Definition Rewrite—Giants19

Seatbelts Are Unsafe

Introduction

Seatbelts are widely considered a great thing for society that save many lives every year, and I wouldn’t argue that they definitely do save a lot of people when used correctly. That being said, while some people believe that they are safe and can save lives in the event of an accident, others argue that they can cause serious injuries and even death in certain cases. When thought is put into it in an abstract way, one will come to understand that seatbelts often times lower peoples inhibitions and makes them less prepared for collision. For this reason, it is not a completely absurd idea to suggest that seatbelts really no not do all that much to prevent risk, and risk often results in danger. Additionally, seatbelts cause people to drive more erratically and pose more of a danger to themselves and others. This whole argument really boils down to how somebody would define the word “risk”, as some people have different definitions than others. For that reason, for the sake of this argument I believe it is important that we understand and potentially reconsider what risk means for most people.

Definition

Risk is generally defined as a chance or possibility of danger, loss, or injury. Typically, risk is bad. Risk is something that somebody want to avoid as much as they possibly can when driving; which is exactly why seatbelts are dangerous. Once one feels safe, they lose their regard for their own safety, and therefore, are at a larger risk for danger. A drivers job is obviously to get from point A to point B with as little risk of danger as possible to themself and their passengers. In doing so, the driver wouldn’t want anything that would make them lose their sense of protection or to lower their ability to react. Humans are intrinsically protective of themselves when they are vulnerable. Taking this vulnerability away causes many people to become less focused, more easily distracted, and most importantly, more at risk. At the end of the day, risk is something that most people go out of their way to avoid, but the truth is that there are a lot of hidden risks in this world. Nobody would assume at first glance that wearing a seatbelt may pose more of a risk to somebody than driving without one, but the correct answer is not always the first one that appears. That being said, while risk is not always avoidable, I would prefer to always have the best chance instinctually to make the decisions or the maneuvers to keep myself and my passengers safe. When we break down what risk is, by its definition, we see that seatbelts cause drivers of vehicles a greater deal of risk than not having one because they give drivers a false sense of security.

Body

A study was recently conducted in Kuwait testing what exactly it was that resulted in collisions on the road, it was found that a vast majority of the accidents were a result of human error, which can be attributed to losing ones sense of safety and becoming distracted. “The relationship between factors that contribute to human error and road transport accident also determined. Data were collected from 80 respondents. Plus, observational technique was conducted at two roads chosen in Pahang and Terengganu. The questionnaire results concluded that there had association between factors that contribute to human error and road transport accident.” (Adibah) This study shows us that human nature will always triumph over human invention. At the end of the day, that is what this argument boils down to. Those that are more willing to place their faith in their intrinsic human instincts than a man made machine will agree that wearing a seatbelt can present somebody with a greater risk than not wearing one.

Body

In one instance, a 49-year old man with no underlying medical illness was killed when he got into an accident and his seatbelt compressed against his neck. The ironic thing about it is that if that man lived, he would probably be so very grateful that he wore that seatbelt. Who wouldn’t be initially? At first glance, it is the seatbelt that saved them. At a closer glance, however, one can see that wearing the seatbelt caused them a much greater deal of risk than if they were without one. This is not even just seen in collisions of lower power/damage, as the man who was killed by his seatbelt when he would have otherwise been perfectly fine without one, was driving 110 kilometers per hour. Getting in a crash at 110 kilometers per hour was not enough to kill him, but the unpredictability and uncertain risk of his seatbelt certainly was. The one true way to truly mitigate day-by-day risk would be to begin driving without a seatbelt. In my opinion, if we limit our risk, we increase our safety, and as I have explained, not wearing a seatbelt is the ultimate way to limit risk while driving. Following that process, the safest way for somebody to get from point A to point B would be without a seatbelt, rather than with one.

Another thing to note is how much somebodies risk of dying or getting injured in a crash decreases when the speed decreases. When do people drive faster, with a seatbelt, or without one? Assuming most people drive slower without their seatbelts on, this fact alone probably saves thousands of people a year. Without the fear of the potential repercussions that may arise from getting into a collision without a seatbelt on, the likelihood of getting into one significantly increases. At the end of the day, we just have to decide that it is more worth it to lower our risk of getting into an accident at all than increasing our risk by preparing for the accident. In wearing a seatbelt, it is almost as if somebody is welcoming a collision. People do something that will make getting in an accident more common, but they do it in order to mitigate the damages of said accidents. That is one of the most counter-intuitive things imaginable, even more so than neglecting to wear a seatbelt for the purpose of increasing safety.

References

Syarah Adibah, J., Mohd Najib, Y. (2022). Contributing Factors Towards Human Errors on Road Transport Safety Among Commercial Vehicle Drivers. In: , et al. Human-Centered Technology for a Better Tomorrow. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4115-2_19

Najari F, Alimohammadi AM. An Immediate Death by Seat Belt Compression; a Forensic Medicine Report. Emerg (Tehran). 2015 Fall;3(4):165-7. PMID: 26495409; PMCID: PMC4608342.

This entry was posted in Definition Rewrite, Giants, Portfolio Giants, Portfolio SP23, Portfolio Tasks, You Forgot to Categorize!. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Definition Rewrite—Giants19

  1. davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

    Seatbelts have been a subject of controversy for many years.

    —Weakest Opening ever.

    While some people believe that they are safe and can save lives in the event of an accident, others argue that they can cause serious injuries and even death.

    —Worst Followup imaginable to the Weakest Opening Ever.

    When you think of it in an abstract way, and understand that seatbelts often times lower peoples inhibitions and makes them less prepared for collision, it is not a completely absurd idea to suggest that seatbelts really no not do all that much to prevent risk, and risk often results in danger.

    —Where you should start after eliminating the terrible Opening and worse Followup.

    Not to mention, seatbelts cause people to drive more erratically and pose more of a danger to themselves and others.

    —What do you mean, “not to mention”? You MUST NOT trivialize your Primary Argument.

    This whole argument really boils down to how you define the word “risk”, as some people have different definitions than others. For that reason, I will spend this argument paper doing my best to do just that.

    —It’s VERY GOOD that you’ve decided to define a term for your Definition Argument. It might NOT be the very best strategy to announce your narrow intentions so directly. And, if you plan to start with a Dictionary Definition, I can tell you in advance, I’m going to strenuously object to that, too. Who cares what the dictionary says? YOU’RE in charge of the Definition here, for the next 1000 words.

    Like

  2. davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

    If you’re going to be counterintuitive, Giants, you seek a NON-controversial topic in order to call attention to the IGNORANCE of COMMON KNOWLEDGE.

    If I want to blow your mind with the idea that gravity doesn’t exist, the last thing I want to introduce my essay with is the observation that Gravity has been a controversial topic for centuries. In fact, it hasn’t. Nobody doubts gravity. But there might be something fundamentally insane about our understanding (or lack of understanding) of gravity that would blow readers’ minds when we present it to them. That’s our goal. You’ve accomplished it already with your hypothesis that “Seat Belts Injure, Maim, and Kill.” Why would you want to undermine the power of that seemingly ludicrous thesis?

    Nobody but you argues that seatbelts cause serious injuries and death. You weaken the power of your argument by suggesting that you’re adopting a popular point of view.

    If you want to acknowledge that there is logic on “both sides” of your topic, you can do that. For example, you could open by saying, “While it’s inarguable that seat belts save lives by preventing injuries caused by accidents, it’s equally true that seat belts cause accidents.” THAT should get a reader’s attention. Prefer to be more straightforward? “Seat belts cause accidents, which cause injury and even death. While it’s inarguable that seat belts save lives FOLLOWING COLLISIONS, this paper will demonstrate that seat belts INCREASE THE RISK OF COLLISIONS and therefore result in injuries and even deaths. First, let’s examine RISK.”

    Is this the sort of feedback you would appreciate most, Giants? I have plenty more available to share.

    I’m going on to interfere with another student for now, Giants. If you keep this conversation going, I’ll be delighted to return with additional feedback.

    Terms of the conversation:
    You Reply to my feedback with observations of your own, specific questions, or clarifications of what you meant in your first draft. OR
    You make significant revisions to your first draft based on my first round of feedback and put the post back into Feedback Please.

    Preferably both.

    Thanks!

    Like

  3. Giants's avatar Giants says:

    Thank you for the feedback. In hindsight, I can’t believe I wrote that as my first line.

    Like

  4. Giants's avatar Giants says:

    Thank you for the feedback. In hindsight, I can not believe I wrote that as my opening line. The more a topic is widely accepted, the more counterintuitive its counter argument is. Therefore, I should convince my readers that the topic isn’t controversial at all, but widely regarded by many as open and closed.

    Like

  5. Conor Olszewski's avatar Conor Olszewski says:

    What if I did the opposite and said something like “seatbelts are pretty much widely regarded by everybody as good for society”. Would that weaken my argument?

    Like

    • davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

      That’s the idea. You could even tease it if you want to. Seatbelts are universally accepted as a good thing: safe, effective, life-savers in fact. You can bolster that feeling with a few numbers that confirm they do a lot of good. Then sneak up on readers with the number of injuries they cause or the number of deaths. And conclude that . . . whatever you’re going to conclude 1) they should be removed from all vehicles, 2) they should be optional, 3) they should be mandated for anyone who has a moving violation, 4) whatever other flavor of permission/compulsion you think is best.

      Like

Leave a reply to davidbdale Cancel reply