The design of the buses and cars are different. For the buses, their interior design is especial compared to cars and hard to install seat belts for the drivers and passengers. On the other hand, the buses only drive on the cities roads and the passengers won't spend much time on the buses, they often get off at a short distance, while for the cars' drivers and passengers, they will drive the car for a long time on the road, which means the chances of car accidents increase than buses, but the seat belts can ensure their safety to much degress. If you have a car, please tight the seat belts. All this just for safety.
Should? Are you stupid of what? There are seat belt laws in most of the world, and will *NO* be going away. If you want to know the truth, follow the money. Seat belts work. My family was belted in in the late '50's -- pappy was a cop and knew that seat belts saved injuries and lives. You are correct that you should be allow to kill yourself -- suicide is legal worldwide. However, the insurance companies know that seat belts save them BIG money. Since idiots like you don't care, the insurance companies bought state governments to pass seat belt laws. You will never see seat belt laws repealed because the Insurance Companies have more money than you, and seat belts will remain.
The earliest major study of seat belts was carried out in Sweden in the 1960s. Accident reports were collected by Volvo between the end of March 1965 and the end of March 1966. During the study 28,780 drivers, 8,731 front seat occupants, and 5,302 rear seat occupants were involved in accidents, 1,803 of which resulted in an injury to one or more of the occupants. Looking at non-fatal injuries among belted drivers, the rate of injuries was reduced by 57% at lower speeds and 48% at higher speeds compared to unbelted drivers. There were slightly higher reductions when comparing belted and unbelted occupants where seatbelts were found to have reduced the rate of injuries by 63% at lower speeds to 55% at higher speeds. Only one belted occupant was fatally injured in this study. The study also looked at injury due to ejection of the front seat occupant, which happened in 159 of the unbelted cases but in only one of the belted front seat occupants. Although it was difficult to confirm that ejection from the vehicle had caused some of the reported injuries amongst these occupants, the authors cautiously estimated that the risk of a fatal injury is increased by more than 10 times if an occupant is ejected from the vehicle. Choice is irrelevant in the face of such overwhelming evidence. Buses don't have seat belts because they travel less fast, are larger vehicles (and do not stop so abruptly) and the realities of operating a public service vehicle that by it's very nature involves passengers frequently boarding and alighting, make belt use less practical. Coaches - modern ones at least - which operate at higher speed and with less frequent stops, are indeed fitted with belts. But if you want your head spread all over your windshield like a water melon that been left out in the sun too long, go right ahead. We gotta flush the gene pool occasionally, just don't ask me - as a tax payer - to fund your medical expenses.
While I wear a seat belt (and a helmet when on a motorcycle) I am totally opposed to laws requiring their use. People should be free to make the choices that they consider correct for themselves, and we do not need a nanny state imposing rules on us. The main reason for seat belt laws is revenue enhancement (the government gets the money from tickets) not safety
The Police are tired of scraping body parts off of the road.
It is a law in cars because cars are much more dangerous. Buses don't need them because they are safer. It should not be a choice because, when you don't wear one, you're not just putting your own life in danger; you're also putting in danger the life savings of anyone who gets into a car accident with year and has to pay gigantic amounts of money because you got hurt even though it was your own fault for not wearing a seat belt.
No. Totally disagree. But, if you want to be a dumbass and not wear one, that's up to you. No one is stopping you.
1) I don't want to pay for the more expensive accident investigations they do for fatals, even if it's just some idiot who didn't want to wear a seatbelt. 2) Last time I was hit, (left rear quarter), the impact sent me fishtailing down the road. The seatbelt kept me behind the wheel, where I could do proper skid recovery, and stay in the roadway and off of the sidewalk. Other lives could have been at risk.
People are stupid NOT to wear them.
Because the mandatory wearing of seat belts has saved thousands of lives.
Seat belts will save your life
theyre just trying to save lives by nnaking seatbelt laws