Originally Posted by Vulcanrules
It is reminiscent of a kid i knew who loved to proclaim that wearing a seatbelt in a car isnt safe because he knew someone who might have survived a crash if they had been thrown from the car. Mostly he just wanted attention and to demonstrate via his outlandish claim that he was therefore "an independent thinker". Others recoiling only seemed to support his sense of how wisely independent he was.
I hear that all the time too. He's not wrong, technically, sort-of. People have died due to injuries caused by a seatbelt (though, I'd venture to say that any impact so great it could cause your seatbelt to kill you, would have been more than enough to kill you without it). People have also run off of bridges, been trapped in the water, and because of panic, unable to get their seatbelt off and drowned. HOWEVER, a whole lot more people have avoided death by wearing it. We know from numerous studies, some basic logic and understanding of what happens in an accident, AND many many statistical understandings, that you are more likely to survive with a seatbelt ON. Again, if you don't wanna wear it that's none of my business, but don't tell me you are doing it for SAFETY. That's just an excuse people use because they want to justify it!
Statistics can be manipulated, but I don't think any of these statistics are an out-and-out lie. Unemployment is an oft manipulated statistic because of how it's recorded. For example, after two years of being out of work, you are no longer unemployed. A person being laid off of a $50,000 a year factory job who then finds work for $12,000 a year part time, is no longer unemployed. Sometimes we can get a false sense of what's going on thanks to those statistics. That's why it's important to look at EXACTLY what is going on. What EXACTLY is being recorded.
People always throw out anecdotal stuff to somehow debunk years of studies. I met a guy once who claimed NOT wearing a helmet saved his life. He wrecked, and he slid into a lawn mower deck in a guys yard face first and broke his jaw in several places and knocked out most of his teeth. He figured that his bones 'breaking' lessened the impact, whereas if he had a helmet on, it would have snapped his neck from the impact. What he evidently wasn't aware of, is A) There really aren't recorded cases of neck injuries caused by a helmet. and B) That's how a helmet works! If he had a full face on, then the chin bar would flex with the rest of the helmet to dull the impact, and the internal liners would crush. If he had a 3/4 or half helmet, then, it would have been the same outcome!