Simple suggestion...

[nowalmart]

Too often we read articles about car crashes. Two cars crash into each other. One driver walks away, the other is hanging on by a thread to life. The difference? The driver who walked away was wearing his/her seatbelt

Comments

If there is a greater chance for survival..

[ariel72]

with a belt than without.. and i know a few people that say they would not have survived having it on.. I say have it on.

Watch Corzine be the posterboy for safety once he gets the feeding tube out and recovers. Cause if the gov can break the state law.. well.. what is NJ state law anyway?

State troopers, NJ_AISC, Wipers with lights, Car seats til age 8.. HOV lanes, traffic circles.. NJ and you.. Free to get in, Pay to get out!

-EBG

Re: If there is a greater chance for survival..

[nowalmart]

and i know a few people that say they would not have survived having it on

Yeah, I have heard that argument before too. I think that if I were in an accident where NOT wearing a seatbelt saved my life, I would wear one from then on. I have to imagine the chances of that happening are a million to one, so if it happens once, I would never risk it again.

Here are some of the great statistics: In 2006, New Jersey ranked eighth best in terms of cars where the driver and anyone in the front passenger seat were wearing seatbelts, at 90%. In 2005, though, 46% of all traffic fatalities involved people who were not wearing their seatbelts.

That means that almost half of the fatalities came from the 1 in 10 people who were not wearing their seatbelt.