I can’t get a good answer for this as Google is thinking I’m talking just solely on the driver. I’m including passengers who don’t. I’ve seen PSAs that tell you the dangers you pose for others as well when you don’t wear a seatbelt. So if you don’t wear a seatbelt and that results in someone being killed could you not wearing a seatbelt mean you get a manslaughter charge?

  • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    In the US at least, it’s not a requirement to wear a seatbelt in the back seat most places.

    I

    • Routhinator@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      15 hours ago

      O.o this comment is from 2024?

      The US continues to surprise me.

      In Canada the driver is penalized if any of their passengers are not wearing a seatbelt. Refusal to wear one means getting booted from the vehicle.

  • tko@tkohhh.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’m having a hard time imagining an accident caused by not wearing a seatbelt… I guess maybe being thrown from the vehicle and hitting a passenger in another car who was wearing a seatbelt?

    • BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      16 hours ago

      If you don’t wear your seatbelt in the back of the car, you become a projectile who can possibly break one or two necks on the way out of the front window.

  • Cyanogenmon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    As I understand it, getting someone killed through negligence of any kind is manslaughter.

    So I’d say yes.

  • Salvo@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    It depends on the Jurisdiction.

    IANAL, but in Australia, the Driver is responsible if any passengers are not wearing their seatbelt.

  • BlitzoTheOisSilent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Are you saying the driver is wearing the seatbelt, the passenger(s) aren’t?

    And how does the death result? Is it because of an accident? Are they messing/moving around in the car? Are they legally allowed to not be wearing a seatbelt in the vehicle?

    There’s too many undefined variables I think for anyone to give you a solid answer.

    • brap@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’ve heard it mentioned that a passenger in the rear without a seat belt becomes a projectile in a crash and can kill or injure the person sitting in front of them.

      • DaGeek247@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        That’s on the driver. If you’re driving, you are responsible for everyone in the car and out of it. If you drove off with someone unbuckled, that’s on you.

  • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Same idea, but if a pedestrian is jaywalking across a street, technically illegal and it’s not a safe move - but is struck by a car - the car is still at fault. As a driver you are still in charge of driving a 2-5 thousand pound hunk of steel and you accept that risk when you get behind the wheel. So I think logically, what the person was doing was not the smartest - but that doesn’t mean they deserved death for it - you are responsible.

    Think about it this way - if you hadn’t been there driving would they have been fine? If so, you caused it, you’re at fault.

    Same applies to rape and dressing provocatively. It’s an irrelevant argument because it puts blame on the victim, when no matter what they do they don’t deserve that outcome. The blame is on the person who caused it in the first place.

    • cone_zombie@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m sorry, but this kind of logic just baffles me. Are you talking out of your ass on this one? If you’re driving and I’ll jump onto the road right in front of you, will you still be at fault? Where in the world would that be the case? If I come to a factory and stick my hand into a wood chipper that someone was operating and then say “whoever the hell was operating this 5 thousand pound hunk of steel should be at fault now!”, would I be correct in my logic?

      Think about it this way - if you hadn’t been there driving would they have been fine? If so, you caused it, you’re at fault

      This is next level mental gymnastics. If someone robbed you, think about it this way - if you hadn’t been there, none of it would have happened. So maybe you’re at fault after all

    • iamdefinitelyoverthirteen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      My grandpa ran over a woman who walked into the street late at night. There was no way for him to have avoided it. He did not get in trouble. This was in California.

  • bitcrafter@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    According to this page, you could attempt to argue “lack of causation” if there was no connection between you not wearing a seat belt and your passenger getting killed.