|
ANSWERS TO FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
2007 Legislative Session Senate Bill 42: Standardizing Nevada's Seat Belt Law, NRS 484.641
1. Isn’t it my personal right to choose to wear a seat belt?
a. Mandatory wearing of a seat belt is already Nevada law. SB 42 would simply make it like all other standard enforcement traffic laws.
b. You can be pulled over for having a broken tail light; why not make the seat belt law standard and equal to all other traffic laws?
2. Why wear a belt at all?
a. You are 45% more likely to survive a crash if you’re wearing a belt.
b. If you’re using a belt, but another passenger is not, you’re 20% more likely to die in the crash from the other person hitting you.
c. Costs for crashes of unbuckled people are 55% higher than for seat belt users.
d. Society pays for your choice to not wear a seat belt: unemployment to survivors, Social Security to widows, widowers, and orphans, increased auto and health insurance costs, legal costs, lost production, and medical costs. If you are involved in a crash, about 85% of the costs are borne by society.
e. Your choices affect others, including loved ones, who must care for the survivors, or carry the heartache for those who died.
3. Aren’t secondary laws adequate?
a. Studies indicate that motor vehicle fatality rates are 20% higher in states without a standard belt law than those with a standard law (NHTSA).
b. It is proven that seat belt usage rates will increase, and thus save lives, in states that pass a standard enforcement law. Nevada’s remaining non-users of belts are our high-risk populations: teens & young male drivers, night-time (about 15% less usage than in day-time), and impaired drivers. For states that pass standard enforcement, belt usage in fatal crashes increases by at least 9% (FARS), meaning more high-risk drivers and passengers are buckling up after standard enforcement is implemented.
c. States like California, Michigan, and Washington that have passed standard seat belt laws experienced a decrease in alcohol-related fatalities; the standard law increased the drunk driver, or high-risk drivers’ seat belt use. In addition, when a state passes a standard seat belt law, it has a positive side affect on neighboring states, through awareness and increased usage.
4. Don’t police have better things to do than to stop drivers for traffic violations?
Since Nevada already has a seat belt law, standard enforcement would not increase law enforcement workload. Car crashes are the number one killer of all people age 3-34. Wearing seat belts is the simplest way to almost double your chance of surviving a crash. (Over a ten-year period, you have a 1-in-7 chance of being in a car crash). Traffic enforcement often leads to the capture of more serious criminals: police routinely find stolen cars and apprehend drug traffickers and fugitives during traffic stops. Nevada law enforcement officers must routinely make wise enforcement priority decisions; they support this bill.
5. Won’t a standard seat belt law lead to police harassment of innocent people?
Motor Vehicle Occupant Safety Surveys (MVOSS) conducted randomly before and after passage of standard belt laws show public opinion supports standard enforcement, with African-American and Latino populations approving even more than Caucasians. Approval of standard laws was even higher after the law passed (no negative effects in relation to racial profiling were noted, www.nhtsa.dot.gov.). No state with a standard seat belt law has reported harassment as a result of the enforcement policy (26 states to date).
6. Doesn’t public education work better than laws?
Standard belt laws and enforcement work when education and fear of death or of a ticket fail. In addition, children are three to four times more likely to be restrained if the driver is restrained, and strong laws and enforcement are proven to change behavior, or increase driver usage of belts.
|