Purpose: to have a statistic to raise the argument that while
important for safety, seat belts are not the cure-all advertised.
a) What percentage of Vehicular Fatalities are wearing seatbelts?
The harder phrasing of the question would be:
b) What percentage of Vehicular Fatalities would NOT have been fatal if the seat
belt was un-buckled?
and if the money covers: 
c) what percentage of Vehicular Fatalities would have been fatalities
whether the seat belt was buckled or not?

---

Request for Question Clarification by bobbie7-ga on 21 Sep 2005 13:27 PDT

Graye,

Take a look at  the report ?Traffic Safety Facts - Occupant
Protection? published on  September 17, 2004  by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration,  National Center for Statistics &
Analysis.
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSF2003/809765.pdf

Please let me know if the seat belt data in this report would be a
satisfactory answer to your question?

Thanks,
Bobbie7

---

Request for Question Clarification by bobbie7-ga on 21 Sep 2005 13:58 PDT

I found additional data that might interest you.

- Percentage of vehicle occupant fatalities in 2003 that were using restraints

- Percentage of vehicle occupant fatalities in 2003 that were NOT using restraints

- Percentage of vehicle occupant fatalities in 2004 (projected) that
were using restraints

- Percentage of vehicle occupant fatalities in 2004 (projected) that
were NOT using restraints

Restraints can be  lap belt, lap/shoulder belt, child safety seat, etc.

Would these figures serve your purpose?

---

Request for Question Clarification by pafalafa-ga on 21 Sep 2005 14:33 PDT

Your questions b and c really boil down to a single statistic.

The Dept of Tranportation considers seatbelts to be 48% effective in
preventing fatalities.

That is, in crashes severe enough to be fatal for those not wearing a
seatbelt, almost half the people would survive if they WERE wearing a
seatbelt.

So the answer to (b) is 48%, and (c) would be the remaining 52% of accidents.


If that seems like the type of data you're seeking, I'll gladly post a
link to the full report that expores these types of data in great
detail.

Let me know what you think.


pafalafa-ga

---

Clarification of Question by graye-ga on 21 Sep 2005 18:35 PDT

Yes, 
Answer number one is satisfactory and covered all bases.
I appreciate the extra information as well.  Thank you for the effort.

One tongue-firmly-in-cheek comment, yes I did search for a while and
got a number of mixed documents....
Paid $17.50... time to link to perfect document that I should have
been able to find on my own - but didn't!! less than one hour.
Did I pay too much... like would $9 have done it... is bobbie that
brilliant ... knew the site to go to before...I know I should be
unqualified delighted but someone I wanted to know some cyber-sweat
was involved .... ha...

Anyway... thank you.
Graye

Hello again Graye,

I'm pleased that the seat belt information in the report I provided was useful.

Title: Traffic Safety Facts - Occupant Protection
Published : September 17, 2004  
By: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,  National
Center for Statistics & Analysis.

Download here:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSF2003/809765.pdf



Additional information:


Passenger Vehicle Occupant Fatalities (All Ages), by Restraint Use

Restraint Use           2003     %     2004 projected
Passenger Vehicle  
Occupants Killed        31,904         31,506
Restraint Used          13,885   44%   13,862    44%
Restraint Not Used      18,019   56%   17,644    56%

Source: FARS

NHTSA?s National Center for Statistics & Analysis

Download here:
http://www.smith-system.com/downloads/2004_EA_Release.pdf


Search terms used:
percent of fatalities using seat belts
fatalities "seat belts"  "National Highway Traffic Safety Administration"


Best wishes,
Bobbie7

Bobbie7 was fast and extremely accurate in providing government
material that completely answered question.
Please don't consider no tip as any judgement other than I think I
outbid myself so I've decided the tip is included in the $17.50

"Purpose: to have a statistic to raise the argument that while
important for safety, seat belts are not the cure-all advertised."

This purpose would have to based on the premise that someone had
stated that seat belts ARE the cure-all, i.e., that their use prevents
fatalities in every situation.  This is, of course, not true and not
being advertised.
Reducing fatalities by 48% is a pretty good justification for their use.

B: fatalities caused by seat belts that would not have occurred without them.

I guess this would be persons strangled by a shoulder belt in an
otherwise less than fatal accident, or people who could not escape
from a burning car after a minor accident.

These unusual cases could be a very tenuous argument against using
seat belts, but in light of the small number of such in comparison
with the overbearing positive factor of using a seat belt in all other
situations, such an argument would would not look serious.

Noted and Nodded.

Just to clarify, I hereby declare on the record:
Anyone who consciously chooses to not wear a seat - belt 
One would have to be either a 
Suicidally inclined proponent of freedom of expression
Playing auto-fun with another person requiring the freedom of movement
or
An advocate of a newly formed religion that really really lets God decide.

As for myself, I even wear a seltbelt when the car is parked and turned off.
(g)

Of course, it is still possible to discuss this issue and for the
purposes of argument, no matter how specious, it is valuable to have
some statistics.

Sincerely
Graye