In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Click it or ticket seatbelt campaign
shootuadeal
Member Posts: 5,242 ✭✭✭✭
Here in the state I live in and a neighboring state are running a "click it or ticket" campaign, my state not wearing a seat belt is not a "primary??" offense meaning they can't pull you over for it, they only write you a ticket after they have you stopped for some other reason, but during this campaign that runs for about two weeks they can stop you and write you a ticket.
My thoughts on seatbelts for years has been it is my business whether I choose to wear my seatbelt, What is it to the police whether I have it on or not, can't I as an adult make up my own mind on whether to wear it or not. Seems to me that this is just a fundraising push for our respective states.
What are your thoughts on this? I am not wanting to here your answers on whether seat belts are a good idea or not as we all know that they DO help in a crash but rather your thoughts on whether or not we should be written a ticket or not for not obeying something that should be personal choice rather than law.
My thoughts on seatbelts for years has been it is my business whether I choose to wear my seatbelt, What is it to the police whether I have it on or not, can't I as an adult make up my own mind on whether to wear it or not. Seems to me that this is just a fundraising push for our respective states.
What are your thoughts on this? I am not wanting to here your answers on whether seat belts are a good idea or not as we all know that they DO help in a crash but rather your thoughts on whether or not we should be written a ticket or not for not obeying something that should be personal choice rather than law.
Comments
I think it should be up to the individual, no different than smoking.
There is hardly a clearer illustration of the intrusion of government into individual liberty than the seat belt clown-show.
Malum prohibitum collectivist-law at its finest.
We are your nanny and we know what's best for you!
Personally, I wear my seatbelt and wore a helmet when I had a bike.
The 'law' really has no effect on that decision.
If I did not want to wear it, I wouldn't.
If 'nanny G' were truly concerned with safety, they'd spec their school buses to include seat belts for each occupant.
It's o.k. for my kids to be unrestrained in a bus, but I have to buckle up in my POV?
Gimme a f'in break.
It is about power, control and money. That's it.
I wear one, but it is MY decision.
The 'law' really has no effect on that decision.
If I did not want to wear it, I wouldn't.
You live in NC, if you got a ticket would you pay it or fight it??
Govt..... Hey we can't get enough tax dollars out of you, so were going to make extra laws to squeak another buck from you. But you still have your freedom, as long as big brother approves.[;)]
Laws are getting contradicting to freedom.[:(!] There was no such thing as a seat belt law growing up in my state. But there is now.
quote:Originally posted by wsfiredude
I wear one, but it is MY decision.
The 'law' really has no effect on that decision.
If I did not want to wear it, I wouldn't.
You live in NC, if you got a ticket would you pay it or fight it??
Probably pay it.
The money I would spend fighting it in the courts would be better invested in ammunition.
The insurance companies might care since they are the ones who have to pony up the dough for hospital bills for injuries that could have been avoided by a seatbelt.
In the state that I live in, it used to be police could not pull you over simply for not wearing a seatbelt. I dont know of anyone who expected that to stick. Within a couple years, you guessed it, they didn't need another reason to pull you over. You could be pulled over just because they didnt think you were being as "safe" as they think you should be. What a joke!
For the record I never wear mine, A ticket here is $20 which I have gotten written up for in the past. Will gladly take another one just to argue my point to the current police officer.
Anybody know the origin of this law? Did the car companies lobby for it to avoid lawsuits or some such thing? Just wondering how it came about in the first place.
For the record I never wear mine, A ticket here is $20 which I have gotten written up for in the past. Will gladly take another one just to argue my point to the current police officer.
It was the insurance companies that lobbied for it.
Sometimes... you just gotta legislate against STUPID. Helped scrape off too many folks from the road after getting ejected from their vehicles.
Sometimes... you just gotta legislate against STUPID. Helped scrape off too many folks from the road after getting ejected from their vehicles.
But it's o.k. for kids in school buses to be unrestrained?
Sure, I believe the state cares;
About money.
Sometimes... you just gotta legislate against STUPID. Helped scrape off too many folks from the road after getting ejected from their vehicles.[/size=3][/navy]
That's their business not the government's/jackboot's
quote:Originally posted by 35WhelenClassic
I don't wear a seatbelt. Matter of fact, I can't. My Jeep never had any to begin with, and I'll be damned if I'm going to drill any holes in the floorboards.[:D][;)]
With your luck, you'd drill into the fuel tank. [:D]
Considering it's now running better than it has in the last 10 years, I'd say my luck is in excellent standing.[;)]
A clear government intrusion via predatory 'law enforcement', foisted on the states by the federal government via NHTSA and the threat of withholding federal highway funds.
There is hardly a clearer illustration of the intrusion of government into individual liberty than the seat belt clown-show.
Malum prohibitum collectivist-law at its finest.
Bingo!!!! Feds pushed the states to pass it by threatening to withhold Fed. highway funds, etc. Alabama fought it as long as they could.
The one justification the state could use for it (that I would agree with) is if the cost to the state/fed in emergency care & services, and future disability was more without a seatbelt. It would be interesting to see the actuarial statistics. After all, being dead is cheapest for the state/fed. It may be that in the long run, not wearing a seatbelt costs the government less on average. But of course politicians never think of the long term.
The justification for cigarette taxes has always been the increased cost of heathcare, but if you actually do the numbers, smokers cost the government less becuase they don't collect as much social security.
Why is it ok for anyone on a motorcycle to ride without a helmet, but I am to wear a seat belt in a car traveling at the same speed? Stupid.
Seatbelts in school buses? I drive a daily route (for one more day); you would be surprised at the parents who develop an attitude toward me when I call them about their students being required to be seated and remain seated on the bus.
I guess they are a bunch of roadwarrior nazis anymore.
quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
I think it stupid in FL how I have to wear a seat belt, but the guy on the motorcycle doesn't have to wear a helmet.
I've been thinking it won't be too long before the feds push for requiring helmets in every state.
Here in Ky my biggest problems with seatbelts is..THey say you have to wear one but they will let motorcyclist go without helmets, doesn't make much sense to me. I think seatbelts do help but it ought to be a personal choice.
Same thing here in Kansas ... its a income generating scam for the city/state.
? otherwise, you'll find an excuse.
Remember - driving is a right, not a privilege. The rules of the road are made by those that grant the privilege.
I wear one, but it is MY decision.
The 'law' really has no effect on that decision.
If I did not want to wear it, I wouldn't.
If 'nanny G' were truly concerned with safety, they'd spec their school buses to include seat belts for each occupant.
around 1985 PA decided to put seatbelts in the smaller school buses that hauled "disabled" kids. Then some school districts decided that the buses they bought or leased needed a flashing white light on top. It became "cost effective" for builders/dealers to sell buses allready equipped with the lights installed. As soon as more school districts decide the buses need seatbelts you won't be able to buy/lease a bus without belts. If you check around there are probably quite a few districts with seatbelts on buses, may not be being used but they are there.
... Kids should always be belted. It would be a confusing law to say the driver is responsible for making sure everyone is belted accept themself. ... So any state that has these types of laws it is for everyone in the vehicle. And I agree with the laws.
Remember - driving is a right, not a privilege. The rules of the road are made by those that grant the privilege.
Doesn't a school bus driver have to wear a seatbelt? Now that is confusing.
So I am being granted the privilege to exercise my right?
They lied.
Here in Oklahoma, they pushed the seatbelt law using cops looking earnestly into the camera, stoutly maintaining how they would 'never use the law to stop people for a ticket'.
They lied.
NO!!!!!
Like any Paramedic, I always wear my seat belt. Anybody who drives down the road without a seat belt is a fool.
But, government should not mandate seat belts, nor motorcycle helmets.
The Nanny State at its finest.
Most people here would throw a fit saying that they are doing it just to get more money and scam their clients.
In short, most people here think, that everybody in the world is out to control ever facet of their lives.
As to the 'unintended truth' in your statement....Collectivism inevitably leads to totalitarianism.
A simple truism.
quote:In short, most people here think, that everybody in the world government and certain elements of society are is out to control every facet of their lives.Cleaned up the hyperbole and made it read properly.
As to the 'unintended truth' in your statement....Collectivism inevitably leads to totalitarianism.
A simple truism.
The way that you changed it, it actually IS true. The government really does want to control everything. However, there are some here that think EVERYBODY wants to control everything. For example, insurance companies really couldn't care less if you wear a helmet, or a seatbelt, or smoke, or whatever, AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T COST THE COMPANY MONEY.
quote:Originally posted by slipgate
... Kids should always be belted. It would be a confusing law to say the driver is responsible for making sure everyone is belted accept themself. ... So any state that has these types of laws it is for everyone in the vehicle. And I agree with the laws.
Remember - driving is a right, not a privilege. The rules of the road are made by those that grant the privilege.
Doesn't a school bus driver have to wear a seatbelt? Now that is confusing.
So I am being granted the privilege to exercise my right?
Apples to Oranges. We are talking about cars. But I don't know of many school buses that even have seatbelts on anything but the driver's seat. And as far as I know, driving is a privilege and not a right.
Without mandatory seat belt laws, more people die. When more people die on the road, the cost of insurance goes up for the people still alive.
We collectively pay taxes to operate, maintain, and enforce laws on our public roads, we have also collectively agreed to certain rules on our roads. Safety features both to keep people alive, and to keep insurance costs down.
I wear a helmet on a donorcycle and a belt in the car. But it should be my choice. Instead, seat belt laws are being used by the nazinannies as a revenue generator (Oregon is horrible). If they really were concerned about your safety, they would just give you a warning. Last I heard, it was a $105 ticket here.