helmet laws, motorcycle helmet laws, "personal floation device laws", booster seat laws, seatbelt laws, air bag laws, etc.) are there because the insurance industry  bribed the members of congress, which in turn bribed state and local government with our tax money. It is a staggering display of arrogance and ignorance. 

When the Congress of the United States  forces the American people to spend more than $60 billion dollars on seatbelts, airbags, booster seats, and other crackpot inventions, plus fines and bribes, and puts their lives at risk, because the insurance industry is under the illusion that this will save them (the insurance industry) a few dollars, that is simply not acceptable.

To see who is behind this, check out www.iihs.org. IIHS is run by Adrian Lund, a social psychologist with no technical training, who has, apparently, fallen for every crackpot scheme ever put out by NHTSA.

Hearings: On May 18, the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee of the House of Representatives held a hearing to justify the inclusion of the auto "safety" clauses of the expiring SAFETEALU bill in the new one. Unless they are stopped, the same murderous lies will be included in the new bill and thousands more will die. For a list of the members, visit http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=160&Itemid=61 Write to Chairman Waxman or the members of the committee,  if any of them are in your state, and ask them to repeal 23 USC 405 and 406, and take seatbelts out of 23 USC 402.
To read the testimony presented at this hearing, visit:

http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1624:energy-and-commerce-subcommittee-hearing-on-auto-safety-current-mandates-and-emerging-issues&catid=122:media-advisories&Itemid=55

This testimony is going to be used to try to extend legislation which has caused the death of thousands of Americans and will kill thousands more if it is not stopped.  All of the witnesses basically regurgitated the same tired old falsehoods being peddled by NHTSA. All of the witnesses belonged the establishment which is trying to preserve the status quo. It was particularly disappointing that the committee gave a platform to Jeffrey Runge and Joan Claybrook, both of whom have repeatedly made false statements under oath, and, by their advocacy of seatbelts,  share in the responsibility for the deaths of thousands of Americans. They continued to make false statements under oath at this hearing. Particulary disturbing was the testimony of one Robert Strassburger who, supposedly has a degree in Mechanical Engineering. If Mr. Strassburger is a competent Mechanical Engineer, then he must have known that some of the statements he was making were false. That would make his testimony perjury and subject him to five years in jail. 
It is a pity that the committee did not give a platform to opposing points of view, given what is at stake. For our  reaction to this testimony, see our Response.

The Subcommittee on Highways held a hearing last summer on this matter which you can watch by clicking on the link on the committee web site.

http://transportation.house.gov/hearings/hearingDetail.aspx?NewsID=702

The hearing lasted about two hours and it is enough to make your blood run cold. None of the participants, neither the members nor the witnessess, had the vaguest idea what they were talking about, yet all spoke as if they were great experts, and all took for granted that they had a right and an obligation to use  police and propaganda to force their ill informed opinions on the public. The testimony of Mr. Poits, the NHTSA representative, was absolutely staggering in its falsity and mendacity. We urge you to watch this hearing, even though it will turn your stomach. Take a shot of whiskey before you watch it, and keep a bucket handy in case you have to throw up.

Insurance companies responsible for seatbelt coercion? It now seems that it is the auto insurance companies who are behind the campaign to force motorists to wear seatbelts. They apparently believe that if they can force everyone to wear a seatbelt it will save them money. They got this silly idea from IIHS, who got it from NHTSA, who got it from Congress, who got it from Joan Claybrook, who probably got it from the same guy who thought Corvairs were prone to roll over. 

It might be a good idea if everyone wrote to their insurance company at this time and asked them to stop promoting seatbelt coercion. Here are the addresses of the principal auto insurance companies:

Seatbelts, anyone? New Haven Register, June 16, 2009. "... David Servin died at the scene and Krakowski...died a short time later after being extricated from the car. ....The car was so badly crushed we thought it was a hatchback of some kind...The way the car was mangled, that police car had to be going really fast" (The victims were hit by a police car).

Seatbelts, anyone? The Guardian, UK, July 1, 2009: "Girl, 14, rescued after plane crash...only survivor...told her father how she was thrown clear...(only injuries were) a fractured collarbone and cuts and bruises to her face"

More seatbelt fatalities:

New Haven Register, June 16, 2009. "(17 month old) Montez Turner, Jr. died in the crash when the Ford Escape in which he was riding flipped over" This child almost certainly died because it was strapped  into a booster seat. You may be sure that if the child had not been in a booster seat, the police would have mentioned it. The booster seat elevates the child and holds it in place, thus guaranteeing that the child will be crushed to death when the roof caves in. (For further information on what booster seats do to children in roll-overs, see puzzles 2 and 3 below).

Tulsa World, June 9, 2009:   "....Salter died in a one vehicle collision...when his 2002 Freightliner left the road...and struck a tree. Salter was wearing a seatbelt (state troopers) said". Note: A Freightliner is a big truck. We don't have enough crush data on big trucks to know if Salter was crushed to death or killed by his seatbelt. If he was not crushed to death, he was almost certainly killed by his seatbelt. If he was going 40 mph or less when he hit, he would most likely have survived, had he not been wearing a seatbelt.

Colusa County Sun Herald, June 10, 2009: "Diego Valdez was killed...when his l991 Dodge drifted off the road and struck a tree...(CHP Officer) Owens said... Valdez was wearing a seatbelt and shoulder harness, he collided head on with a tree at an unknown speed, sustaining fatal injuries as a result of the impact". Based on our research, if Valdez was going over 45 mph when he hit the tree, he would have been crushed to death. If he was going under 45 mph he would have been killed by his seatbelt. If he was going 40 mph or less when he hit, he would most likely have survived, had he not been wearing a seatbelt.

Las Vegas Review Journal, January 25, 2009: "...Gonzalez was killed in a single vehicle, roll-over accident...the accident report stated that the left half of the Explorer's roof was crushed inward and the entire roof was buckled and bowed. Gonzalez seatbelt was found partially extended. Gonzalez, who sustained head injuries, died of blunt force trauma". It's the old story - classic rollover - head bashed in when the roof collapsed; seatbelt prevented her from taking evasive action. In this case "seatbelt partially extended"  may indicate that she was trying to avoid the blow. It's a wonder she was able to extend it at all - the seatbelt would have locked in the roll-over. But people have great strength in desperate situations. Had she not been wearing a seatbelt, she would most likely have survived. Her family are suing the Ford Motor Company because the seatbelt didn't save her, "among other things"!

The NHTSA lobbying machine at work. The following excepts are from the results of a Pro-Quest search:

1."Marchetti Memorial Foundation Urges Florida Media to Help as State Legislature Considers Life-Saving Seatbelt Law Changes. Anonymous, U.S. Newswire, Washington, April 24. NHTSA research shows that...." Notice that this press release, which was, supposedly put out by a grieving family in Florida, was actually written by "Anonymous" and released over something claiming to be "U.S. Newswire" in Washington, D.C. Notice that the first word of the press release is "NHTSA".

2. "Marchetti Memorial Foundation Urges Florida Media to Help, as State Legislature Considers Life-Saving Changes. Anonymous, PR Newswire, New York. Copyright PR Newswire Association LLC, April 24, 2009. Tampa, Fla., April 24 /PRNewswire/ Tampa, Fla. - The Katie Marchetti Memorial Foundation is urging news media across the state to lend their editorial support to help pass important changes to Florida's existing safety belt law to save lives and reduce highway injuries. FAILURE OF THE STATE'S LEGISLATORS TO PASS SUCH  LIFE-SAVING MEASURES BY JUNE 30 WILL DEPRIVE FLORIDIANS OF $35.5 MILLION IN FEDERAL FUNDS FOR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS"
The statement pretty much speaks for itself. Notice that this one, also written by "Anonymous", was released by something claiming to be "PR Newswire" out of New York.

It is simply too nauseating for words. Exploiting the grief of the Marchetti family (assuming they are genuine) to force this blood-soaked scam on the people of Florida.  It is NHTSA which is responsible for this.

The story  in the Orlando Sentinel of May 4, 2009 quoted one Eric Bolton, said to be a spokesman for NHTSA. The falsehoods which Eric Bolton fed to the Sentinel are absolutely breathtaking. ("Seatbelts are the most important safety feature....reduce risk to front seat occupants by 45%....etc.,etc.) It is the classic Big Lie technique of Adolf Hitler, except that it is very difficult to prove in a court of law what a person knew and when he knew it.  So we have to call them falsehoods rather than lies.

Today's amusement for engineers: Visiting the "safety" page of the "Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers"  we are told that they have now decided to put "force limiters" on seatbelts. We know it isn't really funny, but you may as well laugh as cry.

Puzzle A car smashes perpendicularly into a concrete wall at 30 mph. We've never actually seen such an accident but since NHTSA seems to base almost all its design criteria on this scenario, we thought we would use it. A passenger in the vehicle, weighing 150 pounds and restrained by a seatbelt, comes to a stop in one foot. (This is based on NHTSA crash test videos which show about a foot of crush at the front of the vehicle). What would be the force of the seatbelt on the passenger?
Since NHTSA is now pushing "Anton's Law" requiring children up to 8 years old to be placed in booster seats, we offer you an alernative. Instead of an adult passenger, assume it is a child weighing 60 pounds in a booster seat which comes to a stop in one foot. What would be the force of the restraining  straps on the child?

Puzzle answers: The force on the 150 pound passenger would be 4,509 pounds.  The force on the 60 pound child would be 1,804 pounds.  We have posted the solution so you can check the answers for yourself.

Puzzle Answers:

For the complete report on the solution to the puzzle below, click on puzzle2.html or puzzle2.pdf

Puzzle contest: In our previous puzzle, we showed what the booster seat straps would do to a child in a head-on collision. What would the booster seat straps do to a child in a roll-over? In their analysis of a roll-over accident, Yamaguchi, et. al.*, find an angular velocity of 4.89 radians per second when the roof edge strikes the ground after the vehicle has rotated  over 90 degrees. Assuming a typical four-year-old (Anton) in a booster seat in the vehicle, with what force would the child's neck be driven into the edge of the shoulder belt?
*Yamaguchi, G.T., et. al., "Development of a Computational Method to Predict Occupant Motions  and Neck Loads During Rollovers" SAE Technical Paper Series, 2005-01-0300; Biomechanics 2005 (SP-1929); Presented at the SAE 2005 World Congress, Detroit, Michigan, April 11-14, 2005.

Note to those who want to use the police to force seatbelts on the American people. If you dont know the answer to this puzzle, maybe you shouldn't be pontificating about seatbelts.

Puzzle No. 3: It takes a high degree of centrifugal force to cause a 4,000 pound SUV to roll over. If a vehicle occupant, such as a child in a booster seat, is tied to the vehicle, then that occupant, too, would experience a high degree of centrifugal force. What would be the force on a child in a booster seat during the first 90 degrees of an SUV rollover?

Solution to Puzzle No. 3: The graph on the left shows the force on a child sitting on the inside of the rotation for rollovers at speeds ranging from 59 to 95 fps (40 to 65 mph). The discontinuity in the solution indicates a vault. The graph on the right shows the direction of the force in the transverse plane: omega is the angle in radians which the force makes with the perpendicular to the side of the car; a negative value indicates that the force component perpendicular to the seat is downward -i.e., towards the seat, and a positive value indicates that the force component is upward - that is, away from the seat and against the straps. Notice that when the force is highest,   just before vault, all the force is directed against the straps.

For the full report, click on one of the following links: puzzlesol3.pdf  puzzlesol3.htm    puzzlesol3.doc (Note: this is a 55 page report).

Legislative news: We have moved most of the 2009 legislative news to leg2009

Attention, activists: If your state does not have a primary seatbelt law, check your state budget bills. NHTSA is trying to get legislators to slip primary seatbelt laws into state budget bills, hoping they won't get noticed among all the pages of fine print, or, if they do get noticed, hoping that they won't get taken out. This is a rule violation in most states, since legislation is generally not allowed in appropriation bills.

Fatal car crash pictures. For years we had to do a lot of work to find pictures of fatal car crashes (see our picture gallery and the pictures further down on this page). No more. Now you can find scores of pictures of fatal car crashes on youtube, under such titles as "World's worst car crashes", "Super insane car crashes", "Deadly car crashes", Horrible car crashes", etc., etc.. Contrary to what the titles imply, this is what most fatal car crashes look like. The FARS data base tells us that that the average car involved in a fatal crash was travelling at 56 mph and the average car involved in a fatal head-on collision was travelling at 66 mph. Collisions at these speeds are enough to reduce most cars to scrap and to crush the occupants to death.

Seatbelts, anyone? This is the car in which Los Angeles pitcher Nick Adenhart was killed by a drunk driver on April 9, 2009 (FOX News photo).

Seatbelts = death: Fayetteville Observer, 3/19/09. "...Williams was driving... when his SUV plunged into the Lumber river. His two passengers drowned. ...(they) were wearing seatbelts and were unable to escape."

No seatbelts  = minor injuries: Boston Herald, 3/23/09. "...two car crash.... travelling in close proximity at a high rate of speed (drag racing)...lost control at the same time and crashed into several trees...Dias, in front seat (of one of the cars) was killed. Neither Brandon nor his two passengers (in the other car) were wearing seatbelts. All three were treated for minor injuries and released." (Note: They do not say if Dias was wearing a seatbelt which means he probably was).

No seatbelts = minor injuries: "Jane (Clark)...hit a lamp post with such force that she knocked it over and overturned her small car.....She ruined the car but crawled out with nothing more serious than some ugly bruises". From "Kenneth Clark" by Meryle Secrest, page 88. (The car she was driving, a Wolseley Hornet, was not equipped with seatbelts).

Seatbelts kill: Toronto Star, March 16, 2009: "Total Horror:  ...Police yesterday recovered the bodies of Carolyn Bray and Joeline Robinson from the lake...The pair were riding in a two seat utility vehicle... carrying Robinson's niece in the back.... Bray's cart hit a pressure crack in the ice and went under. Jeni Robinson managed to jumpoff the back but Bray and Joelin, belted in and unable to free themselves as they were swallowed up by the frigid water, disappeared under the ice."

Seatbelts worthless: San Francisco Chronicle, October 16, 2008. "... the vehicle veered off the road, crossed a 30 foot shoulder, hopped an 18 inch embankment, and tumbled down more than 600 feet in darkness....The next morning rescuers found the three men, their seatbelts fastened, inside the vehicle. They were dead. The Jeep (Cherokee) was "rolled up to a ball" (Officer) Covello said. The cause of death for all three was blunt force trauma. An unsafe speed for conditions was a likely factor in the incident, (Officer) Covello said."

Seatbelts worthless: Daily Press (Virginia), December 30, 2008. "Owen Walter Carter.....driving a 2002 Chevrolet...ran off the road and struck a tree. (Police Sgt.) Cotten said Carter died at the scene. He was wearing a seatbelt".

Seatbelts?: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, March 22, 2008: "Two men were killed in a violent crash on Route 22...State police...said...Charles Maines...was driving "in a careless an unattentive manner". He lost control of his car...crossed over into oncoming traffic, striking a...minivan driven by Gerald A Wilson...Both men were trapped in their vehicles and (their bodies) had to be extricated by hydraulic equipment."

Ejected?: Western Morning News, Plymouth (UK) October 18, 2008. "Andrew Kelly received fatal injuries when his car and two others were in a collision...Emergency services battled for nearly two hours to free Mr. Kelly from the car". (Note: If he'd been "ejected" he might have lived.)

These are not exceptional cases. This is how most fatal automobile accidents happen.

Congressional appropriations to promote the seatbelt scam. Congress  passed HR 1105, the omnibus appropriaton bill for fiscal 2009. This bill  contains the following provisions:

"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:

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. For the details on the lies, fraud and deceit which was used to get this bill through, see leg2009.htm

Kansas: SB 59, the primary seatbelt law bill, is now officially dead.  For details on how the seatbelt scammers attempted to get this bill through, see leg2009.htm

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.

For more on the sordid story of this bill, visit leg2009.htm

Note: With the principal legislative season in the states now over, we have now moved most of the 2009 legislative news into a separate web page.   Visit  leg2009.htm

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).

 

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.

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.

For a brief bio of  Patty Murray and her "qualifications", visit www.safetychoice.org/earlier_news.htm

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.

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 currently headed by  Acting Administrator David Kelly. Mr. Kelly was formerly director of  the so-called  "Seatbelt and Air Bag Campaign of the National Safety Council", one of the many phony front organizations created by NHTSA to promote the seatbelt and air bag scams.
CPSC is headed by Inez Tenebaum a lawyer 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.

See how and why NHTSA gets states to pass primary and other seatbelt laws

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.

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:

House Committee Report: Section on Highway Traffic Safety Grants.
Senate Committee Report: Highway Safety Programs
Senate Committee Report: Highway Traffic Safety Grants
HR5576 as introduced in the Senate: Highway Traffic Safety Grants
Senate Committee Report: History and description of NHTSA

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)

 

                                                                                 (earlier news)