from my POV... based on the CCTV, the 4x4 were on the right most lane (fast lane and travelling quite fast) and upon seeing those myvi (racing), he switched to the middle lane but those myvi would assume that the 4x4 wouldn't change lane, thus overtake on the mid lane, at the speed they are going... fail to slow down/avoid the 4x4 that change lane thus the crash

Frankly, we have seen those racing on the road and most of the time, it doesn't gives a shit for u to switch lane even with signal indicator. Saw too many on NSE

That is clearly not my intention, it is too unfortunate that that connection can be drawn.

But everyone should know that they should put on their seatbelts to protect themselves and their loved ones. You don't do that, you risk your life. Point proven by the Pajero folks.

You can't stop others from doing stupid shit, and sometimes we ourselves, no matter how careful, will do a mistake. That is HUMAN. You only need to misjudge things once. Be a bit too tired when driving. And you can crash. Given that a crash can ALWAYS happen, heck, even in a car park, it is only sensible to put on your seatbelt. Should anything happen you have got the most important protection that you can have already covered.

The wrecked Pajero btw. looks pretty decent, I've seen much worse car wrecks that the passengers have survived... because they were wearing seatbelts!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyigWhdSqco
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abuaYiyk-xQ

Staying in the car helps a lot in not getting killed.

A lot of people until now still thinks : driving 110km/h shall stay on right lane.
This is wrong, as long as your speed are constant, you shall be staying on middle or left lanes.
And when I see a fast car coming near to me, I won't change lane, if that fellow wants to overtake from left, just let it be.

Yes. That is correct because their perception is you (in front) will stay on same lane, resulting them to zoom past us on the left lane. If we sudden swerve to left, they might crahs onto us

all i want to say is that,just because somebody didn't wear seat belt doesn't entitle you to knock them or drive dangerously, in fact you have to drive even more carefully knowing there's people who didn't wear seat belts

Blame for the accident (so far) goes to the Myvi drivers, but blame for the deaths have to be shared.

Of course you can't eliminate death completely. You can reduce the risk. Every bit you do to reduce risk helps. Now if you want to call the remaining risk fate... fine. I'd call it remaining risk, but fate will work. But at least do all to reduce the risk. After all people live in gated condos and do all sorts of stuff to protect themselves, but then when sitting in a car they can't put on their seatbelts? That's my main issue with fate. It gives away all responsibilities. People who believe in fate tend to avoid doing things they don't want to, in order to protect themselves. Seen that many times. "Oh, I don't need a safe car, if I die it is fate." But at the same time they'll take some food supplement to prolong their life, because they want to, and there it's not fate. So fate is just an excuse to be lazy, to be stingy, ...

@sleepwalker: It's less likely to fall out of the car though with a seatbelt. Even in a rollover. And considering that everyone left the car...? But we'll have to wait for the result of the investigations to know for sure... I really hope that if they find that they didn't wear the seatbelts the police, government and press makes sure to mention that. And that they would probably be still alive had they worn the seatbelt. Maybe it will make some people wear their seatbelt in future...

@Dwango: 3 point seatbelts are a compromise between giving good protection yet convenience. We can see how people are reluctant to put on even the 3 point seatbelt (2 point is worse, as your body isn't kept back). Imagine a 4 point, 5 point, 6 point harness. It's much more restrictive, and much harder to put on. Safety technology works, just look at race cars and how they crash. They can have very violent crashes, and just get out of the car and walk away. Unfortunately that sort of technology is very cumbersome, so car makers try to protect you as good as possible without having to resort to a roll cage, 6 point seatbelts, helmets etc. Some effort is still required though.

Now... put on a seatbelt. Try to leave it. It IS possible, but it is rather difficult, especially given that when there is an accident the seatbelt will pull you towards the seat, into the seat. Escaping that is not easy. One way is when you lean back the seat a lot and crash frontally... you may slide under the seatbelt. But that's not what could have happened here.

I have seen devices to educate people on the importance of seatbelts... like, you get into a specially prepared car shell, put on the seatbelt, and then they will roll the car shell (it's like a wheel). People will stay inside. Or ones where you are on a car seat that's propelled forward and then suddenly stops. To show the importance of a seatbelt. Maybe such devices should be created in Malaysia and then toured around the country... like demonstrating it on shopping center car parks etc. Go from school to school and demonstrate it to the kids and their parents. Those who think they don't need a seatbelt can try without... so the car interior needs to be soft. And when they fail at a very slow speed maybe they realize their mistake. Clearly some very basic education needs to be done.

My last statement was not serious, I was poking fun at people believing in fate. I do believe that when you do a bit effort to reduce the risk in a car accident it helps, and I try to do that, as it is common with people in Europe. Obviously I am not invincible. Fate doesn't exist.

As for the sound the car makes... you can buy fake seatbelts to deactivate the alarm for example.

@supersound: Given how fast airbags deploy I'd say the airbag deployed first, however they may have hit the airbag while it was deploying, and in any case it won't stop you from existing the car, where you get hurt even more. The deflation happens much faster... it's not a rock solid thing... well, initially it is, but only for a couple of ms perhaps.

First you say it's risk fate. Then later on you say fate doesn't exist. Which is which? Don't need to complicate things, live in denial or try being smart. Fate is something that exists.

When sugar is sweet, you don't say it isn't sweet, or sweet doesn't exist.

Where did I say it is fate? Fate does not exist.

There is a risk in driving/being on the roads, and that is related to the way you behave on the road, where you drive, what you drive, ... it can be higher, it can be lower. That's all.

People who believe in fate, and thus neglect things like wearing seatbelts, buying safe cars, behaving properly on the road, they will live shorter lives. There's proof for that, and it's a big difference. Fatality rates in Europe are much lower than in Malaysia/South East Asian countries.

Where did I say it is fate? Fate does not exist.

There is a risk in driving/being on the roads, and that is related to the way you behave on the road, where you drive, what you drive, ... it can be higher, it can be lower. That's all.

People who believe in fate, and thus neglect things like wearing seatbelts, buying safe cars, behaving properly on the road, they will live shorter lives. There's proof for that, and it's a big difference. Fatality rates in Europe are much lower than in Malaysia/South East Asian countries.