I will stick with sir Jimmy Savilles advice, clunk click every trip.
If your not going to wear a seatbelt then the least you can do is make sure your donor card is up to date.
It’s an Aussie vid, and it’s a car, but you can get the gist:
youtube.com/watch?v=fi5-iVb1YKA
PS the bloke at the end with the spoon is lucky, believe me
I always wear a seatbelt in the truck…and most of the time in the car…not because i am compliant with the nanny state and in fear of the “man”…but simply because i want to do my best to make sure that i am around to watch my kids grow up, and if that means wearing a seatbelt…so be it.
Putting seatbelts on trains is a ridiculously fantastical notion…what about the people who don’t get a seat during the morning/evening commutes? Are they to be strapped to the wall or simply refused to be allowed to travel?
Would you put them on the London Underground (it’s still a train), or the Docklands railway, or tram systems? What about buses?
No excuse for coaches not to have them, and not the ■■■■■ little lap belts either, should all be fitted with 3 point belts.
Have a look at this, if you don’t wear your seatbelt, the airbag makes it a little easier to slide head first through the front windscreen.
youtube.com/watch?v=Y7BDWuIIpkY
If we only could avoid chrashes, but somebody else can make a mistake, truck comes trough the central reservation and hit you head on.
Even if you are the best driver, you are not be able to stop other people to make mistakes, and get caught up in it.
In the end why should you bother 
It’s not you who have to collect your bodyparts, tell your wife and kids that your not coming home, you are not the person who is left over on his own and have to see how to bring your kids up with no decent income, you are not the grandkids without a granddad, you won’t know anything because you are in your box for the reason " THAT YOU COULDN’T BE BOTHERED"
Selfish isn’t it■■?
truckerjon:
having spent 15 years as a firefighter, I’ve seen enough dead bodies to last my life time, and placed too many acident victims into body bags. don’t think in all that time I have seen anyone survive an accident simply because they were NOT wearing a seat belt. I have cut many people out of cars and trucks who were wearing seat belts, and are still alive to tell the tale. Having spent one evening walking along side a busy dual carraigeway, with a thermal imaging camera, looking for the head of a decapitated truck driver, who would have been alive today if he had been wearing a seat belt, I always wear mine, my choice. it takes ten seconds to put on, and may add 20 years to my life. Only time i will take it off, is when doing low speed reversing, and i feel naked without it!If you choose not to wear a seat belt, that is your right, but this is one health and safety law that is there for a good reason. I have heard drivers refuse to take a truck out for not having a radio working or maybe the air con is not cold enough, things that we can live without, but something that is there purely to save your life, becomes some kind of “macho” icon and so many choose to not to use it, or will continue to drive even though they know its not working properly’.
I will concede that there may be occasional instances where, by not wearing a seat belt, someone did survive, but these are far out weighed by the amount of times seat belts have saved lives.
i remember many years ago before seat belts were fitted in most trucks, being asked to take a baby volvo truck out in which the entire seat was loose, I refused to drive it, the TM started threatening me with all sorts of discipline, so I took the seat out of the truck, banged it down on his desk, and told him to drive the [zb] thing! I would do something similar today with a defective seat belt>
When i go to work ni the morning, I want to come home save that night to my wife. I don’t want some Plod having the terrible job of telling my wife that I won’t be home. i don’t want some poor sod of a firefighter having to put me into a body bag then go home to his wife and family and try to have a normal life. From experience, I know that every fatality will stay with that police officer, firefighter or paramedic for the rest of thier lives, so I will do anything i can to keep me safe.
Hear! Hear! ^^
it really depends on my mood tbh, some days ill wear it other days i wont. i always take it off and lower the window when reversing
when i was in europe i never wore it once, was farr too hot to wear it though everytime we saw the police we quickly grabbed them.
DonutUK:
I always wear a seatbelt in the truck…and most of the time in the car…not because i am compliant with the nanny state and in fear of the “man”…but simply because i want to do my best to make sure that i am around to watch my kids grow up, and if that means wearing a seatbelt…so be it.Putting seatbelts on trains is a ridiculously fantastical notion…what about the people who don’t get a seat during the morning/evening commutes? Are they to be strapped to the wall or simply refused to be allowed to travel?
Would you put them on the London Underground (it’s still a train), or the Docklands railway, or tram systems? What about buses?
No excuse for coaches not to have them, and not the ■■■■■ little lap belts either, should all be fitted with 3 point belts.
Under that logic someone would make sure that they use their seatbelt while driving to the station and then park their car for the daily commute and then get wiped out when the train runs into something 
Or you drop the missus or the kids off at the bus stop by car and make sure that they’re all using their seat belts and then get the bad news when the bus hits something. 
and any race driver would call those 3 point jobs ■■■■■ little things which can break your ribs and cause internal injuries even if you hit something at road type speeds causing someone to bleed to death long before the services arrive.The safety argument can be taken to infinite levels.
Quoted from Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt
A seat belt, sometimes called safety belts, is a safety harness designed to secure the occupant of a vehicle against harmful movement that may result from a collision or a sudden stop. As part of an overall automobile passive safety system, seat belts are intended to reduce injuries by stopping the wearer from hitting hard interior elements of the vehicle, or other passengers (the so-called second impact), are in the correct position for the airbag to deploy and prevent the passenger from being thrown from the vehicle. Seat belts also absorb energy by being designed to stretch during an impact, so that there is less speed differential between the passenger’s body and their vehicle interior, and also to spread the loading of impact on the passengers body.
The final, so-called ‘third impact’ after a passenger’s body hits the car interior, airbag or seat belts, is that of the internal organs hitting the ribcage or skull. The force of this impact is the mechanism through which car crashes cause disabling or life threatening injury. The sequence of energy dissipating and speed reducing technologies - crumple zone - seat belt - airbags - padded interior, are designed to work together as a system, to reduce the force of this final impact.
Just wear a hi viz vest in the cab like some weirdo drivers do, after all they are invincibility jackets that are supposed to stop you getting hurt or killed, no need to wear a seatbelt then
caledoniandream:
Quoted from Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_beltThe final, so-called ‘third impact’ after a passenger’s body hits the car interior, airbag or seat belts, is that of the internal organs hitting the ribcage or skull. The force of this impact is the mechanism through which car crashes cause disabling or life threatening injury. The sequence of energy dissipating and speed reducing technologies - crumple zone - seat belt - airbags - padded interior, are designed to work together as a system, to reduce the force of this final impact.
But you’ve left out the bit where seat belts themselves can actually cause injury not by the internal organs hitting the ribcage etc etc but by not sufficiently spreading the impact loads between the belts and the body.That’s why yank spec belts are much wider than euro ones and race belts use four points over both shoulders and both legs not across the pelvis and are even wider than yank road belts.
Carryfast:
But you’ve left out the bit where seat belts themselves can actually cause injury not by the internal organs hitting the ribcage etc etc but by not sufficiently spreading the impact loads between the belts and the body.That’s why yank spec belts are much wider than euro ones and race belts use four points over both shoulders and both legs not across the pelvis and are even wider than yank road belts.
True, but there are still more people who has survived by wearing a seatbelt, than people injured or killed by a seatbelt.
There are maybe bikers killed because they where wearing a helmet, but more survived for the same reason.
If you believe in that there is no point to lock your truck at night, because there are more trucks not broken in than there are truck that are broken in, but you try to reduce the risk by locking it, but …you still could get robbed overnight.
The figures shows that seatbelts save lives, and the moment somebody can show me that more people get killed or injured when wearing a seatbelt, than I will consider not to wear one.
extrucker:
Whilst i am not a policeman,and in my current role,i dont want to be,i would inform a police officer if i saw an activity that endangers my well being when im working on the motorway.A driver,car or truck,is not endangering me by not wearing a seat belt so it is not my business.
Sounds like a bloody jobsworth to me.
Something that drivers and/or passengers do not take into account when they choose not to wear a seat belt is this. If the vehicle is involved in an accident, i.e. rolls over, and an occupant who is not not wearing a seat belt comes into contact with another occupant that is and that occupant dies as a result of the impact, then the one not wearing a seat belt could possibly be charged with manslaughter.
ROG:
Those that are not exempted from wearing belts but choose not to wear them -Do those drivers/passengers have a prominent notice to paramedics and the A&E Dept saying - please leave me at the back of the queue to be treated as it was my own fault for not wearing my seatbelt - I am betting not
It’s alright saying that they know the risks to themselves (their choice) in not wearing one but have they thought about anyone else that it might affect ?That should hot up the debate
Intersting thought, ROG!! Twenty years ago I was involved in a serious RTA in my car when I was wearing a seat belt. I had multiple serious injuries which the doctors told the insurance company had been caused by the seat belt! I nearly lost an eye when it failed to stop me and split my head wide open. With serious leg injuries (caused by the engine being pushed into the car alongside me) I had to sit there trapped by my seat belt with blood pouring from my head injury, and my car catching fire with me in it. I was very lucky that a fuel tanker was following me with the correct equipment for putting out the fire. The idiotic woman who hit me at 80mph whilst I was stationary, yes, stationary - was travelling on the wrong side of the road, was not wearing a seat belt , yet got treated first by the ambulance crew! That accident is why I am called xtruckerlady!
It is possible I would not have survived if I had not been wearing a belt, I honestly wouldn’t like to say, but I can say that they can cause very serious injuries as I found out myself.
On the matter of having a seat belt on whilst reversing - it is not required.
caledoniandream:
Carryfast:
But you’ve left out the bit where seat belts themselves can actually cause injury not by the internal organs hitting the ribcage etc etc but by not sufficiently spreading the impact loads between the belts and the body.That’s why yank spec belts are much wider than euro ones and race belts use four points over both shoulders and both legs not across the pelvis and are even wider than yank road belts.True, but there are still more people who has survived by wearing a seatbelt, than people injured or killed by a seatbelt.
There are maybe bikers killed because they where wearing a helmet, but more survived for the same reason.
If you believe in that there is no point to lock your truck at night, because there are more trucks not broken in than there are truck that are broken in, but you try to reduce the risk by locking it, but …you still could get robbed overnight.The figures shows that seatbelts save lives, and the moment somebody can show me that more people get killed or injured when wearing a seatbelt, than I will consider not to wear one.
In the context of the law which says that we have to use seat belts when driving trucks but we can’t use yank type conventionals,no belts fitted in trains or buses and we don’t even have yank spec width seat belts the analogy would be lock your truck at night but you must leave the windows open and the keys in the ignition switch.
Carryfast:
In the context of the law which says that we have to use seat belts when driving trucks but we can’t use yank type conventionals,no belts fitted in trains or buses and we don’t even have yank spec width seat belts the analogy would be lock your truck at night but you must leave the windows open and the keys in the ignition switch.
Can you tell me where I can find the specification that the USA has legal requirement for wider seatbelts??
I can not find anything in the Federal law for car and truck specification last edition.
My contact there also informs me that the “old fashioned” buckle type still in use is, which where quality wise inferior to the ones we use here.
xtruckerlady:
ROG:
Those that are not exempted from wearing belts but choose not to wear them -Do those drivers/passengers have a prominent notice to paramedics and the A&E Dept saying - please leave me at the back of the queue to be treated as it was my own fault for not wearing my seatbelt - I am betting not
It’s alright saying that they know the risks to themselves (their choice) in not wearing one but have they thought about anyone else that it might affect ?That should hot up the debate
Intersting thought, ROG!! Twenty years ago I was involved in a serious RTA in my car when I was wearing a seat belt. I had to sit there trapped by my seat belt with blood pouring from my head injury, and my car catching fire with me in it. I was very lucky that a fuel tanker was following me with the correct equipment for putting out the fire.
It’s best to carry a seat belt cutter close by for yourself or to help someone else.
caledoniandream:
Carryfast:
In the context of the law which says that we have to use seat belts when driving trucks but we can’t use yank type conventionals,no belts fitted in trains or buses and we don’t even have yank spec width seat belts the analogy would be lock your truck at night but you must leave the windows open and the keys in the ignition switch.Can you tell me where I can find the specification that the USA has legal requirement for wider seatbelts??
I can not find anything in the Federal law for car and truck specification last edition.
My contact there also informs me that the “old fashioned” buckle type still in use is, which where quality wise inferior to the ones we use here.
You can ask any european car maker that exports cars to the states to satisfy federal safety standards.It’s been in force for years certainly since the 1970’s so by now everyone’s probably forgotten about the difference.I’ve driven yank cars over there on hire since the 1980’s and they were all fitted with inertia reel type belts with no real noticeable differences to ours other than the width issue.
Carryfast:
You can ask any european car maker that exports cars to the states to satisfy federal safety standards.It’s been in force for years certainly since the 1970’s so by now everyone’s probably forgotten about the difference.I’ve driven yank cars over there on hire since the 1980’s and they were all fitted with inertia reel type belts with no real noticeable differences to ours other than the width issue.
He Carryfast, I cannot find a proof of that anywhere, also when I imported Jeeps from the US of A for export to Italy we had to replace the belts to be able to registrate them, however Italian gear we exported to Canada and the US of A we had to change the bumoers and the lights but never the belts.
But i found a peace in a publication of Volvo about the use of wider belts, and they don’t see much improvement in a wider belt, first of all they are more uncomfortable, because they fold easier, look at the lower bit of your seat belt if you undo him, maybe you are superslim and have a square figur, but my belly squeezes the belt double. The other reason Volvo (inventor of the seatbelt in production vehicles) that the force is concentrated in the middle of the belt and that there is less spread than we assume.
Have a read of their story 
Translation shouldn’t be a problem for yourself
Veranderingen in de gordels zelf
Zowel Volvo als tal van andere autofabrikanten maken vandaag de dag gebruik van veiligheidsgordels van een klein aantal toeleveranciers. Daarbij kunnen er geringe verschillen zijn in de technische details van de gordels, maar hun structuur en breedte zijn gelijk. Men zou zich kunnen voorstellen dat een bredere gordel een betere bescherming biedt. Echter, aangezien de kracht zich gewoonlijk in het midden van de gordel concentreert, levert de extra breedte slechts een marginaal voordeel op. Bovendien is het comfortabeler, zeker voor vrouwen, om een smallere gordel diagonaal over de borst te dragen.