Motoring Discussion > seat belts	Miscellaneous
Thread Author: sooty123	Replies: 84

New Sun 30 Sep 18 10:08   seat belts - sooty123

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45675928 I was surprised reading this at the high percentage of people dying in a crash found not to be wearing them. I suppose it stands to reason, I guess I'd thought seat belt wearing to be a given. Perhaps an inherent believe in all the modern safety devices means people are less wary or perhaps there'll always be quite a few that are happy to chance it. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 10:33   seat belts - legacylad

I’m not surprised at all. Driving around Bradford & Keighley the young Asian males think of it as a macho thing. And for those in dodgy vehicles....no insurance, stolen,etc, a seatbelt is a hindrance when you decamp and leg it. Hitting a solid bit of timber at high speed accounts for a few fatalities. Makes a right mess of your internals when not wearing a seat belt. According to fire brigade and paramedic friends who both work within W Yorks. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 10:58   seat belts - Duncan

As the leg lad said, in some case it's a cultural thing. On an LBC phone-in prog yesterday, a woman said 'it creases my clothes'..... Just remembered - Nick Ferrari is the name of the show's host. Despite his best efforts, he couldn't really get her to see sense. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 13:10   seat belts - sooty123

I suppose it's a given in Bradford, it's like the wild west in terms of driving standards. As to 'it creases my clothes ' just when you thought you'd heard every excuse. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 16:34   seat belts - CGNorwich

When seat belts first became compulsory objections like that were commonplace. There was actually quite a bit of resistance against their use. People even used to say you were safer being thrown out of the car than being trapped and burned alive. In fact there is only one reason people don't wear seatbelts. They don't like being told what to do and like to rebel against authority even if they are potentially putting themselves in harm''s way Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sun 30 Sep 18 at 16:34 Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 17:16   seat belts - Pat

>> >> They don't like being told what to do and like to rebel against authority even >> if they are potentially putting themselves in harm''s way>> While I don't agree with them, I do think people should have the right to rebel against authority and put themselves in harms way if they so wish. Having said that I never drive a car without one but I never wear one when driving a lorry. Probably because I can't reach the Tacho above my head, the dashboard or the windscreen with one on. Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 17:57   seat belts - Bromptonaut

>> Having said that I never drive a car without one but I never wear one >> when driving a lorry. I would never travel in a car without wearing one even before they were compulsory. Dad always wore one for as long as I remember - I think he'd bashed his face on the steering wheel in one of his first cars back in the fifties. My first car, a 1973 Mini 1000, had static belts which I kept reasonably tight for safety and were therefore restrictive. Inertia reels in my next car, a Pug 104, were a luxury by comparison. I'm intrigued by what's not possible in a lorry with an inertia reel belt that doesn't need you to stop anyway. Appreciate the lap portion pins your bum to the seat but not surely you don't 'stand up' while moving? Having said that Mrs B's cousin who's been an LGV driver for 30+ years is a reluctant wearer in his truck and he's a 6' plus bloke so not likely to have reach problems. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 30 Sep 18 at 18:01 Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 18:49   seat belts - CGNorwich

While I don't agree with them, I do think people should have the right to rebel against authority and put themselves in harms way if they so wish. Up to a point I guess. Do you believe for example that you have the right to ride an unlit bicycle down a motorway at night? I rather think we have a duty not to endanger the lives of others or impose undue burdens on our fellows. Having to scrape up the non-seatbelt wearing remains of car drivers and passengers seems to me an unfair burden to place on others in the name of our personal freedom. Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Sun 30 Sep 18 19:49   seat belts - Old Navy

Non seatbelt users join motorcyclists as potential organ donors so it is not all bad. Last edited by: Old Navy on Sun 30 Sep 18 at 19:50 Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 20:22   seat belts - Fullchat

Generally only one 'victim' when it comes to not wearing a seatbelt. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 20:27   seat belts - CGNorwich

As I said those who have to deal with the aftermath are effectively victims as indeed are the friends and relatives of those who insist on their "right" to rebel. Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Mon 1 Oct 18 02:42   seat belts - Pat

>>Up to a point I guess. Do you believe for example that you have the right to ride an unlit bicycle down a motorway at night?<< Of course not, there is no comparison whatsoever. I think you forget that the right to rebel against authority means having the right to choose, and not be told, what to do. You make the false assumption that all those who feel it worthwhile to rebel in order to protect some freedom of choice will make what you see as the wrong choice. Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 06:16   seat belts - sooty123

I think what cgn is trying to say is where does the right to rebel end and the state's right to force you to comply start? Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 08:03   seat belts - Pat

Yes, I understand that Sooty, and I'm trying to say at what point are we prepared to lose our freedom of choice. Forcing compliance is often counterproductive. People have to be capable of making informed and correct decisions. If those decisions are continually made for us, then we eventually lose the ability to think for ourselves when it really matters. Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:40   seat belts - sooty123

>> Yes, I understand that Sooty, and I'm trying to say at what point are we prepared to lose our freedom of choice. That's been one of the the questions that all societies have been trying to answer. It's a very complex question. Balancing someone's right to carry out whatever against the risk and what impact it has on another's rights. I would say, broadly speaking, when it disproportionately affects others. >> >> Forcing compliance is often counterproductive. >> >> People have to be capable of making informed and correct decisions. If those decisions are >> continually made for us, then we eventually lose the ability to think for ourselves when >> it really matters. I wouldn't say that was the major impact from any perceived imbalance. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:54   seat belts - Zero

>> Yes, I understand that Sooty, and I'm trying to say at what point are we >> prepared to lose our freedom of choice. >> >> Forcing compliance is often counterproductive. Its rarely counterproductive. Seat belt alas and DD for two. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:12   seat belts - Duncan

>> Yes, I understand that Sooty, and I'm trying to say at what point are we >> prepared to lose our freedom of choice. I think at the point where one person's 'freedom of choice' impinges upon another person. e.g. In this country if someone was injured as a result of not wearing a seat belt, they would expect to get treatment, 'free of charge' from the NHS. Logically, if it were a serious injury, they, and/or their family members would expect to claim from Social Services (or whatever it's called). At the end of the day (how I hate that phrase) very few decisions can really be said not to affect anyone else. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 09:33   seat belts - CGNorwich

We have laws precisely because individuals, if left to chose how they behave in society will often choose behaviour which is not considered beneficial to society. I think you accept this. It is of course right that we have an input into the introduction of new laws but once enacted we are obliged to accept those laws. We can of course always campaign for their change. What we don’t have of course is the right to ignore the law of the land, what you call rebelling, because we don’t like it. That way lies anarchy. Your view that left to their own devices people would come to a sensible decision on matters without the necessity of legal enforcement seems to me to amount to wishful thinking. Do you really believe that the rate of seat belt wearing would be as high as it is if it was not a legal requirement? In an ideal world we would all think it only sensible to have proper training before we ventured on the road, sensible to buy insurance in case we injured someone, sensible not to run red lights or speed. Unfortunately the population are not all sensible or intelligent and many would not do these things unless they were legal requirements Seat belt wearing is unfortunately no different. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:04   seat belts - Pat

I'm not sure if you always 'miss' my point on purpose CG and try and turn it into something it isn't. Whether you do or don't, I really can't be bothered. I have work to do. Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:10   seat belts - CGNorwich

It seems a quite reasonable and argued response to me Pat. I fully understand what you say, I just don’t agree with it. I must say that you do have a habit of making statements when questioned in any detail you are unable or unwilling to defend. Reply to this message | Report message       2

New Mon 1 Oct 18 11:30   seat belts - Pat

>> It seems a quite reasonable and argued response to me Pat. >> The bit I find tiresome is the 'argued' response that I inevitably get from you (and mark) any time I pass an opinion on anything. I don't have time to sit and argue, neither do I feel the need to defend or explain my opinons on everything in great detail. I've totally given up on any casual response on here simply because someone always wants to pick it to pieces, dissect it, totally misconstrue it usually on purpose and then demand that I defend/explain myself at great length. If you can't live with that then perhaps you should do what I do with Marks comments to me, and just ignore my comments? Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:04   seat belts - No FM2R

Why bring me into it? Same ole, same ole; you come in, write an opinion and then run away whining about victimisation if amybody queries, disagrees or wants further explanation of your statement. And for someone who is so proud of ignoring me you do seem to spend a lot of time talking about me. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:31   seat belts - Cliff Pope

>> >> someone always wants >> to pick it to pieces, dissect it, totally misconstrue it usually on purpose and then >> demand that I defend/explain myself at great length. >> I thinks that shows the quite reasonable divergence in the way people use a forum. I've often said I see the forum as a kind of pub full of locals. There's a hubbub of noise, several conversations and arguments are going on at the same time, threads are being started, argued, drifting, new ones are beginning, overlapping, abandoned. New people join, some leave. Some people having started or joined a topic want to relentlessly follow it to the end. Some just enjoy the occasion, throw out a few observations, add a controversial opinion, sometimes tongue in cheek, crack a joke, tease, provoke, swap to another conversation. It's perfectly reasonable to resent being grilled by someone who treats it as a legal inquisition, and wants to hold someone to account for a throw-away remark 2 drinks ago. It's perfectly reasonable to get irritated by people who slide away from answering a question or drift to a new topic. It takes all sorts. All welcome. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 13:40   seat belts - Pat

That describes it exactly Cliff. What I actually said was >>While I don't agree with them, I do think people should have the right to rebel against authority and put themselves in harms way if they so wish.<< Promptly I'm accused of saying all sorts and had people wanting an explanation. I spent 8 hours yesterday training a Health & Safety course in the workplace. 20% of that is mandatory,25% is not reasonably practicable another 25% is good practice but 30% is utter rubbish. A brief example of how I cam to this >>If those decisions are continually made for us, then we eventually lose the ability to think for ourselves when it really matters. << All pedestrians must use walkways only. Yard staff cannot reach trailers using a walkway. Forkie knocks down yard man, not on a walkway going to a trailer. Forkie's defence? 'Well I always used to be looking for people walking about all the time but since we had the walkways I only bother when I'm crossing one' By being cocooned by laws, rules and regulations all the time we are losing the ability to think sensibly for ourselves and making the correct informed decisions. Now, that's my lunch break gons so it's back to work for me. End of. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:15   seat belts - Duncan

>> I'm not sure if you always 'miss' my point on purpose CG and try and >> turn it into something it isn't. >> >> Whether you do or don't, I really can't be bothered. >> >> I have work to do. >> >> Pat >> Instead of putting 'Pat' at the end of all your posts, why not put 'End of'? Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:20   seat belts - sooty123

>> Instead of putting 'Pat' at the end of all your posts, why not put 'End >> of'? Message? Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 1 Oct 18 at 13:02 Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:42   seat belts - No FM2R

>>why not put 'End of'? Because that would just be teasing. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 13:25   seat belts - Pat

Can you explain that to me please Duncan? You've told me before I have mistaken your humour, so perhaps if you make it absolutely clear I won't mistake what you mean. Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 13:09   seat belts - Manatee

There is no right to rebel, otherwise it wouldn't be rebellious. I'm not too worried about lorry drivers not wearing seat belts, but it doesn't seem wise. On my first driving test, the examiner didn't wear the seat belt. The procedure actually stated I think that "your examiner may not wear a seat belt - this is to enable him to do his job" or some such wording. On the test, as I was only yards from a set of temporary traffic lights, they went directly from green to red. Nobody in his right mind would have stopped in normal circumstances, but I was on my test and decided in that instant I must stop, or fail. So I anchored up, the clipboard shot out of his hands, he banged his head on something, and his glasses fell off. He said something like "Why did you do that?" and I replied that I wouldn't expect to pass my test by driving through a red light. I failed, on one fault. "Failing to take appropriate action at a traffic signal" IIRC. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 22:51   seat belts - Dave_

>> Having said that I never drive a car without one but I never wear one when driving a lorry Basic physics. In a 44-tonne lorry you're either going to hit something 5% the mass of your vehicle, in which case you'll hardly feel it; or something solid and immovable, which is generally curtains for you. Not much in between. FWIW I belt up in every vehicle, including in the back of taxis. I was only a nipper when belts became compulsory so I've grown up with the habit. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 23:07   seat belts - bathtub tom

I was a passenger in quite a heavy frontal impact in the '60s, fortunately I was wearing a belt and it left me with a diagonal bruise across my chest. I promptly fitted front belts to my then Standard 10, subsequently to its replacement A35 and the Moggie Minor van after. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 30 Sep 18 23:27   seat belts - henry k

All my cars I have had since the early sixties have had seat belts. I have added belts to all three rear seats if not standard. In addition I fitted carry cot straps and later 4 point children belts. The children's belts were very narrow but that was all that was available back then. No kiddy seats in those days but did have booster seats. Fortunately I have not tested any of them to the extent of getting injuries. I just cannot understand folks deliberately not wearing seat belts. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 09:46   seat belts - Old Navy

This is a 5 mph impact simulator. youtu.be/2a93m_jMJ18 Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:02   seat belts - CGNorwich

If you have ever inadvertently walked into a glass door tyou will know what a sub 5mph impact without restraint feels like! Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:25   seat belts - Fullchat

When I first joined the Job nearly every frontal impact, even minor, resulted in some form of facial and chest injury pieces of flesh, blood and hair embedded on the cracked windscreen to a lesser or greater extent dependent on the gravity of the impact. After they became compulsory and people accepted the day to day wearing of them those type injuries declined dramatically. Clunk click every trip :S Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:39   seat belts - Ambo

Is there some good reason why the seat belt fitting I have found on American hire cars is not available here? Instead of using the door pillar as the top anchor point, the belt is attached to the adjacent point on the door itself. This means you step into the belt, which adjusts itself to you as the door is shut, so you can't drive off unless you are belted up. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:45   seat belts - No FM2R

>>so you can't drive off unless you are belted up. However, that system has a separate lap belt and by law you are supposed to manually put the lap belt on as well. Of course frequently people do/did not. in any case, I'm not sure that approach is still current. It's certainly been many years since I encountered it in a US car. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:52   seat belts - Zero

>> >>so you can't drive off unless you are belted up. It was considered part of a U.S. requirement for Automatic occupant crash protection and seat belt use, but has changed I think. US seatbelt law is very piecemeal, one State doesn't consider it an offence at all, some don't consider it an offence you can be stopped for, and some do. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 11:24   seat belts - Pat

You can't drive off in our V90 unless the driver has the seat belt on. Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 13:06   seat belts - VxFan

>> You can't drive off in our V90 unless the driver has the seat belt on. Presumably there is an override for someone with a medical condition that makes them seatbelt exempt? Or do they have to fool the system by clipping in the seat belt and routing the webbing behind the seat? Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 1 Oct 18 at 13:07 Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 13:23   seat belts - Pat

I don't know if there is an override as I've never bothered to look for it. It only catches me out when waiting to board Eurotunnel in the queue and I have to move up. Catches me out every time! Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 13:42   seat belts - Zero

>> >> You can't drive off in our V90 unless the driver has the seat belt >> on. The BM is happy to let you drive off with no seatbelt on, but woe betide you if you crack open the door while reversing to see the kerb. It instantly throws on the handbrake. If you try and drive off with the door cracked open, it keeps throwing the box back into park. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 14:05   seat belts - commerdriver

The VW auto handbrake is quite happy to release in either direction of you have a seatbelt on, you have to release it and reapply it manually if you do not have a seatbelt on, little bit of a pain when you are parking or pop back in to move a few inches in a space but you get used to it. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 21:36   seat belts - Dave_

>> If you try and drive off with the door cracked open, it keeps throwing the box back into park. Which is a pest when you're trying to line one up on a car transporter :/ Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:21   seat belts - sooty123

>> Is there some good reason why the seat belt fitting I have found on American hire cars was this a good few years ago, I can't remember such a set up. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:40   seat belts - No FM2R

>>was this a good few years ago, The last time I can remember encountering it was when I was working in Oklahoma City, and I guess that was around 1990. Mind you, that wasn't a new car at the time so perhaps even further back than that. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 17:36   seat belts - sooty123

I guess that was around 1990. Mind you, that wasn't a new car >> at the time so perhaps even further back than that. >> Ah right that explains why I've not seen them. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:43   seat belts - sooty123

>> This is a 5 mph impact simulator. >> >> youtu.be/2a93m_jMJ18 >> I had a go on one of those at a car show. it's surprising how strong the impact even at that speed. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 10:55   seat belts - henry k

>> This is a 5 mph impact simulator. >> >> youtu.be/2a93m_jMJ18 >> Would elf and safety allow this in the UK today? :-( Last edited by: henry k on Mon 1 Oct 18 at 10:56 Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:19   seat belts - Duncan

The G force is more important than the speed, Shirley? Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 11:46   seat belts - Roger.

>> I suppose it's a given in Bradford, it's like the wild west East in terms of >> driving standards. >> >> As to 'it creases my clothes ' just when you thought you'd heard every excuse. >> Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:20   seat belts - Old Navy

We worked a No belt, no move policy with our grandkids from a soon as they understood. They have always used them and now they are at learning to drive age it is automatic to put seatbelts on. When you think that 5 mph is slow for some car park bumps, hitting something solid at normal road speeds is not surprisingly sometimes life changing or fatal. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 12:43   seat belts - Mapmaker

Pat, you're quick enough to criticise employers of lorry drivers. The employees owe a duty to their employers too; if a driver be injured whilst at work on account of not wearing a seat belt then the employer will be taken to the cleaners for having allowed slack practice. I'd sack any employee of mine who refused to wear a seat belt - and announced it in public too. Indeed, admitting to breaking the law on a public forum seems somewhat rash. Reply to this message | Report message       4

New Mon 1 Oct 18 14:04   seat belts - sherlock47

>>>I'd sack any employee of mine who refused to wear a seat belt - and announced it in public too. Indeed, admitting to breaking the law on a public forum seems somewhat rash. <<< Totally agreed - particularly by someone who represents the PDA (or is it the PDF?) and apparently takes responsibility for training other drivers. "The PDA is a stepping stone for Drivers professional development and provides a foot on the ladder to a career in the Transport Industry. We provide specialist knowledge to enable the newly qualified driver to approach his first job with confidence and the ability to cope with most situations." Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 14:23   seat belts - Pat

I rest my case. I do hope both Mapmaker and Sherlock are feeling really good about themselves. I'll deal with Sherlock first. I don't understand how you could be bothered enough to search Google for something against me. What have I ever done to you? How bitter and twisted is that? Well perhaps you should have dug a bit deeper and you would have discovered that quote was from 2006 and The Professional Drivers ASSOCIATION was dissolved at Companies House many years ago. The Professional Drivers FOUNDATION is a Charity. In what capacity do I/did I take responsibility for training other drivers? When did I last drive a lorry? Do I even still hold an HGV licence? May I suggest Sherlock since you mention announcing breaking the law on a public forum you get your facts straight, then toddle off and check them once more before making public accusations. You said I would have a vendetta against you???? It seems the boot is on the other foot doesn't it? Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 14:46   seat belts - No FM2R

"but I never wear one when driving a lorry." [Not, "I never wore one when I used to drive a lorry".] I think to admit to breaking the law in your chosen profession on a public forum is unwise. Dumb, even. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 15:41   seat belts - CGNorwich

"Having a said that I never drive a car without one but I never wear one when driving a lorry. Probably because I can't reach the Tacho above my head, the dashboard or the windscreen with one one" I wonder why they assumed you were still driving? Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 16:14   seat belts - Pat

I've been 5' 2'' since I was about 14 years old CG. I'm still the same height whether I sit in a driving seat of a car, lorry or on a motorbike so if you want to join the lynch mob then go ahead. Just back it up with the proof, as you so often say to others. It would seem the others have gone quiet when all they are looking for is a bit of humble pie. The ability to admit they were accusations which should never have been made on a public forum, would be nice from a couple of posters both old enough and intelligent enough to know better. Perhaps they are happier to make the bullets and allow another to answer on their behalf now? I have screenshots of the posts just in case, so removing them is a bit late now. Even Duncan can't seem to explain his remark but we seem to have a forum of trolls and keyboard warriors these days. I suspect Duncan was trying to say why don't you just say that's it and go! But, he hasn't got the balls to put it in words that we all understand. Well, Duncan, it isn't going to happen. If I antagonise you just once a week without even trying then it's all worth it. Pat Last edited by: Pat on Mon 1 Oct 18 at 16:15 Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 16:38   seat belts - No FM2R

It seems Pat does not have the courage to stand by her own words. How strange then to be talking of the behaviour of others. Strange, but perhaps not surprising. Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 1 Oct 18 at 16:39 Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 16:51   seat belts - sherlock47

Iin her response to me I must congratulate her Last edited by: sherlock47 on Mon 1 Oct 18 at 16:53 Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 16:58   seat belts - Pat

Haven't you accused me of that Sherlock? Pot and Kettle anyone? How hard is it to admit to making a mistake and giving a grudging apology? I can dig about on the internet for information on other's pasts indiscretions. I have to do to ensure the Charity funds are not going into wrong hands but at the very least I check, and cross check again, to make sure my information is up to date and correct. Even then I would never post it publicly. I may not have your education or success in business life Sherlock but my morals leave yours standing at the starting line. As for further comment, don't worry you have said enough. Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 17:12   seat belts - No FM2R

I think she has genuinely forgotten her statement that she drives lorries without wearing a seatbelt. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 17:21   seat belts - sherlock47

My message was truncated by the technical failings of the internet. You should probably be pleased that I did not complete it! Whilst the PDA may now have ceased as an organisation, ( I was aware of the original date of my quote, but it made my point), you should be aware, (I hope), that there are multiple instances of where PDA references are made sitting underneath a PDF Banner and branding. Many of these PDA Forum (a?) posts are current! Perhaps your time would be better spent ensuring that the charity you represent has an online presence with information that is up to date and correct. I would love to know what mistake I have made, and what apology you would appreciate. And as for commenting on my morals...…. totally inappropriate. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 17:32   seat belts - Pat

As before Sherlock, I am quite happy to talk to you on the weekend of October 13th when I shall be in your area with some time to spare and then you can explain exactly what 'wrong' information you seem to think you have found and exactly why you felt the need to go digging for it. What better than a face to face chat over a coffee? Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 17:53   seat belts - No FM2R

Much as I'm rather enjoying the spectacle, I think I need to point out that this is almost certainly a misreading or a misunderstanding somewhere. Perhaps a re-read may help? Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 18:17   seat belts - sherlock47

Not sure that I am in the area you think - you must have confused me with another. ' I did not go 'digging', it was a simple google. I never said 'wrong' information, you said wrong! I just pointed out confusion of the PDF Branding of the PDA material. Lots of examples - PDA website Branded PDF PDA forum(a?) www.pda-uk.org/nuke/modules.php?name=Forums as a single example. Having now spent 5 minutes 'digging' I have seen multiple examples. Have you explained the need to keep paper copies? Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 18:29   seat belts - Pat

>>Have you explained the need to keep paper copies?<< Now I am confused. Whatever you mean, I don't have any need to explain myself. I'm not the one making accusations. Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 18:36   seat belts - sherlock47

>>>I have screenshots of the posts just in case, so removing them is a bit late now.<<< OK maybe not on paper? As far as I am aware I have not made accusations. What were they? Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 18:36   seat belts - CGNorwich

I was not questioning your height, simply pointing out that you had stated earlier that you were still driving an HGV. This is all getting more complicated and confusing than a Donald Trump press conference. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 19:13   seat belts - sooty123

I'm impressed, possibly the most confusing thread I've seen here for a long time. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 19:24   seat belts - CGNorwich

It’s all your fault, you started it! Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 19:49   seat belts - No FM2R

This is hilarious. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 20:50   seat belts - sooty123

And I'm taking full credit for it. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 21:37   seat belts - No FM2R

credit/blame Tomayto/tomarto. Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 1 Oct 18 at 21:38 Reply to this message | Report message

New Tue 2 Oct 18 03:49   seat belts - Pat

>>And I'm taking full credit for it<< Well done Sooty for allowing me to demonstrate the reaction a casual contribution from me on any thread, on any subject, gets from a small group of the regular posters on car4play. The group don't do this to others, not consistently on every post made so why do it to me? There is no denying it happens. I have this morning looked at the forum in depth and over the past couple of years, there is one poster who replies almost immediately to every post I make mostly within an hour. Always derogatory, argumentative or sarcastic. Wow, I really must be important to warrant that. This is always followed on a regular basis by another couple, always the same people demanding full explanations, proof and evidence, along with the accusations that because I said one thing it meant another (to suit their argument) It's tedious, it's counterproductive for forum traffic so please tell me why you feel the need to do it? I was surprised looking back on all of my posts how consistently it happens and could certainly be looked upon as stalking or harassment in some people's eyes. I was thinking I may have imagined it, but no, the evidence is there for all to see. I have my own theory as to why it's done. Many years ago a wise old boss of mine gave me a bit of advice. He told me to always stand against the least intelligent person in the room because that would make me look cleverer than I was. So is it just grandstanding? Are you so insecure you need to do that? OK, I get you few (you know who you are), don't like me and I have an opinion on you too. Over the last year I have totally ignored one poster on here and contrary to his belief, it has given me immense satisfaction to see how it annoys him, to see the great lengths he will go to in order to try and 'tempt' me into retaliating. I can certainly recommend that approach so why not do it with me? I challenge you.....but I bet you can't do it. I enjoy posting on here, I enjoy the discussions that I seldom contribute to, as well as those I do. I disagree sometimes with others and can say so to them without either party having a problem with it. Bromp, Manatee, Movi, Sooty, Haywain are a few who spring to mind and yes, even Mapmaker. who at the very least will differ with me yet still manages to treat me with a modicum of respect and I return that respect. I know I'm not the only one who is, and has in the past, got utterly sick of this attitude by a few whose sole intention is to spoil it for so many. Pat Last edited by: Pat on Tue 2 Oct 18 at 03:50 Reply to this message | Report message

New Tue 2 Oct 18 09:55   seat belts - No FM2R

You have a screw loose. I wasn't even in this thread until you started discussing me. You need help. I recommend you seek it. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 23:21   seat belts - No FM2R

>>>I have screenshots of the posts just in case, so removing them is a bit late now Methinks somebody is losing the plot. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 14:33   seat belts - Pat

I am Mapmaker but let's clarify that one shall we? I criticise employers of lorry drivers who are about to go out of business using the much-maligned pre-pack deals for getting their (honest) employees to fill up their lorries at garages on the way back to the yard, before telling them they are redundant and the firm is closing down that day. >> if a driver be injured whilst at work on account of not wearing a seat belt then the employer will be taken to the cleaners for having allowed slack practice.<< Not so, provided they can show they have been instructed to use them the employer is not responsible. >>I'd sack any employee of mine who refused to wear a seat belt - and announced it in public too. Indeed, admitting to breaking the law on a public forum seems somewhat rash.<< As for the above, read my reply to Sherlock, it applies equally to you and I really thought you had more sense about you than to base any reply, on anything other than cold hard facts. Don't make accusations about me breaking the law Mapmaker unless you can provide proof. Pat Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 14:47   seat belts - No FM2R

>>Don't make accusations about me breaking the law Mapmaker unless you can provide proof. What proof is required? You said you break the law willingly. He was taking your word for it. Though I can see why that would be unwise. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 14:48   seat belts - No FM2R

p.s. bet you wish you weren't ignoring me. [chuckle] Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 21:29   seat belts - legacylad

I can’t test it at the moment, but I think my car won’t start without the seat belt being clipped in. I suppose if that is correct, then I could clip it in then sit on it without being secured. Immaterial anyway as I’ve always used seat belts when fitted for as long as I can remember. You’ve got to be a retard not to use one. And that includes taxi drivers. Why do they get away with not being forced by law to clunk clink every trip ? Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 21:42   seat belts - CGNorwich

Apparently according to the Sun, the reason cabbies don't have to belt up dates back to before the introduction of screens between the driver and passenger. The law is in place because of worries that wearing a belt would make them more vulnerable to assault. A passenger could grab the belt and pin the cabbie in their seat before attacking them or grabbing cash. www.thesun.co.uk/motors/4702056/the-bizarre-reason-why-british-taxi-drivers-dont-have-to-wear-a-seat-belt/ Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 21:39   seat belts - No FM2R

>>I am Mapmaker Explains a lot. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 1 Oct 18 22:23   seat belts - Bobby

I have a colleague who, in the 11 years I have known her, never wears a seatbelt properly. Instead of having it come over her shoulder, she tucks it under her arm and across her body. I remember asking her once and she said it was uncomfortable across her chest. At the weekend there she was in the rear of a stationery car just outside Peebles when a tractor drove into the back of it. Her pal in the back with a proper seatbelt got out unscathed. My colleague however ended up with lots of bruising and possible broken ribs. I hope she has learnt her lesson! Reply to this message | Report message

New Tue 2 Oct 18 02:24   seat belts - VxFan

Regarding belts. There are one or two people in this thread that really do need to belt up. Reply to this message | Report message       1