They're not controlling her body. It's a safety regulation.
12/19/2006 8:30:46 AM
Now get back to your homework, kiddo.
12/19/2006 9:42:16 AM
Just for the record, I disagree with that law, too. If a person is stupid enough to drive without a seatbelt, should we really interfere with the thinning of the herd mechanism that is likely to follow?
2/3/2007 1:44:14 AM
The Christian fundies wouldn't like it, because it would be survival of the fittest in action.
2/3/2007 5:53:28 AM
Even if that WAS controlling her body (which it isn't), they do that to men too.
Fail example has failed.
1/3/2009 6:16:33 PM
um no. Period.
4/13/2010 6:29:25 AM
I've read that paragraph several times, and I still am unable to find a resemblence of logic to it. Men would also be fined if found driving without their seatbelts right? *shakes head*
The same system is in place over here (Norway), and I do see a very good reason for it - safety.
4/16/2010 4:26:28 AM
The seatbelt is not part of her body, nor is it totally dependent on her body to exist.
It's a safety measure, both for her safety and for others. An unbelted body can cause great harm during a crash, both to itself and to those around it.
Plus, a man will be fined just as much as a woman.
4/16/2010 5:11:22 AM