Fox News Doesn’t Want Your Kids To Have Seat Belts On School Buses

As if America’s school children don’t already have enough to worry about since the Sandy Hook tragedy, now Fox News is complaining about a proposal to put seat belts on school buses.

An op-ed by John Stossel was published today that took the administration to task for the seat belt initiative. He characterized the safety measure as another boondoggle by big government. He mocked the agency that was proposing the new standards. He also argued that it was too expensive and that some studies have concluded that they were unnecessary. But what really destroys his case is that the evidence he relies on to bash the government is from – the government. In fact, it’s the very same agency that he’s bitching about, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)

Stossel wrote that a few years ago the NHTSA conducted a study that concluded that seat belts on school buses were “of no value in the majority of fatal accidents.” He listed six additional items culled from the report. He didn’t cite the specific study or the year it was published. There was a study in 2002 that found that seat belts were not effective in severe frontal collisions. However, it also found that the benefits more than offset the risks, particularly with regard to preventing ejections. Apparently there are more types of collisions than just from the front.

Bottom line: Stossel is criticizing the NHTSA’s big government decision to install seat belts in school buses and supporting his criticism with older NHTSA big government data that he misinterprets. But to pile on the stupidity, take a look at the headline from Fox that mangles both spelling and syntax.

Fox News

That’s an apt demonstration of how idiotic the right-wing is in their haste to condemn any government initiative, even those designed to protect kids. They derisively portray Team Obama as spending wastefully on seat belts, just as they cast Obama as a Stalinist gun-grabber when he proposes safety measures to reduce gruesome shootings.

[Update] Fox News has removed this article entirely from their web site. That seems like a drastic reaction to a couple of grammatical errors. Could they have realized that Stossel’s argument was idiotic? Nah … if that bothered them they’d have to take down 80% of their site.


17 thoughts on “Fox News Doesn’t Want Your Kids To Have Seat Belts On School Buses

  1. The vast majority of schools aren’t victimized by deranged gunmen either, so so much for guarding any of them, Stossel.

  2. Actually, according to Merriam-Webster, “busses” is an acceptable plural form. Most one-syllable nouns ending in a single s (gas, yes, plus) have the option of doubling the s before adding the -es to form the plural.

    The improper verb, however, is inexcusable. (Understandable, given that education isn’t high on the FoxNoise priority list, but still inexcusable.)

    • The Grammerist:

      In 21st-century English, buses is the preferred plural of the noun bus. Busses appears occasionally, and dictionaries list it as a secondary spelling, but it’s been out of favor for over a century. This is true in all main varieties of English.

      After bus emerged in the 19th century as an abbreviation of omnibus, buses and busses (the logical plural of buss, an early alternative spelling of bus) vied for dominance for several decades. By the early 20th century, though, buses was the clear winner, and it has steadily become more prevalent.

      Perhaps Stossel and the editors at Fox missed the school bus too many times.

  3. I thought Shlox didn’t want kinds ON school buses, because then they would go to school and be instantly absorbed into the liberal Borg collective…

    • HA!!! Then the president is Locutis? Hilary is Janeway….shut up, I’m a nerd.

    • I need to reprogram my kids every night after a full day of indoctrination – although I think I have them on the right path now.

  4. You seem to suggest that if someone states “it’s for the children” that everyone should just accept it and do it – and not scrutinize. You’re right in that criticism shouldn’t be knee-jerk, but skepticism of government plans and proposals should be maintained by the public.
    Am I right or am I off base here – I’ve been accused of misrepresenting your views. yes you hate fox news, but is it ok for media to question government actions – regardless of how nice and wonderful they sound?

    • Of course.

      You have a real knack for making a response in the negative by making a general and broad point to articles in which the content is focused and quite specific. I’m sure you could find forums to have conversations about general political ideology and philosophy. Not that you’re wrong on this one of course, but we’re talking about seat belts that kids should wear. I mean, who would even look at seat belts for kids and cry big government? Question them all, I get that. But seat belts on buses is big government? Come on. Ya know??

      • I actually wasn’t trying to be negative – but you’re right I do normally. Honestly, the ignorant statements and characterization by Mark of “the right” usually draws the comments and tone.
        Maybe some can just get ignored, but your statement – “who would even look at seat belts for kids and cry big government” kind of proves my point. Do we hide behind “it’s for the children” or do we evaluate proposed government rules based on their merit and/or true usefulness.

        • Dude….you did it again. What is wrong with you? I’m starting to think that you’re just a dumbass. I don’t know what else to say to that response…’re an idiot. I will never waste my time either reading your comments or responding to them ever again.

          • Maybe you’re reading something into my response that isn’t there – I’m not trying to be ignorant to you…really.

          • Yes, he’s just an idiot. Pretty much everything he says is stupid or opposite of reality.

    • If they want to question government views they should do it by showing how those views are not correct.

      Now, does that happen here?

      Oh and Mark certainly never said anything about media not questioning the government anywhere, as a reply to another post further down, I believe that your statement implying he does implies that YOU read a little too much into his articles… usual.

  5. Ejections aren’t very common on busses, but children using pieces of the busses to injure each other are… Which is part of the problem and why many of the studies found the usefulness limited in school busses – where you can just pad the seats instead.

    I seriously doubt Fox News was going at that scientific angle, though.

    • Hmm, and my spellcheck turned it into busses. o-o Hmm.

Comments are closed.