Displaying WOF and Reg stickers

[Cosmik de Bris]

Seatbelt really has nothing to do with anyone but me,

You selfish bastard! What if you hit an improperly parked caravan, and are catapulted through the windshield and land on a mother and her triplets?

Cheers

[FJRider]

Howzabout 'no seatbelt - no ACC'?

Sounds a bit like Cassina's ... "No ACC for those at fault in an accident" suggestion ...

But in the commission of a crime ... ACC might be refused ... ???

[neels]

Again until 2011? (I think it was) my Landy wasn't even allowed to have seatbelts thanks to NZTA's moronic rules & even now they're optional

A bit before 2011 I added seatbelts to the back of one of my cars, using the seatbelt mounting points which were there from factory but not used, when I went for a WOF I was failed as they hadn't been put in by a certified installer. So I took them back out again, and drove the kids around with no seat belts instead, apparently much safer.

[Scuba_Steve]

You selfish bastard! What if you hit an improperly parked caravan, and are catapulted through the windshield and land on a mother and her triplets?

Cheers

Hey at-least thats only 4 people unlike you on your crotch-rocket hitting an oilslick & sending yourself as well as that 200kg of steel through a pre-school class of 20 walking down the street... Killing 20 innocent kids cause you choose an inherently unsafe for of transport over a cage.

A bit before 2011 I added seatbelts to the back of one of my cars, using the seatbelt mounting points which were there from factory but not used, when I went for a WOF I was failed as they hadn't been put in by a certified installer. So I took them back out again, and drove the kids around with no seat belts instead, apparently much safer.

Yea, fucking retarded right!

[Jeeper]

As I understood the law ... if seat-belts are fitted ... they must be worn. Regardless of the fact that the fitting them was optional ...



Or did I get it wrong ... again ... ???

And that was what my argument was. Riding a motorcycle or whatever legally is different than disobeying legal requirements (i.e. choosing to not wear seatbelts when required to by law). Now if I was to ride a motorcycle that I am not allowed (i.e. a non-LAMS bike when I am on restricted or learners), then yes I will take the responsibility personally and should not expect any kind of subsidy.

[Jeeper]

Hey at-least thats only 4 people unlike you on your crotch-rocket hitting an oilslick & sending yourself as well as that 200kg of steel through a pre-school class of 20 walking down the street... Killing 20 innocent kids cause you choose an inherently unsafe for of transport over a cage.



Yea, fucking retarded right!

Hows that different in hitting an oil spill at speed in a car, 4x4, bus, truck or anything and causes death? Have you never hit black ice on road in a car? Every mode of transport has inherent risks for self-harm as well as harm to others. Even horses can buck!

[Scuba_Steve]

Hows that different in hitting an oil spill at speed in a car, 4x4, bus, truck or anything and causes death? Have you never hit black ice on road in a car? Every mode of transport has inherent risks for self-harm as well as harm to others. Even horses can buck!

Yea exactly, roads are dangerous; The level of danger I want to subject myself to should be no-ones business but my own.
The argument "but it's dangerous" is a BS one that'll one day be used to further oppress the vehicle choice we have all made
Anyone complaining about another's choice to wear a seatbelt should really go sell their bike immediately never to ride again & go get themselves a nice safe cage with all the latest safety features, cause a bike is no safer than not wearing a seatbelt the only difference is they haven't legislated against bikes yet.

I choose to ride a bike & I accept the risks, I usually choose to wear a seatbelt but do on occasion drive vehicles without them or where wearing them is completely pointless
I don't believe in controlling others, if they choose to endanger or harm themselves that's their business.

[neels]

The argument "but it's dangerous" is a BS one that'll one day be used to further oppress the vehicle choice we have all made.

Let's hope not.

I was driving a 1927 car in the weekend, no roof, no seatbelts, appalling brakes, it's bloody good fun. Then again it must be safe, the ACC levy for it is fuck all.....

[FJRider]

Seatbelt really has nothing to do with anyone but me, if I don't want to wear one that should be upto me I'm the one going to suffer the effects; so yes "revenue collecting scum" as you say

Perhaps ... those "revenue collecting scum" are just sick of pulling battered bodies out of wrecks ... or out of the roadside ditches (alive or dead) ... simply because it was "THEIR choice" not to fasten their seat-belt.
Seat-belts do not save lives in every accident ... but even the most ardent gambler would take the best odd's possible ... if it was their life at stake.

Parking wardens provide a non-service, they do nothing that actually helps anyone so it's quite easy to think them also "revenue collecting scum"; hell WellyTown City Council even indirectly call them as such as they openly admit paid parking has nothing to do with moving people along, it's all about the money!

Tell that to the rate payers of the city. Parking fees provide millions of $$$$$$$$$$$ into the coffers ... that ratepayers don't need to fund.

[Scuba_Steve]

Perhaps ... those "revenue collecting scum" are just sick of pulling battered bodies out of wrecks ... or out of the roadside ditches (alive or dead) ... simply because it was "THEIR choice" to ride a bike.
Cages do not save lives in every accident ... but even the most ardent gambler would take the best odd's possible ... if it was their life at stake.

My point still stands!

Tell that to the rate payers of the city. Parking fees provide millions of $$$$$$$$$$$ into the coffers ... that ratepayers don't need to fund.

Who da fuck do you think is paying not only the parking fees but also the meters & for the wardens??? Give you a hint, it starts with rate & ends in payers

[FJRider]

Who da fuck do you think is paying not only the parking fees but also the meters & for the wardens??? Give you a hint, it starts with rate & ends in payers

How much a week do you spend on parking meters ... ???

[Cosmik de Bris]

One of my mates had a van that he had made into a camper van thing. He left the seat belts in place so that he could remove the bed etc and put the seats back if needed. The MOT said that if he had seat belts he had to have proper seats installed. No warrant!

Cheers

[Jeeper]

That's general rule with a few things. If they are installed, they must work. If they aren't there, no problem.

[Old Steve]

I'd be interested to know if Scuba Steve pays ACC for the increased risk of injury or death whenever he decides to drive a car without wearing the seatbelts if fitted? Or texts them that he's decided to withdraw from the contract that ACC coverage is based on.

Basically ACC are saying, you'll take all legal steps to reduce injury or death and we will cover your time off work, repair and rehabilitation. Wearing a helmet and a seatbelt, having your vehicle in a safe condition, these should be conditions for receiving ACC compensation. If proved you're driving in a manner against the law, then ACC shouldn't cover you. Mind, that'd be a bit of a worry if you came off your bike at 101 km/hr, but of course any bike rider would only be "doing 90 or 95, officer."

And that, Scuba Steve, is why motorbike registrations are so damn expensive, it's the extra ACC levy to cover the increased risk of us injuring ourselves or dying. A motorcyclist has 22 times the risk of death or injury compared to a car driver. If we wear ATGATT and a hi-viz vest that risk decreases by a third, down to just under 15 times more likely. Don't know if a hi-viz makes us more visible so we are involved in fewer accidents or if hi-viz riders are more cautious and situationally aware so they are involved in fewer accidents.

[pzkpfw]

One of my mates had a van that he had made into a camper van thing. He left the seat belts in place so that he could remove the bed etc and put the seats back if needed. The MOT said that if he had seat belts he had to have proper seats installed. No warrant!

Cheers

Interesting; my father took the back seats out of his 2 door Vitara, for carrying his fishing gear. Left the seat-belts in. Has been having no WOF issues - but I'll have to warn him that may not last forever.


(Many years ago he put seat-belts into one of his old land rovers. Didn't need them due to its age. Then one day got a ticket for not wearing the seat-belt that didn't have to be there.)