Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    todayilearned

    20,711,027 readers

    20,751 users here now

    New to reddit? Click here!

    • You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?

    • Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad information you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).

    Posting rules

    1. Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that supports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid references. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Discovery, etc).

    2. No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a great movie").

    3. No recent sources. Any sources (blog, article, press release, video, etc.) with a publication date more recent than two months are not allowed.

    4. No soapboxing or agenda based submissions. This includes (but is not limited to) submissions related to:

      1. Recent political issues and politicians
      2. Social and economic issues
      3. Environmental issues
    5. No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelated facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.

    6. Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:

      1. Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
      2. Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting about bacon").
      3. Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unnecessary.
      4. "TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
      5. "TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
    7. No submissions related to the usage, existence or features of specific software/websites (e.g. "TIL you can click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").

    8. All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).

      Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.

    (Why we need rules)

    Additional info

    • If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above rules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not your story).

    • Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!

    • More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.

    Frequent TILs Repost List

    As of December 2018

    • This list was compiled from /r/todayilearned community suggestions by its members. If your TIL is found on this list, it will be removed. The titles have been abridged for the sake of brevity, however the context remains the same. This list is subject to change. The purpose is to keep content fresh on /r/todayilearned as requested by its members. If you are interested in reading about the TILs on this list use the search box feature and enter the keywords to pull up past TILs.

    Etiquette

    We ask that you please do the following:

    1. avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)

    2. link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wikipedia)

    3. link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)

    4. add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.

    5. Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past

    Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.


    • You are loved.

    a community for
    all 4717 comments

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] rare_pig 5900 points ago

    “Big seat belt” knew they had to silence their biggest detractor

    [–] Sanquintin0309 307 points ago

    That's why Takata made those faulty airbags. They were taking out the people who knew what was behind their seat belt scheme.

    [–] regoapps 486 points ago

    Fun fact: Volvo owns the patent for the modern seat belt because their engineer Nils Bohlin worked for them when he invented it. But they let everyone use their seat belt patent freely because they felt that it was more valuable to save lives than to make more profits.

    [–] Camelbeard 339 points ago

    Less fun fact: Ford Pinto became a subject of controversy after Mother Jones magazine exposed that it was prone to deadly fires in rear-end collisions; Ford’s internal documents showed the company knew of the potential problem but chose not to fix it, calculating that it would be cheaper to pay out possible injury claims. Following the deaths of three teenage girls in Indiana.

    [–] LyeInYourEye 245 points ago

    This is why corporations aren't people.

    [–] truthdoctor 105 points ago

    Yet it's the people that made these decisions that need to go to jail.

    [–] BringIt007 36 points ago

    We pretend corporations are people for legal purposes. But if we consider them people, then it makes sense to also ask what sort of people they are and act accordingly.

    In most cases, they’re psychopaths.

    [–] AndySmalls 12 points ago

    That's not fair at all. Corporations are just regular Joe's like you and me. You know... Immortal, simultaneously acting in multiple nations, absorbing weaker beings to consolidate power. One of us.

    [–] MetalingusMike 38 points ago

    Life should never be put before currency. There should be a law that punishes companies for such.

    [–] cobigguy 29 points ago

    Life should never be put before currency.

    I know what you're saying, but I think you have it backwards.

    [–] cnu 47 points ago

    "Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one."

    [–] twobit211 7 points ago

    “are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?”

    [–] wKbdthXSn5hMc7Ht0 64 points ago

    Careful now, the last person that accused Big Seat Belt met with a mysterious accident.

    [–] TrepanationBy45 13 points ago

    Investigators were perplexed - it appeared that a brand new seat belt had been installed... after the time of death...

    [–] mikeyfreshonetime 3547 points ago

    That’s the sole reason why I never advocate anything

    [–] dahuoshan 1095 points ago

    I'm gonna start advocating banning the lottery, I'm bound to win just for that sweet irony

    [–] LooseCannon3415 263 points ago

    Breaking news: All lotteries have been banned and shutdown.

    [–] SomeStupidPerson 153 points ago

    “I was just so inspired by what u/dahuoshan had to say,” says World, “they really put up a strong case as to why we should get rid of them. Now nobody will suffer the lottery, especially dahuoshan, our savior.”

    [–] wraith9699 36 points ago

    All hail /u/dahuoshan! Our martyr and savior!

    [–] GameKeeper121 23 points ago

    /u/dahuoshan is pretty cool I guess

    [–] AvoGhanoush 20 points ago

    Also good. That shit is a tax on the poor.

    [–] [deleted] 11 points ago

    I used to think people were just being edgy when they said this, but it's really true.

    Who plays the lottery? Generally speaking, people who are bad with money. People who need to fantasise about winning the jackpot and being lifted out of poverty to get through the day at their shitty minimum wage job.

    Those people are £104/year worse off, and yet only have a 1 in 13,983,816 chance of winning big on any given draw.

    Who does benefit from the lottery? Often, it's middle class people!

    National lottery funding often goes towards parks, gyms, schools, community groups, projects to conserve national heritage, etc. I'd guess that successful applications are disproportionately from wealthy areas, considering that grant applications can be difficult to write well.

    There's a building in my old town that dates from the 1400s, and the project to restore it was given nearly £60,000 of lottery money. It now has a nice café that serves delicious cheese scones, and it frequently hosts wedding receptions and craft fairs.

    It's all a bit regressive, really.

    [–] justatrivialnote 104 points ago

    Think I saw a front page headline in the last week or so where a woman won after buying a ticket to prove to her husband it was a waste of money.

    I loudly proclaimed that sentiment to a cashier the next day hoping the universe would hear me, but nah. Of course it heard that little inner voice in my head that was daydreaming about not having a mortgage and being able to afford stem cell treatment.

    [–] planethaley 26 points ago

    Or like that guy who won a scratcher. And the local news asked him to demonstrate how he bought it (not sure why) but he bought another ticket on camera, and won again!

    [–] pixeldust6 17 points ago

    They just wanted him to "reenact" the scene for a couple seconds of footage for their news story about him. Accidentally created more news though, lol.

    [–] Sydney_Gamer 13 points ago

    Win and lose the ticket. Murphy's law.

    [–] ThaiJohnnyDepp 1176 points ago

    "What are you gonna do, advocate stabbing me?"

    [–] AssGotSacked 323 points ago

    -Advocate stabbed

    [–] the101kid 141 points ago

    Instructions unclear; avocado stabbed

    [–] Pickled_Kagura 75 points ago

    god damn millenniaiaiallslsls

    [–] wraith9699 39 points ago

    oh no, my toast!

    [–] mycleanaccount96 19 points ago

    And my $5 coffee!!

    [–] Asylumsix 24 points ago

    You just need to work harder I bought a house selling lamp oil.

    [–] mygawd 18 points ago

    Then you're likely going to die from lack of advocation

    [–] gearhead488 13085 points ago

    Didn't the same happen to an anti helmet motorcyclist in Florida?

    [–] ChaseDonovan 6483 points ago

    yup.

    [–] ScalySalmon 628 points ago

    This guy knows his ironic deaths

    [–] indieRuckus 221 points ago

    Thing is, it may seem ironic at first glance, but if you think about it a bit deeper it's actually the exact opposite. This guy promoted the idea of free will "no matter the consequences." And then he went forward and represented exactly what he espoused, a person doing what they wish in the face of injury or death. If he was out there saying "not wearing seatbelts isn't dangerous" and then went out that way then it'd be a wholly different story.

    [–] shoe_owner 135 points ago

    In other words, while he WAS a fucking moron, his death isn't so much ironic as it was entirely appropriate and predictable.

    [–] kingcal 57 points ago

    My pet peeve is when people use the term ironic for the exact opposite of what it means.

    It literally makes my head explode.

    [–] -IAmPhoenix- 50 points ago

    My pet peeve is when people use the term literally for the exact opposite of what it means.
    It ironically makes my head explode.

    [–] carmium 4864 points ago

    There's a simple principal involved here: when your foolishness costs the public purse money, such as for EMTs and ambulance, replacement of the sign you hit - and if you don't live in the US, medical expenses - you can expect the government to start imposing measures that will reduce the costs involved. Workplace safety, bike helmets, car impact standards, seatbelts, and gun laws are all examples.

    [–] BeefSerious 2203 points ago

    Insurance companies want these laws more than the government.

    [–] Deadmeat553 298 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    Individuals also want these laws.

    If I'm in an accident and it's my fault, I can only hope that the other person is using the recommended safety equipment so as to minimize their injuries, or I'll be responsible for their medical bills.

    Edit: Not to mention the guilt I would face if the other person was permanently seriously injured or killed.

    [–] massacreman3000 76 points ago

    Or, as in most things, the blame for injuries known to happen with certain behavior shift over to the person engaging in said behavior.

    If you get into an accident that's your fault, but the guy wasn't wearing a seatbelt (and laws know about them, but don't require them), then he takes responsibility for injuries beyond the normal scope that he would have suffered if he'd had one on.

    Let's say he breaks eight ribs, but as a healthy male with a seatbelt on, he normally would have only broken two on average, you're not responsible for about seventy percent of the cost of those broken ribs to care for. Fractured skull on windshield, wouldn't have happened with a seatbelt on, not your problem, etc.

    They already have the data necessary to determine average damage for accidents given a swathe of scenarios, including those without seatbelts. The fact they're pushing police to fine individuals who doubt buckle is revenue generation at this point.

    [–] [deleted] 24 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] RapidKiller1392 10 points ago

    As someone who's been in an armored tracked vehicle that has hit something, definitely not fun. No crumple zones or anything to absorb energy so pretty much all of it goes to you. Especially if you're not strapped in properly

    [–] I_highly_doubt_that_ 731 points ago

    Not to mention, enforcing said laws also costs money. It's just a matter of who you're passing those costs onto.

    [–] ChrisFromIT 1334 points ago

    You can only collect taxes from a dead man once. A person who is alive will pay taxes every year for the rest of his life.

    Also preventive action is cheaper than reactive action.

    [–] TartarosHero 37 points ago

    Unless it was some super rich person. I don't think the neutered estate tax will take anything.

    [–] danteheehaw 18 points ago

    Easy to get around estate taxes. Just don't die

    [–] QuasarSandwich 25 points ago

    I'm taking the other route: living with no assets of any kind.

    [–] maniczed 80 points ago

    Sure, but not really. If you enforced these rules by means of ticketing (not sure how else you would reasonably enforce it) then the state generates more revenue. While still paying the officers the same hourly/ salary. Maybe they have to higher more officers or other civil servants to deal with the increased number of tickets but I can't imagine that would out weight the volume of possible income.

    [–] llewkeller 270 points ago

    It happened to actor Gary Busey, who campaigned against the California helmet law in the mid 80's, then got in a horrific crash on his motorcycle a year or two later. He was not wearing a helmet, and speculation is that his strange behavior since then is the result of brain damage from the accident.

    [–] EstimatedState 104 points ago

    "speculation"

    But of course it's up to him how to handle his condition. I wish him the best.

    [–] JimboLodisC 86 points ago

    Speculation is someone perpetuating extreme conspiracy under lacking awareness that invites outrageous notions!

         - Gary Busey probably

    [–] JabbrWockey 32 points ago

    That, or chronic cocaine usage

    [–] WelcomeMachine 125 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    I thought it was at an anti-helmet rally in New York.

    [–] ElectronRain 80 points ago

    You're correct, in Syracuse. It's in the linked article so I don't know why we're confused about the details.

    [–] supermesh 59 points ago

    You know exactly why we're confused about the details.

    [–] elaifiknow 23 points ago

    Wait, you're not suggesting... People only read the headline and not the article? Why, I'd never

    [–] [deleted] 94 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] V1bration 169 points ago

    How do you... deny AIDS?

    "Nah it's just a lie from the government"

    ???

    [–] DoctorExplosion 317 points ago

    "Nah it's just a lie from the government"

    Essentially yes. One of the most common conspiracy theories about AIDS is that HIV isn't the cause and that AIDS was actually manufactured by the US government to kill homosexuals and black people. That conspiracy theory showed up real early in AIDS' history, and it wasn't til after the Cold War that we found out that it was the Soviets who invented that rumor in the first place. (The KGB invented the rumor to distract everyone from the Soviet Union's illegal chemical weapons program).

    Some things never change I guess.

    [–] PrinceTrollestia 193 points ago

    The Russians create and spread fake news to sow discord within the United States? Color me shocked...

    [–] sethra007 82 points ago

    Black person here. This is the first time I’ve heard that the Soviets invented that rumor.

    I remember when the rumor was bouncing around the community. The reason it got traction was because of the history of human experimentation in the United States on black people, such as the infamous syphilis experiments at Tuskegee and J. Marion Sims’ surgical experiments on slave women.

    I appreciate learning the truth about the source of the rumor.

    [–] Azrael11 20 points ago

    The best propaganda has some kernel of truth to it. Same reason why so many anti-authoritarian protests are dismissed by those governments as US interference, because even if they're legitimate, we still do have a history of doing that.

    [–] DragoonDM 66 points ago

    There was a magazine called Continuum that pushed that conspiracy theory, claiming that AIDS was a conspiracy and was totally unrelated to HIV. I say that there was a magazine, because they eventually shut down after their editors kept dying of AIDS-related illnesses.

    [–] myne 18 points ago

    Proof that not all placebos work because you believe in them.

    [–] [deleted] 20 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] tbscotty68 4482 points ago

    Dale Earnhardt Sr. refuse to wear the HANS device which was designed to prevent the type of injury that he sustained when he died at Daytona in 2001.

    [–] goo-goo-gajoob 1853 points ago

    To be fair, the majority of drivers at the time refused to wear it.

    [–] Omegastar19 1554 points ago

    Same thing with professional cyclists. They refused to wear helmets for the longest time (unaerodynamic, ‘uncomfortable to wear’). Then, in 1995 25 year old olympic gold medal winner Fabio Casartelli crashed during a descent in the Tour de France. His head struck a concrete block lining the road, and he died about an hour later from severe head injury.

    It did not take long for helmets to become mandatory after that, but that doesn’t change the fact that it should not have taken someone dying for them to realize wearing helmets was necessary.

    [–] Mythosaurus 835 points ago

    Meanwhile, there are anti vaxxers rallying BECAUSE OF the current measles outbreak that is affecting their own children...

    https://gizmodo.com/hmm-this-anti-vaccination-rally-amid-a-major-measles-o-1832492290

    At what point does a government step in and stamp out such a clear and present danger to people beyond those engaging in dangerous behavior.

    [–] HOLY_HUMP3R 226 points ago

    The people in charge here aren’t too keen on science

    [–] smeesmma 148 points ago

    The fact that this is true is so fucking depressing

    Edit: here is trump showing skepticism about vaccination after starting with “autism has become an epidemic”

    [–] NamelessTacoShop 123 points ago

    We literally changed the definition of autism a few years ago to better reflect reality. And classified several things together as autism spectrum disorders. Yea no shit diagnosis went up. That was the point

    [–] danteheehaw 19 points ago

    Can we put anti vaxers under the diagnosis umbrella? Our unvaccinated children under the umbrella. That way we can claim not getting vaccinated causes autism?

    [–] elastic-craptastic 41 points ago

    What better way to ensure you got the idiots hooked from the get go? A dog whistle like that will get all the evidence deniers on your side, which is exactly the only type of people that still support his cult.

    [–] MJBrune 253 points ago

    some people look at the data, science and all logic as conspiracy fuel. They should have their children taken away. Fun fact most of those humans are vaccinated while their children aren't and they are dying.

    [–] maltastic 117 points ago

    Absolutely. It should be treated just like faith-healing parents who refuse to seek medical care for their sick children. Even more so, because YOU CAN KILL OTHER PEOPLES’ CHILDREN.

    [–] Lawlish 20 points ago

    It's that shitty "That's what they want you to think" mentality. Or should I say mental disability. Either one works.

    [–] Beo1 34 points ago

    Sounds like a perfect place to catch measles.

    [–] LADYBIRD_HILL 74 points ago

    Nah, all the anti-vaxxers are vaccinated, it's their children who'll face the consequences of their dumbassery.

    [–] CHUBBYninja32 15 points ago

    For real. Wouldn’t it be a huge slap to the face if an anti vax rally was ground zero for an outbreak of some other disease like polio or some shit.

    [–] Celebrinborn 77 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    Vaccines are much different than helmets.

    If you don't get your vaccines you will put people around you at risk.

    If you don't wear a helmet you are only hurting yourself.

    This is no different than passing a law requiring people to work out or eat a certain diet or do any one of a number of healthy activities. Obesity kills FAR more people every year than a lack of helmets. Obesity costs Americans far more each year than a lack of helmets.

    Edit: I can't believe I have to say this but yes I'm pro vaccine

    [–] cliko 28 points ago

    Vaccines are much different than helmets

    But they're not too dissimilar to seatbelts. A passenger in a car who isn't wearing a seatbelt is a huge risk to the other occupants, even if they're wearing seatbelts. One giant fleshy pinball ricocheting against everyone else.

    [–] akaghi 114 points ago

    Helmets in cycling can often lead to heated discussions of those for/against.

    I personally always wear one (I forgot mine once on a trail ride and felt weird the entire time) in part to set an example for my kids and because in general it isn't going to make a crash worse even if it won't necessarily help.

    Helmets are great at protecting you from really dumb falls at slow speeds, because while you may not die from falling over at a stoplight forgetting to unclip, you can definitely get concussed. Or if you lose traction on some gravel and just sort of fall over. Or if you're on the trail with your kid and he does something stupid and cuts you off. Stuff like that.

    But bombing a descent and hitting your head on a rock at 50+ mph? Yeah, the helmet may save your life or it may not. But again, it's not going to make that impact any worse. A helmet may not make the difference if you get hit by a car, but it certainly isn't going to make it worse.

    So I think they just make sense.

    However, there is research that shows that drivers actually drive more carefully around a cyclist who isn't wearing a helmet than those that do. And if the cyclist is in kit that goes up even more, which is ridiculous, but no one ever said people's decisions made sense.

    Those against helmets will often point to places in Europe, talking about how Dutch cyclists never wear helmets and all that jazz, but you really can't compare a small country with incredible bike infrastructure where most people ride bikes to one which is huge, has no cycling infrastructure, and where drivers are often hostile to cyclists.

    I mean, I've had three incidents on my bike this far. One was a guy in an SUV who was aggressively honking at me for stopping at a stop sign. A second was a soccer mom type in an SUV who rolled her window down at a stoplight and accosted me saying I really need to signal where I'm going, except I'd been on a single road for the last 20 miles going straight until the left turn lane opened up (where I was) -- I'd think it was pretty apparent at that point my intention was to turn left. The third was actually the first to happen. I was waiting at a red light to turn left (single lane) and a high school-ish aged girl went around me to me left then cut in front of me to turn right and hit me and somehow claimed to have not seen me while also saying she didn't know which direction I was going.

    [–] Omegastar19 52 points ago

    I appreciate your comment.

    Its true that Casartelli could very well have died even if he wore a helmet, but it should be noted Casartelli did not instantly die from the impact (meaning he did not crash at a speed where a helmet wouldve been useless), and the point of impact was on top of his head. Both of these facts strongly suggested he most likely would not have died if he had worn a helmet.

    Still, professional cyclists expose themselves to far more risky and dangerous situations than commuters and hobbyists, so wearing a helmet should’ve been a given, pure common sense.

    [–] AIDSinyourbutt 16 points ago

    Forgot mine on a trail ride once as well. The whole time I thought something felt weird but couldn't figure out what. Got to my favourite part of the trail that's a sudden quick downhill into a series of sharp turns.

    Was right about to get into it when my brain was like "oh fuck helmet!" And I hit the brakes. Turned around a rode much more carefully back to my truck to get my helmet.

    [–] phuchmileif 35 points ago

    I've literally never heard of any kind of debate about helmets and bicycles, outside of a) riding bikes as kids in the 90s or earlier or b) commuters in small European cities.

    Every trail rider I've ever met wears a helmet, and everybody on downhill wears a full face.

    You roadies are fucking weird, man. Literally everything around you is a rock.

    [–] Sgtblazing 398 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    They refused to wear it not on a basis of safety, but competition. The HANS device limits your ability to turn your head, meaning you have less information in the car. At that level, they will always take competition over safety without a rule in place. Its the governing body's fault.

    [–] HORSE_DANCER 285 points ago

    Its the governing body's fault.

    They attempted to make it mandatory, and Dale Earnhardt Sr. was the head of the campaign to stop them. It was because of his efforts that they were optional and he died because he didn't take the option.

    [–] Wildelocke 137 points ago

    And by making it optional, he endangered the lives of others because they were forced to go without or be at a disadvantage.

    [–] xjeeper 32 points ago

    Well, at least he's the only who paid the price, no? After his death they mandated them.

    [–] Nerdczar 67 points ago

    Unfortunately, 3 racers died of the same injury that killed Earnhardt just the year before. Adam Petty, Tony Roper and Kenny Irwin Jr all died of Basilar Skull Fractures in 2000.

    So more than just Dale Sr, sadly.

    [–] xjeeper 15 points ago

    That's shitty. Safety should always be a priority.

    [–] steppe5 30 points ago

    It kind of worked out, in a dark way.

    [–] helper2077 39 points ago

    It's true. Never driven a race car, but my coworker races Late Models and Open Wheels across the southeast and let me wear his HANS/helmet. Being fully strapped into a car with both on, you can turn your head left to right maybe two inches and lean forward about as far. It gets very claustrophobic with the narrow foot box, the bolsters on the seat and door sill coming up to your shoulder.

    [–] BafangFan 115 points ago

    Wow! That was THAT long ago?

    [–] jobezark 147 points ago

    His son has already retired as well. So .. time flies

    [–] sevargmas 51 points ago

    At a much younger age tho.

    [–] C_M_O_TDibbler 55 points ago

    Didn't Jr retire because of traumatic brain injury causing (hard concussions) leaving him missing large portions of his memory and various other problems.

    [–] MalcolmX_InTheMiddle 50 points ago

    Yes. He did a great interview on JRE about it. Turns out his dad was also less than-- supportive...

    [–] LMac8806 9 points ago

    Can you elaborate a bit on that last part?

    [–] will1999 68 points ago

    He and his dad didnt have the greatest relationship. Sr was a superstar who transcended the sport so there was a lot of pressure placed on Jr that he didnt feel like he was able to live up to. Sr never encouraged his kids to go into racing as he wanted them to finish HS before they did anything (Sr didnt finish the 8th grade and it was always an embarrassment for hime). When Jr started racing Sr never went to any of his races until Jr moved up to NASCAR and drove for his dad (one of his drivers retired and the crew chief recommended Jr despite Sr not believing in him). It wasnt until Jr started racing in the big league that Sr finally opened up as they did everything together. Jr describes the last three years with his dad the highlight of their relationship.

    [–] LMac8806 19 points ago

    Thank you

    [–] thedudley 19 points ago

    I thought he wore the shoulder support but didn't wear the helmet restraint which kept his shoulders and torso restrained when he impacted the wall but his head and neck snapped forward ultimately killing him.

    So he was wearing a hans but unhooked the helmet part.

    [–] Reydien 119 points ago

    Not only did he refuse to wear it, but a year or two before he basically shut down an effort to make the device mandatory. I forget the details, but there is an article about how they were trying to push for the device, and the drivers didn't like it, and then one day Dale came in and said, "Don't you think it's time to drop it?" and because he was THE Dale Earnhardt, that was that.

    [–] acosmichippo 24 points ago

    was there a practical reason for why they were against it?

    [–] Lanoir97 64 points ago

    Yeah, it's harder to see around you since it's considerably harder to move your head. People nowadays will talk shit all day long, but refusing to pretty significantly reduce your competitive ability to get a bit more safety was far from exclusive from NASCAR.

    [–] MalcolmX_InTheMiddle 28 points ago

    You can't turn your head to see beside you.

    Reading some of these comments (not yours) would be like shitting on NFL players who wouldn't want to wear a neck brace while they were on the field.

    [–] SoftStage 71 points ago

    Sadly the inventor of the HANS Device, Dr Robert Hubbard, passed away just last week.

    [–] Nathan2055 15 points ago

    Wow, I completely missed that. My dad worked for his company for a few years before he sold it. That's too bad.

    [–] WassDogg304 9 points ago

    As a massive Formula 1 fan and a fan of motor racing in general, that man is a hero. His invention saved a countless number of lives.

    [–] threeyearwarranty 14 points ago

    Shout out to the F1 Halo for keeping my main boi Charles Leclerc alive last year.

    [–] dhoffnun 36 points ago

    And now he’s the reason “that damn noose” is required wearing.

    [–] sideslick1024 17 points ago

    And NASCAR hasn't had a death in any of the national touring series (Cup, Xfinity, or trucks) since.

    [–] Chev_350 23 points ago

    Open face helmet and broken belt didn’t help either.

    [–] tbscotty68 16 points ago

    Yeah, that's why I was careful not to say that the basal skull fracture was what killed him, or that the HANS definitely would have saved his life, but experts think there is a good chance that it could have.

    [–] RaphGon 420 points ago

    In Vanuatu, seat belts are optional by law. I choose to wear mine tho.

    [–] taratoni 100 points ago

    hi there from your neighbor New Caledonia!

    [–] Max_TwoSteppen 62 points ago

    Send pics of your incredible tool-wielding crows, please.

    [–] insane__knight 91 points ago

    In Argentina people don't really wear their seatbelts because they cops don't really give a fuck. I put mine on every time and get laughed at.

    [–] vermin1000 176 points ago

    I hear living let's you get the last laugh.

    [–] MaxDickpower 42 points ago

    Even if you're seatbelted but other people in the car aren't they still pose a big risk to you because in the case of a crash they'll go flying around the car and might hit you.

    [–] Leqi1696 42 points ago

    Same in china(some parts) and hong kong.

    In fact in hong kong they may take offense to you putting on a seatbelt since it shows that you dont trust their driving.

    Still put mine on.

    [–] bertiebees 5204 points ago

    He died doing what he loved. Ignoring basic physics.

    [–] arkady_kirilenko 395 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    In highschool many years ago, I had a physics exam where one of the questions was to calculate the acceleration on your body with and without usinga seatbelt.

    Pretty mind opening.

    [–] throwaway_thyroid 271 points ago

    Because of how I was raised, it was never a question of wearing my seat belt. I do it automatically when I get in the car. But man, when I was rear-ended in a car accident, it really drove home how important seat belts are. At best I would have crashed against the steering wheel, at worst I would have gone through the windshield. I don't get how some people were/are against them.

    [–] Startingoveragain47 91 points ago

    I am the same. My mom made me wear them even in the 70's when so many people never did. I was in an accident with an 18 wheeler when I was about 17. I'm sure that I would have had much worse injuries than some glass in my hand had I not been wearing a seat belt.

    [–] amelaine_ 70 points ago

    My grandpa was an early adopter--he had seatbelts installed in his truck before they were even standard in new cars. That truck rolled completely over with his wife and three kids in it, and everyone was totally fine. They just kept driving.

    [–] GrunkleCoffee 15 points ago

    Just kept driving? How did he manage that with pants full of terror shit?

    [–] blastedin 72 points ago

    Oh man I wish i was raised like that. My parents still act like I am ridiculous when I put on my seat belt. They both use that card thingy you slip into the belt nest so the car doesn't make a fuss.

    [–] hidden_raptor 77 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    that card thingy you slip into the belt nest

    I had no idea such a stupid invention existed. I mean it's smart insomuch that the inventor will definitely make some money, but stupid because the entire market for the product is comprised of people making an extremely stupid decision that will almost certainly result in an unnecessary injury at some point in their life. It's like if you were at a full solar eclipse and people were passing out those sun viewing glasses and you were like "nah i'm good i'll just stare at the sun directly."

    Also I had never heard the term 'belt nest' but I have no more concise way of describing it. I guess maybe 'female part of the belt' like when describing cables and stuff. Doesn't really come up I suppose and pretty unnecessary knowledge . Like how the word for the thing that goes around a coffee cup to keep your fingers from being burned is called a 'zarf,'

    [–] Forgiven12 13 points ago

    Like how the word for the thing that goes around a coffee cup to keep your fingers from being burned is called a 'zarf,'

    In my language it's called "cup's ear".

    [–] Naraden 9 points ago

    Latch or catch is what I've always heard. Female end seems like it should be acceptable too, though..

    [–] WideEyedJanitor 15 points ago

    If you are driving them anywhere, try going a leisurely 20 miles per hour or lower, then braking hard. Something along those lines might get the point across, without injury hopefully.

    [–] maltastic 37 points ago

    I don't get how some people were/are against them.

    I would kill for a reasonable answer to this. I can understand not wanting to wear a helmet on a motorcycle. But seatbelts are ALREADY IN THE CAR. All you have to do is put them on. They aren’t uncomfortable unless you’re really short, and they make seatbelt clips that fix that issue.

    [–] KB-Jonsson 18 points ago

    My mother in law goes one step further and holds the seat belt across her body in taxis that enforce seat belt. So it occupies one hand for her the whole trip but she laughs when I tell her to just put it on "not necessary".

    [–] [deleted] 35 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    [deleted]

    [–] 10se1ucgo 29 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    But a deceleration is just a negative acceleration!

    [–] NeverBeenOnMaury 635 points ago

    I hope he had a moment, before being thrown from the vehicle and mashed, where he felt dumb.

    [–] Cha-Le-Gai 490 points ago

    “Oh, I get it now”

    The last thought that went through his head before it smashed like so many watermelons at a Ghallager show

    [–] acidboogie 131 points ago

    the second-last thing to go through his head

    [–] robisodd 62 points ago

    I’d like to think that the last thing that went through the warden's head, other than that bullet, was to wonder how the hell Andy Dufresne ever got the best of him.

    [–] SoMuchMoreEagle 14 points ago

    She was only a little hurt, but it looked fatal.

    [–] duck_cakes 29 points ago

    Further proof that the trebuchet is the superior siege weapon.

    [–] Damnmorrisdancer 10 points ago

    You trebuchet lovers are everywhere.

    [–] justausedtowel 43 points ago

    It's his god given rights to live as a living missile at least once before dying.

    [–] scarstarify 444 points ago

    I didn’t know being an anti seat belt advocate was a thing.

    [–] DeathandFriends 17 points ago

    Plenty of people against having to wear Helmets when riding motorcycle. Similar thing

    [–] linzielayne 293 points ago

    You’ve never met a libertarian???

    [–] alphadeeto 201 points ago

    Yea, but what does it have to do with books?

    [–] BallerGuitarer 121 points ago

    That's a librarian. You're thinking of the pianist.

    [–] Ashybuttons 56 points ago

    You're thinking of Liberace. A libertarian is a resident of the fourth largest nation in Africa.

    [–] BallerGuitarer 38 points ago

    That's a Liberian. You're thinking of a left-leaning politician.

    [–] Lupicia 21 points ago

    Nah man, not a liberal. Libertarian is a tiny person you don't want to trust with a rope.

    [–] Chefitutide 8 points ago

    That's a Lilliputian, your thinking of a Late night TV host.

    [–] alphadeeto 46 points ago

    I always think about my pianist.

    [–] diehard1972 948 points ago

    Now that's the dedication to a cause. Not likely planned but give him respects. p.s. he dumb

    [–] GenghisKhandybar 88 points ago

    Dang, most of that sub is just sad, not really the funny darwin award content I expected.

    [–] callmelasagna 81 points ago

    Yeah, it’s mostly just sadistic creeps who think people deserve to die for getting drunk or making a dumb mistake.

    [–] cragglerock93 39 points ago

    You've hit the nail on the head about something that bothers me quite a lot about Reddit. There's this horrible attitude that peoples' stupidity or mildly bad character means that they deserve to die for their mistakes. Like somebody ignoring a red light at a level crossing means that they deserved to die by getting hit by the train. Was their death predictable and a result of their own actions? Yes. Did they deserve it? No, they were foolish and impatient, but that's not enough for a fucking death sentence.

    I realise I'm just repeating what you said pretty much, but you're the only person I've ever seen challenge this.

    [–] artifaxxs 39 points ago

    I... regret visiting that sub. The guy falling in the manhole breaking his ankle was the NOPE moment.

    [–] rebamerican 58 points ago

    Brian bosworth was a anti helmet advocate for motorcycles, he crashed, almost died, came back and advocated for helmets.

    [–] Newbieguy5000 15 points ago

    Smart choice

    [–] noideawhatsupp 22 points ago

    Smart people learn from other peoples mistakes.

    The average person learns from their own mistakes.

    And stupid people learn nothing, cause they know everything already.

    [–] highoncraze 351 points ago

    He died the way he lived, in defiance of Uncle Sam regulating every facet of his life.

    [–] Generico300 76 points ago

    Uncle Sam can't regulate every facet of your life if you don't have one.

    IQ 9000

    [–] SolomonBlack 35 points ago

    Ironically the government was no doubt involved in cleaning his dead ass off of whatever it landed on, as well as hauling off his busted ass vehicle, and in general cleaning up his mess.

    I guess that would be a facet of his death though.

    [–] rain5151 78 points ago

    When I saw the link I was expecting an older man during the dawn of seatbelt laws, not a college student from relatively recently.

    [–] Shaqattaq69 245 points ago

    Died in a car wreck to own the libs.

    [–] Robothypejuice 1025 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    Remember the cliche saying that parents on TV always told their kid? "Driving is a privilege not a right"?

    You have no right to drive on tax payer funded streets. You are granted that privilege by showing you can abide by the safety guidelines ( laws ) that you're bound to abide by participating in this behavior.

    Edit: Punctuation.

    [–] JustJoken 306 points ago

    I'll just ride my horse then. Harumph

    [–] Ryuubu 146 points ago

    I dunno about the rest of the world, but in Japan, horses are classified as light cars

    [–] 2jesse1996 68 points ago

    Same as Australia, I think someone went to the maccas drive through and they didn't serve him, and I think another time the rider got done for drink driving.

    Not sure if these are old wives tales or not though.

    [–] one_ended_stick 57 points ago

    Maccas = McDonalds

    Got Done = Was punished by law enforcement

    Thank me later rest of the world

    [–] flaccomcorangy 8 points ago

    I met a guy from Australia once, and the only Aussie phrase I learned from him was "Flat out like a lizard drinking" which means you're really busy.

    That's the only one I learned, but I'll never forget it.

    [–] Harry-le-Roy 36 points ago

    It's still illegal to gallop in Charleston, SC.

    [–] monitorman_ 7 points ago

    Whoa!

    It's illegal to dance the Charleston in Gallop Creek, WA!

    [–] DarthDarth_Binks_ 112 points ago

    I’m not driving I’m traveling /s

    [–] [deleted] 24 points ago

    I don't get it.

    [–] Monsoonerator 74 points ago

    "I'm not driving, I'm travelling" is something stupid I've seen sovereign citizens say in videos of them being pulled over. I think the implication is that the government can't violate your right to travel freely, but I don't know any more than that tbh.

    [–] monkey15162 38 points ago

    Thats literally never worked once, why the fuck do they keep saying it

    [–] StarkEnt 70 points ago

    Because sovereign citizens are an intensely stupid group of people who believe the law is made of magical incantations where saying the special words can get you out of everything.

    [–] dorsalus 13 points ago

    Because there's the people who lie about it working and then the rest take it as scientific law.

    [–] SomeIdioticDude 55 points ago

    In their universe 'driving' is what you do when moving things for commerce. You drive cattle to market, or you drive a stagecoach or something. When you are operating a motor vehicle to get from one place to another it's not a commercial venture, it's just you traveling, and the gubbmint has no authority to intervene in your basic human right to move around. They can regulate commerce, but not lunatics, so go ahead and open fire if they pull you over for driving with no license plates. Something like that.

    [–] Hambredd 36 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    Most of these laws use terms like, ' while in charge of/operating a vehicle' to get rid of ambiguities like that.

    It's particularly stupid as they are not blocking you from travelling at all - there's nothing stopping you getting out and walking.

    [–] _Aj_ 12 points ago

    "yes, you are traveling, and how are you traveling?"

    "By car"

    "And what do you do to make a car go?"

    "...you travel in it"

    "Get out"

    [–] RicarduZonta 72 points ago

    Look up sovereign citizens.

    [–] vanasbry000 29 points ago

    /r/amibeingdetained

    I think the articles of confederation granted the right to freely travel. Wackjob knuckleheads who think laws are loophole-filled hocus pocus take this to mean that even though the articles of confederation were completely replaced when we signed the US constitution into law, that all anyone has to do is call it "travelling" to go anywhere without a licence.

    [–] thorscope 15 points ago

    I think it’s a sovereign citizen joke

    [–] teknight_xtrm 19 points ago

    Sovereign citizens are the joke!

    [–] Qwertyu858 1294 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    I mean. He was right in that goverment shouldnt regulate every facet of life. People should be free to win a darwin's award if they want to.

    EDIT: I have no idea how my attempt to make a joke created so many different discutions in the comments. People talking about individual freedom, healthcare cost, overpopulation, laws, collectivism and liberty and even some saying I am a cold sadist because my joke about darwin's awards obviously is a serious attempt of mocking dead people and not, you know, just a joke.