Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Routes Available | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Do you support the N.D. Legislature's decision to reject a bill that would have required at least front seat occupants of vehicles to wear seat belts?

  1. Yes, it's a personal choice
  2. No, seat belts save lives
sort: oldest | newest




Feb-24-13 4:09 AM

Very good observation loner about belts and fetuses...and the favorite right wing motto is "Socialism for the rich...Capitalism for the rest".

5 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-24-13 8:07 AM

the child being aborted doesn't have a 'personal choice' but the person putting on a seatbelt does. but Minotloner let's just blame it on the repubs and maybe the messiah will take more from the "rich" bad guys and re-distribute it to His subjects.

10 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-24-13 8:29 AM

So we don't have seat belt laws now?

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-24-13 10:24 AM

Unbelieveable! This is what our ND legislature spends its time on! Just because some fat farmer is to lazy to click on his seat belt that could save his life! Really!

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-24-13 11:36 AM

YES YES YES EDUACATE DON,T MANDATE!! you libs make me sick, even little children know the difference between seat belts and abortion

3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-24-13 11:48 AM

My question is, why isn't there seat belts in school buses?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-24-13 12:13 PM

Because seat belts simply do not work the same way in school or city buses as they do cars. The passengers are situated much higher -- and they are not in danger of flying through the window in the event of an impact.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-24-13 12:19 PM

A pregnant woman will have to wear a seat belt on the way to the abortion clinic where she will be forbidden to have a tobacco product while waiting for the appointment for her abortion.

She won't be able to afford the child, can't afford the abortion, but nobody will be there when the child is born to help pay for the medical costs. No need to offer any kind of help, she's on her own. It's a easy decision to have an abortion when you're left out in the cold. She can gamble, so she might win enough to afford one.

Right to Life hypocrites are no help whatsoever.

And we wonder why it is all completely haywire. It's because we're nuts and are content and complacent with being nuts.

Enough to drive you to drink.

Why can't we be just left alone and be free? Is that asking for too much?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-24-13 1:07 PM

First, with buses, are you going to make the driver responsible for the bucking and releaseing all the belts? As namexxx stated the risks are not the same. Second, the question is wrong. The bill required both adults in front to buckle, bot not the adults in the rear seats. Third, the 'abortion bill' SB2368 was amended by Mathern and passed by the senate to include medical coverage for prenatal, birth and neonatal care.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-24-13 5:55 PM

leftwing, the bill was defeated. There is no primary seatbelt law now.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-25-13 10:52 AM

There is no blanket "federal seat belt law" leftwing.

"In an effort to promote states to pass seat-belt requirements, the NHTSA provides grants to states who pass seat-belt requirements; all states but Maine and Wyoming participate in these programs. The Transportation for Equity Act for the 21st Century, which was passed by congress in the late '90s, also provides grant money as an incentive to states that implement seat-belt regulations and awareness campaigns. These grants don't establish a federal seat belt law or mandate states pass their own, but reward states for enacting safety-belt laws."

Passing seat belt laws is still left up to the states.

W a s t h a t s a i d s l o w l y e n o u g h f o r y o u ?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-25-13 11:18 AM

locomotive, that was good, but you may have to repeat it for some!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-25-13 12:18 PM

Thanks, disgusted.

Just returning snark for snark.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-25-13 12:21 PM

sometimes, snark is good!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-25-13 2:18 PM

I prefer my snark grilled, served open-face on toast, with a side of horseradish.

How about you?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-25-13 7:41 PM

Three-headed elephant is nice too, ssuteed with onions and served with a green salad.

A little goes a long way...

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-26-13 8:56 AM

So nice of you to thank me ahead of time, leftwing. That's the only nice thing in your post...

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 17 of 17 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web