New CDC Report On Seat Belts

Seat belt laws were created fairly recently in the United States, and their implementation has varied across states and vehicles-the consequences of which have proven detrimental on numerous occasions. One night last fall, a father and his daughter were traveling down a San Diego highway when he suddenly lost control of the vehicle and swerved into oncoming traffic. His daughter was ejected and died at the scene of the accident. The vehicle, a 1956 Volkswagen Beetle, had never been outfitted with safety belts, nor was the father ever required by law to install any. Given the strong relationship between occupant protection and the use of safety belts his daughter may have survived the accident had she been wearing one.

An estimated 12,713 lives were saved by seat belts in 2009. Moreover, more than 72,000 fatalities were prevented between the years of 2005 and 2009, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). In California, 574 of the 1,963 vehicle occupants killed in motor vehicle collisions in 2008 were not wearing any safety equipment, according to the California Highway Patrol’s accident statistics. As much as drivers who “buckle up” have improved the safety of motor vehicles, there were no laws mandating their use until New York enacted the first one in 1984. In the following years, every other state would follow, except for one: New Hampshire.

Seat belt laws fall into two categories: primary and secondary. In states where primary laws are in effect, law enforcement officials may stop a vehicle and issue a citation when either a driver or a passenger is not wearing a belt. An officer may only issue a citation for not wearing a safety belt after the vehicle has been pulled over for another violation in states with secondary laws. “Currently, 31 states, including California, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico have primary seat belt laws, and 18 states have secondary laws”, explains Jim Ballidis, a California personal injury lawyer.

Compliance has been higher in states with primary laws than in those with secondary laws, according to NHTSA. A recent telephone survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed NHTSA’s finding: drivers in California, Oregon, and Washington-all states with primary laws-reported the highest seat-belt use in the country. Coming in first place was Oregon, where 94% of the people surveyed claimed to be seat-belt wearers, followed by California with 93.2%, and Washington State with 92%. Surprisingly, New Hampshire did not rank the lowest. Whereas 66.4% of people surveyed there said they always use a safety belt, only 59.2% of people in North Dakota reported the same.

As seat-belt use has increased, the number of vehicle occupant fatalities has decreased, according to the National Occupant Protection Use Survey (NOPUS). The recent CDC study noted a similar correlation between seat-belt use and injuries resulting from accidents: between 2001 and 2009, the injury rate among motor vehicle occupants decreased by 16%, while between 2002 and 2008, the number of people using buckling up rose from 81% to 85%.

Motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death for people between the ages of 5-34 in the United States. Safety belts have the potential to reduce the risk of fatal injuries during a crash by approximately 45%, according to the CDC. Considering these two facts, everyone should buckle up.

The UK Parliamentary Select Committee Report

The offence of blasphemy, last successfully prosecuted in the UK in 1977, has now been abolished. However, an analysis of the offence is instructive and the history leading up to its abolition will be briefly recounted. Following a 1985 report by the Law Commission, which concluded that the offence should be repealed, and a similar recommendation by the UN Human Rights Committee, in 2002, the House of Lords appointed a Select Committee ‘to consider and report on the law relating to religious offences’. The Report did not offer a conclusion regarding the law of blasphemy, but offered several possible options for reform which will be discussed later. The report, in its approach to religious freedom, mostly encompasses the identity aspect of religious freedom rather than its expres­sive-critical aspect, as will be seen in the following discussion.

In its analysis of the law under the Human Rights Act 1998, the Committee saw in the prohibition a contravention of freedom of expression (Article 10) and of the obligation not to discriminate in the application of the right to religious freedom (Articles 9 to 14). It thus looked at the equality of protection of religious freedom of the members of groups, which the blasphemy laws either did or did not protect. The Report did not consider religious freedom as a critical- expressive right, the religious freedom of the blasphemer, which is impaired by blasphemy laws.

The Select Committee suggested three options for reform the offence of blas­phemy, without choosing between them: ‘leave as is’, repeal, or replace with a broader offence. The reasoning behind each of the approaches reveals more of a community-identity approach than an expressive-critical approach to religious freedom. One reason for the first option, leaving the law unchanged, was that blasphemy law was part of the legal fabric; this reasoning underscores the law’s constitutional heritage and national identity, which should be tampered with only for weighty reasons. This is a viewpoint that sits squarely within the community perception of the right to religious freedom.

Under the reasons in support of the ‘repeal’ option, the Report stressed that the common law offence of blasphemy was discriminatory as it protected only one religion. The Report also stated that the most serious deficiency of the blasphemy offence is that UK courts had interpreted the offence as one of strict liability. The Report did not directly ask, however, whether any offence of blasphemy would be commensurate with respect for religious freedom. An expressive-critical approach would raise this question and answer it by noting that a blasphemy offence is incommensurate with the right to religious freedom.

Under the option of replacement of the offence with a broader, non-discriminatory provision, the Report suggested the use of the Indian Penal Code provisions as a starting point, particularly Article 295A, which states:

Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, insults or attempts to insult the religion or religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprison­ment… or with a fine, or with both.

The Indian Supreme Court viewed this Article as commensurate with the Indian Constitution’s provisions of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The Indian approach, as the Report itself noted, is based on the uppermost con­sideration of preventing religious strife in a particular political context. The Report envisioned problems with such a law, namely potential misuse for political prose­cutions (which it did, however, see as unlikely to occur in the UK) and the difficulty of defining hurt to religious feelings.

Yet the more basic objection should stem from a view of religious freedom that sees the value of this right in the freedom to criticize and debate issues of religion and belief. Even deliberately insulting speech is not necessarily without merit; some effective conveying of religious ideas for and against religions is deliberately provocative and insulting. There is, however, speech that effectively silences, through propagation of hate or intimidation, members of a religious group from expressing their own voice and enjoying their rights as equal citizens. This speech should be more narrowly defined and is better addressed through prohibitions on hate speech.

The Smart Way To Read Your Credit Report

You might not realize but finding out the best way to read your credit report can actually save you a lot of time and money – it’s not even that hard to get started, but there are some basics that you need to get your head around all the numbers, abbreviations and unfamiliar terms before reading your credit report.

Before going to a website and getting your credit report you need to be aware that you will need to get more then one create report.

The three main credit report agencies will have a copy of your report but your information will be inconsistent across all three of them – lenders will report your information to maybe only one or two agencies and that information might be incorrect.

Your personal information is no doubt old and out of date as when past lenders reported on your personal information they will only normally report it back to one of the agencies.

You need to get a copy from each one and make sure you do this regularly through out the year, it is recommended that you get a copy from all three first and then get one copy every 4 months – but get one at a time – only by getting your report through this process can you be sure you have the correct information.

The main resign for this is that its voluntary reporting process so the lenders don’ have to by law report your information.

You need to make sure you get a consumer friendly report – don’t ask your friend who may work at a bank to get your copy for you – as you will not be able to read it correctly – you need to get a consumer version.

The Credit report layout Each report is divided into four sections falling under these categories – Identifying Information, Credit History, Public Records and Inquires.

Identifying information is quote obvious – it’;s all the key information about you but make sure you look t this closely – this is the most common place for your report to be incorrect, especially check you social security number.

Other personal information is your address, phone numbers, date of birth, drivers licenses, your employment information and your spouses name.

The following section is your Credit History – this is the most important information that your new lender will look at to assess your credit worthiness required to make an assessment. You might see that individual accounts are called trade lines.

The accounts will include each creditors name and the associated account number (this could be disguised for security reasons) Note that you may have multiple account kinds with the one lender as they will create a new one if you move.

Here you will have information like the date you opened your account, total amount of the loan, if you’ve paid off the account well and one time. It will also state how much money you owe and the credit limit, and ofcause the account status.

Look out for “charge Off.’s these are big black marks that mean that the lender has given up chasing you and has noted that they did not receive the money they were owed.

Public Recored You wan this section left totally pristine white – blank as can be. As having a report here will seriously impact your likelihood of gaining credit. bankruptcies, judgments and tax liens activities are listed here.

Inquiries – The Last Section This the place that will note each inquiry that was made you your account – noted as a soft or hard “call”so if you If you call the credit bureau and ask for a copy it will be on there. It’s great as it’s a very detailed entry record.

“Hard” inquiries are ones you initiate by filling out a credit application – you wan to avoid these as they will have a negative impact on your report if you have too many but the good news is that it also counts two or more “hard” inquiries in the same 14-day period as just one inquiry.

Read your report carefully and report any mistakes to each credit agency so you can get them all fixed and consistent as soon as possible.

I hope you know how to read your Credit Report, so you have a good handle on what your information means.