Now that we (US) have adopted homeland security we may not get busted for dancing but they can watch, any time, any where. Welcome to 1984.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20021122/ap_on_re_eu/britain_dancing_ban&e=2&ncid=

Heh, I should move to the U.K since I like dancing. Maybe I'll get the women because I'd be a "rebel".

Where's Kevin Bacon when you need him?

-Zeke

Now that we (US) have adopted homeland security we may not get busted for dancing but they can watch, any time, any where. Welcome to 1984.

They're doing that in NYC too. Been doing that since Guliani and his anti nightclub/ anti porn crusade after he first took office. Bloombergs aproval ratings are in the toilet, so he's reviving it. No cabaret licence, no dancing. Thanks Rudy.

Thinking of dancing & NYC, anybody else going to the Burning Man east decompression tomorrow night in Brooklyn?

-Zeke

Thinking of dancing & NYC, anybody else going to the Burning Man east decompression tomorrow night in Brooklyn?

I didn't know that was this weekend. Maybe I'll go if I can talk the boyfriend into it, but he's done entirely too much to humor me lately, and he's leaving for the middle east soon.

10 Jay St., Brooklyn. Saturday.

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?country=US&address=10+Jay+St+&city=Brooklyn&state=NY

Details Here: http://www.sealspace.org/events/decom2002/decom02.html

-Zeke

The point at which something like this comes face to face with me is the point at which I start punching the local authorities in the face.

I recently heard about a seat-belt check waypoint on some highway somewhere. It was unmarked and everyone was getting nailed. It was so bad that the cops had a parking lot set up for people to wait for their tickets to be written.

Um, rounding people up for no reason and segregating them and subjecting them to punishment. Remind you of any square-mustache angry German man? Yes, I'd promptly tell the cop, "You have my F-ing plate number, write me the friggin ticket and mail it to me." Then, I'd drive off as fast as I was able.

FireFox31, I don't understand your analogy.
wearing a seatbelt is for safety, I for one am glad that it's compulsory here. Dancing in a bar is just a stupid licencing system.
Rhythimic swaying? Do you get booked for that if you've been at the bar too long? or if you've got parkinsons?

What a stupid law. Who are these anal types policing it too? do they have special training in detecting whether people are rythimically swaying, or just having tgrouble with the beer/gravity effect.

wearing a seatbelt is for safety, I for one am glad that it's compulsory here.

safety for who? me? Thanks but I think that I would rather decide what is 'safe' for me and what is not. Not the government deciding what I can and can't do with my own self. If I'm not harming anyone else by not wearing a seatbelt, then why should I not be allowed to decide if I want to wear one or not?

If I'm not harming anyone else by not wearing a seatbelt, then why should I not be allowed to decide if I want to wear one or not?

When you are involved in a car crash while not wearing your seatbelt, your injuries will likely be worse than if you had been wearing one. However, you are not the only one affected. Almost everybody in the country is. Hospital costs go up and everyone on your insurance plan (and other plans) have to pay for your injuries.

I am not trying to preach to you. I sometimes drive around without a belt on, but I'd say 80% I am wearing one.

Agreed. Though, I *always* wear my seatbelt, it just seems like common sense (which isn't all that common).

Also, they aren't just for restraint to decrease bodily harm, but also for confinement to the vehicle. A body being thrown out of a vehicle into on-coming traffic tends to cause accidents.

What about the passenger sitting behind you? If you wear your seatbelt, then they are also most likely to wear theirs, so you do have an effect on others' lives. Besides which, if they aren't wearing a seatbelt then they are going to be launched through your head with the weight of an elephant....Bye bye neck.

I always get surprised by people carying non-secured loads in the car. I've been carying a callapsable ladder in my hatchback and due to the stereo in the boot it has to go behind me. I always make sure that when it's in the car, it's secured by a seatbelt so that if someone runs in to me, it doesn't end up through my spine.
I do the same for my dog, as much for her protection.
I'm intrigued that people think that seatbelts are an imposition on their freedom.
I've seen a doco on car crashes. not waring seatbelts caused more injury to passengers and others (by exiting the vehicle) than not. Air bags caused even fewer.
Only in heavy impacts did having a seatbelt on not make any difference becuase intenal organs crashed into eachother and ruptured.

Side impact air bags also had a dramatic effect on the reduction of injuries for such accidents.

safety for who? me? Thanks but I think that I would rather decide what is 'safe' for me and what is not.

Very Massachusetts, man. What you need is a talk show host who can help the state's citizen's ignore important issues for the next 4-5 years and spend all of that time repealing the oppressive seat belt law!

wow, jeez everyone.

I never said I didn't wear my seatbelt. I always do. Always have, always will. It would be stupid not to.

I just said that I wasn't a big fan of the government telling me I should.

I was pulled over for speeding on the New Jersey Turnpike last year, and as the cop was coming up to my car, I dutifully turned off my car, took out my registration, and got my licence out of my wallet. Of course to get to my wallet I needed to unhook my seatbelt. When the officer walked up to my car he "could see that I wasn't wearing my seatbelt" I protested of course but he would have nothing of it. Thank you so much for protecting me and thanks for the additional $45 fine asshole.

Ok, I can see why that would piss your off. But just because the cop got it wrong doesn't mean the law isn't valid - I hope you fought (at least that part of) the ticket. People sometimes get falsely convicted of other crimes too, such as murder, but I don't think it'd be fair to argue that we shouldn't have laws against murder.

The sad reality is that too many people are just too stuck in their ways, sheep-like and ignorant of safety issues, to the point where laws are often the only way to change their behavior.


While the first seat belts were installed by automobile manufacturers in the 1950s, seat belt use was very low — only 10-15 percent nationwide — until the early 1980s. From 1984 through 1987, belt use increased from 14 percent to 42 percent as a result of the passage of seat belt use laws in 31 states. Then, from 1990 through 1992, belt use increased from 49 percent to 62 percent as a result of a national effort of highly visible enforcement and public education.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/airbags/presbelt/fullreport.html

Britain spent lots of money through the 70's pushing seatbelt safety - but it wasn't until the '80s, when it became law to wear seatbelts in the front seats that the number of deaths caused by unrestrained front seat occupants significantly decreased. And it still took a further law in the early '90s to get people to make their kids wear seatbelts.

I have a difficult time with the manner in which this country is continuing to wittle away our rights. I understand that wearing a seatbelt saves lives. I wear mine. However, it is clear that the mission of the government is not to protect our rights but to have access to every facet of our lives while giving the illusion of freedom. I love America, I am an American and proud of what it stands for, or used to stand for. Freedom, freedom of choice, freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, freedom to choose elected officials. Unfortunately I see many of these freedoms being removed or restricted,and its all for money. If the seatbelt law is right because it saves lives(which it does) why are motorcycles not illegal? Why is rock climbing not illegal? Why is smoking or alcohol not illegal? I would guess that more people die of smoking than of not wearing a seat belt? I think it is a matter of revenue for the state and federal governments more than anything. The taxation on tobacco and alcohol is big business. You can't tax the used of my seatbelt but you can sure fine against it's disuse. It's all about money. Power rules and money is power.

I have a difficult time with the manner in which this country is continuing to wittle away our rights.

I would submit that many people in this country spend a lot of time railing about the erosion of liberties that they perceive to be uniquely American but that many of those same people waste 95 percent of that energy on trivial issues like seat belt laws (which have a definite upside).

Reason #12 that i left Massachusetts was that political discourse at the time was dominated by a talk-radio host's noisy campaign to repeal the new seat belt law (the link I posted earlier to ithoughti). What a huge waste of time when so many other issues were being ignored.

My very, very imperfect adopted home state now has an $87 fine seatbelt law. It passed, so far as I could tell, without any considerable dissent. Do I now feel less free? No.

There *are* many small, slippery slope issues that concern me WRT corporate and government intrusion into my life. I refuse to shop at stores that require some sort of discount/tracking card. More and more I work to be an anonymous, cash customer.

In the end, though, the fact that we can devote significant mental energy to something like a seatbelt law when faced with a civil rights abomination like Ashcroft just reinforces how impotent the electorate is on important issues.

Doesn't there need to be some kind of proof for you to get prosecuted for something?

It's always interesting to get pulled over for speeding by a regular city policeman in the UK, because you know his speedo isn't calibrated, he has no video camera, there's only one of him and he can't touch you!

Rob

Doesn't there need to be some kind of proof for you to get prosecuted for something?

Here in the states, 99.9% of the time a court will side with the policeman over you, unless he blatantly screwed something up. I have heard a policeman in court give testimony that he "judged" the vehicle to be traveling at X speed, VISUALLY, and it was accepted as fact.

It sucks, but that's the way it is.

I have a hard time reconciling the 'right' to not wear a seatbelt against the right to be able to pick up a phone without Verizon then selling the call details to whoever they want. Or the right to receive an email without the senders ISP then selling my email address to the World (hotmail anyone??). Or the right to expect that a government (taxpayer) funded body can successfully regulate the entities involved in my retirement planning. Or the right to expect that my son will grow up in an environment where affordable healthcare and education is available to him.

There's big issues, and there's small issues. Seatbelt law is definately in the latter group.

I certainly don't disagree with you. There are large and small issues, and they are all about one thing.......money. There isn't a politician out there, at least one in a seat of power, that would place your kid or mine above their own personal agenda. I'm sure that there are politicians that start with lofty ideals, in fact I would suspect that most of them do. Those that keep those ideals are not politicians very long. There must be trade offs. An alliance here an agreement there. "Its all right I know those kids really needed that money for better education but if a propose it's use for the betterment of Big Business Brand X I will get the leverage I need and next year, watch out!" It's all about money and power.

OK that enough for me. I not really into politics. Such a migration from "Busted for Dancing" hehe. What a game of "telephone" I wonder if Verizon knows about it.

For real. How's a cop on a motorcycle gonna give me a $25 ticket for not wearing my damn seat belt???

Speaking of cops, I just got pulled over last night for my temp tag not showing, so I did I quick title search and in seconds I had the BAD BOYS theme from COPS playing. But he didn't seem to notice.

Hmm, most cops are older these days... Try the CHiPs theme next time.

While were on the subject of eroding rights, what's with all the damn licenses you have to get for everything.

If i wanna hunt, I gotta get a license.....if i wanna buy more than 5 vehicles in a year, I gotta get a license.....if I wanna carry a pistol in my jock, i gotta get a permit.....If I want to serve alcohol, I gotta get permit......if I wanna dance, I gotta get a license...If I wanna go fishing, I gotta get a permit.....next thing I know I'll have to apply for a $25 license to own a fucking mailbox, or I'll need to acquire a ball-scratching permit for when I get a rash. Fuck all this shit. It's just hidden taxation while at the same time controling the population's actions. Free country my ass....

Yeah, he was an older fella, but still, he should know his own theme song. They should play it for the trainees at the Police Academy or something.

Police Academy or something

Maybe they do play it all the time as musak in the college, which is why he didn't notice it when you played it.

"The curious incident of the dog in the nightime"
"The dog did nothing in the nightime"
"That was the curious incident"
, as Sherlock Holmes put it.

The whole topic of seatbelts and helmets within this thread is quite interesting. It could only be explained as a rant. The government does have an obligation to promote public safety, does it not? Your untimely death, for basically any reason, affects society. So its in the Government's best interest to keep you breathing... The idea that the government exists to give me the right to be stupid(by not wearing seat belts or helmets), is a misdefinition of liberty and its use.

Your untimely death, for basically any reason, affects society

I know that it's been said already, but your argument falls apart when you condider all the wonderfully dangerous things that the goverment lets us mortals get away with, like smoking and drinking and skydiving. If they were more interested in safety than revenue then all these things would be outlawed.

The government does restrict the first two of your examples. Smoking is restricted in certain areas and for certain ages, along with a Surgeon Generals label that basically calls you stupid for touching the things. Alcohol is in the same way restricted by age, the timing of purchase, and the consumption while doing other things(driving specifically). Your third example however I find simply wonderful. Skydiving is moderately dangerous, however the danger decreases with appropriate training and of course the use of a parachute. Driving is again moderately dangerous, however with training and a seatbelt it becomes at least less dangerous. I doubt that law explicitly states that all skydivers must use a parachute because its obvious, however too many people didn't understand that using a seatbelt should be just as obvious.

Secondly, the government spends far more cleaning up after alcohol and tobacco than it ever makes on taxing them. Of course this also heavily leans on the "they" argument. Who exactly is making all this money? The "government" is a wonderfully faceless organization on which to blame this deliciously evil conspiracy, but it falls apart at the requirement of names of people that would even somewhat prosper from the budgetary theory being espoused here.

The "government" is a wonderfully faceless organization on which to blame this deliciously evil conspiracy, but it falls apart at the requirement of names of people that would even somewhat prosper from the budgetary theory being espoused here.

The military-industrial complex, of course.

(I think.)

I think that the frequencies at which these activities are performed is a big factor too. I'd imagine that if 50% of the population were skydiving twice daily then there would be lots more legal regulation regarding skydiving.

I hope you understand that the skydiving thing was meant in jest...

I'm just saying that life involves many risks, everyday. Most people are stupid and I agree, need to be protected from themselves. However, I would rather that they were not, and maybe we could get rid of a few.

I was pulled over for speeding on the New Jersey Turnpike last year

Well that explains it. New Jersey is notorious for pulling people over for the money. It's how a lot of local townships get their income. It's fantastic. The township I drive through to work has a cop in EVERY parking lot on the highway. I wish I was over exaggerating. And if they pull you over, it's guaranteed that you're getting a ticket. If you're lucky, you can talk them into a seat belt ticket so you don't get the points on your license. They also profile a lot. They pull over my friend at least once a month. And they don't even give him a reason. Just pulled over, check him out, then drive away. I need to get out of here...

I was pulled over for speeding on the New Jersey Turnpike last year


I doubt they pulled anyone over for speeding on the NJTP yesterday... I decided to get off and take the far more scenic I287, which was reasonably empty of traffic.