this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2026
98 points (100.0% liked)
Slop.
862 readers
412 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
my experience is that whether seatbelts are worn or not has heavily to do with convention and social norms more than any objective view risks vs benefits. if you are in a vehicle with 3 other people none are wearing seatbelts, you are the only one who does it up, you are looked upon as weird. whoever is in charge (vehicle driver/owner) can sometimes enforce everyone wearing them but depends on the dynamics. After that, only legal intervention is left and the chances of this might be low.
therefor the creation and enforcement of a social norm is how to make people feel natural to wear a seatbelt. which is a minimal safety mechanism understood about for years with minimal drawbacks.
So why isn't the dutch reach encoded into law? I'd say that's about the same inconvenience as wearing a seatbelt which is to say basically none