In: Economics
Wearing seat belts and shoulder harnesses is an efficient means of minimizing the costs of automobile accidents. Assuming that the benefits of these passive restraints exceed their costs, but that not all drivers and passengers use seat belts, how might the rules of tort liability be changed so as to induce a greater number of people to wear seat belts and shoulder harnesses?
A person who is not wearing a seat belt or shoulder harness could be treated as "negligent" provided they attract any kind of injury while driving. This will provide the incentives to the individuals to use the seat belt as it will be far cost effective to wear the seat belt rather than paying the medical bills due to the negligent behavior. In fact, the ideal level of precautions can also be extended by the law by including the wearing of seat belt once again making not wearing one a negligent action.
If a person does not wear the seat belt then this behavior can be modified to the intended negligence. If a person who is driving without having seat belt gets injured in any accident and if there is no fault of the person then then the intended negligence rule would hold that any injuries to the driver that exceed the injuries that would have occurred if the driver had not been intentionally negligent (not wearing a seat belt) would be at the fault of the driver. Therefore, the driver whose fault the accident was would not have to pay hospital bills etc for any injuries beyond what would have happened if the seat belt-less driver was wearing a seat belt. This would induce driver's to wear seat belts more often because they would be held partially liable for their injuries.
I REQUEST YOU TO KINDLY RATE THE ANSWER AS THUMBS UP. THANKS A LOT.