Well this kinda sucks...

[b5blue]

  116.00 ticket for not having my seat belt on today. Funny I can hop on any motorcycle and drive with no helmet, be texting, and or talk on my cell phone, but OH gotta be buckled up going 20 miles an hour in my Cherokee!    My pal Jeff was downtown last month and had to leap out of the way of some woman blabbing on her cell. I do mean leap and roll to the sidewalk....she never even slowed down, he was in a cross walk and had the go light.    That's it I'm ticked off the Charger is going back on the road ASAP! (Got some six pack repairs to do tomorrow!)

[daveco]

I despise seat belt laws
I almost always use a seat belt, but if I don't feel like it, thats my call.
I don't need johnny law looking after me.

[Rolling_Thunder]

I got hit for $170 for talking on my phone here in CA...        talk about getting f*****

[Kern Dog]

I have been cited twice for the cell phone. The first time, I asked why a hands free device was allowed since the problem is DISTRACTION, not the fact that I had something in my hand, The cop changed the subject.

[1969chargerrtse]

I despise seat belt laws
I almost always use a seat belt, but if I don't feel like it, thats my call.
I don't need johnny law looking after me.

I always wear a seat belt but gotta agree with ya.

[Richard Cranium]

Yet it's  legal for 50 kids on a school bus to be riding around unbelted. Go figure.

[Troy]

So why aren't you wearing a seat belt? Seems like an easy way to save $116.

But any way... Ohio has a seat belt law but you can only get ticketed as a secondary offense (meaning there had to be another reason to cite you). However, since the federal "Click it or Ticket" campaign went in effect they have temporarily (yeah right!) modified that law so that any seat belt violation is a valid reason to pull you over. When the law went into effect it was a $25 fine but now it's over $100 - and only slightly less for a passenger. According to the statistics, 90% wear a seat belt any way so they're running out of ticket revenue.

I despise "nanny" laws. Let your voice be heard and back it up with your vote!

Troy

[BrianShaughnessy]

More stories of the "Revenue Patrol"...       What used to be a secondary offense that could only be ticketed after being pulled over for something else is now a primary offense.

Friend / Co-worker got pulled over Friday morning going over the Mid-Hudson bridge to Poughkeepsie.  He was wearing his belt...  trooper said he wasn't.   Now he has to take his time and plead it out or whatnot to some lesser offense but will still probably get stuck with a fine as the court system around here favors the police and you're guilty unless proven innocent via technicality.

[b5blue]

  The cop asked me "how long ago I was ticketed if ever?".....kinda odd as I know they run tags before pulling you over. Tag would tell you owner and pull that info so why ask? Your "made" before the stop right?
  This was my only 2nd ticket in over 18 years, he knew that before asking.  Thanks guys for your comments.

[bakerhillpins]

  The cop asked me "how long ago I was ticketed if ever?".....kinda odd as I know they run tags before pulling you over. Tag would tell you owner and pull that info so why ask? Your "made" before the stop right?
  This was my only 2nd ticket in over 18 years, he knew that before asking.  Thanks guys for your comments.

Yea, I think they ask that question as a test to see if you are going to try to snow job them. In my case he asked me and I said yes several years ago, to which he replied "what about the accident 6 months ago". At that point I got jacked and asked him if he bothered to read the report behind it. He said he didn't at which point I enlightened him that I was hit by someone running a stop sign. Twit. Got a verbal warning though (speed).

I ride my motorcycle with full gear and always buckle up but firmly believe in natural selection, do what you want. Though I do feel that laws for minors are worthwhile and give them a fighting chance from their parents. As always, YMMV.

[TruckDriver]

Seat belt tickets are only $10 here.

[b5blue]

How can cell and texting laws remain uncontested when police drive around with computers running and talking on the radios?  Isn't that paramount to drunk cops driving around? (According to their "study") 

[BrianShaughnessy]

How can cell and texting laws remain uncontested when police drive around with computers running and talking on the radios?   Isn't that paramount to drunk cops driving around? (According to their "study")  

Traffic laws are enacted to protect the profits of insurance companies that had to pay claims based on injuries sustained by people not wearing seat belts....  or plowing into other things talking on a fone...   or whatever.

As for the cop thing...  many municiapalities are self insured so if a cop wrecks a cruiser - you get to pay for his mistake also.

[Magnumcharger]

Seatbelts have saved my life on several occasions. Also, I've done my time flying through the air while seperated from my motorcycle, which is why I don't drive motorcycles anymore.

My wife is an operating room nurse at the largest trauma hospital in eastern Canada. She loves to come home after a day in surgery and fill me in on her day's work. Often it involves people in car crashes, or motorcycle accidents. Typical victim is an arrogant young male (she calls "organ donors").

After years of hearing first-hand accounts of people flying through their car's windsheild, or getting run over by their own car, or my favorite....exiting their sunroof....I'm a firm believer that restraints are there for a reason.

Obviously, you have your own mind. I suggest doing a bit of homework.

[twodko]

IMO seat belts always despite any inconvenience. I'd rather be inconvenienced than dead.
Texting and/or handheld cell phone use while driving should mandate serious fines, the bigger the better.
If you are in this country illegally and drive here, when you get stopped, and you will, you forfeit your car and should go to jail with an ICE visit. 

No one likes getting ticketed, I sure don't but the above are "no brainers" to my way of thinking.

[charge69]

Twodko......couldn't have said it better myself!!     +1

[b5blue]

  My point is that it's a LAW...the state intended it to be a 35.00 fine, the county saw fit to raise it to 116.00. At no point in my travels was I going to exceed 20-25 MPH tops, belts would make no difference at that speed. Yes my kids and I were raised to buckle up and do but I'm sick of being hassled and nanny law this and that when the state, in my personal experience, can disregard there own laws, court orders, and refuse to prosecute legitimate violations of their own statutes on a discretionary opinion. Legislators waste so much time "debating" so much stupid stuff and district attorneys "cherry pick" cases so they maintain a high "win record" they do the public a disservice to make themselves "look good". Enforce all the laws, prosecute all violations, stop picking what, where and when or we the people loose all the time.               

[68X426]

I'd rather be inconvenienced than dead.

Wisdom in 6 words. 

I do understand you b5blue. I'm with you bro. The nanny state is a hypocritical state. But seat belts aren't exactly a PC issue either, nor hypocritical.

Maybe you pick the bigger fights to fight instead of this one? 

[daveco]

Seat belt laws are about revenue, not safety.

[stripedelete]

I hate the "nanny state"!!!!!!!!

I think one should have the right to choose.  That is as long as I am not forced to pay more for my health care as result of your decision not to wear a seat belt or helmet.

Therefore, if you can prove you have sufficient health care insurance and or cash on hand to handle ALL of the medical bills for the 50 surgieries, and or breathing machine, and or prostetics,  as a result of your car accident you should not be subject to this tyranny.

just sayin'......

[daveco]

...so it's ok that you can't afford to pay your own medical bills as long as you were wearing a seat belt?

[b5blue]

   Please don't think I'm going to war over this, because I'm not. I laughed when the cop said signing the ticket isn't an admission of guilt...I told him "I'm guilty as hell". I bear no ill will to the cop, he's doing his job. Hypocrisy just bugs me no matter where I see it and "for me" this is. I'll write the check not tie up the courts system just to rant. Hey the 36,000.00 my ex owes in support to my kids that the state will do nothing about, after pleading with them for years to enforce there own lawful court order? The fact that she drives around the last 8 years with no license or insurance? No matter, there are much worse examples in my personal experience then those, that the D.A. refused to prosecute that I won't share, that really have me frosted. Like I said, it just kinda sucks.
  Thanks to all who replied here, it was nice to be heard and get feedback, pro or con! b5   

[stripedelete]

...so it's ok that you can't afford to pay your own medical bills as long as you were wearing a seat belt?

good point.

[John_Kunkel]

Automobile accidents are the second leading cause of traumatic brain injuries yet no state requires helmets in cars. Why? Because there is a limit to the authority people will cede to the state in the name of "safety".

I wonder how many here who are advocating the mandatory use of belts in cars and helmets on motorcycles would sit mute if they mandated helmets in cars.....the logic is irrefutable, helmets in cars would save lives and ease the burden on the state for under-insured vegetables with permanent brain injuries due to lack of head protection.

The current belt/helmet/cell phone laws are there because there hasn't been a sufficient outcry to the powers usurped by the "nanny state". Maybe someday.   

[Darkman]

At least wearing a helmut in the car would decrease phone use whilst driving 

[Ponch ®]

I dunno. It does seem like a nanny law, but the way i see it, if youre not wearing a seatbelt, get into an accident, go flying through your windshield and splatter yourself all over the street, you're creating a nuissance and my tax money will end up paying for the clean up.

[chargergirl]

   Please don't think I'm going to war over this, because I'm not. I laughed when the cop said signing the ticket isn't an admission of guilt...I told him "I'm guilty as hell". I bear no ill will to the cop, he's doing his job. Hypocrisy just bugs me no matter where I see it and "for me" this is. I'll write the check not tie up the courts system just to rant. Hey the 36,000.00 my ex owes in support to my kids that the state will do nothing about, after pleading with them for years to enforce there own lawful court order? The fact that she drives around the last 8 years with no license or insurance? No matter, there are much worse examples in my personal experience then those, that the D.A. refused to prosecute that I won't share, that really have me frosted. Like I said, it just kinda sucks.
  Thanks to all who replied here, it was nice to be heard and get feedback, pro or con! b5   

I hear you b5 about the fact that they won't go after the offending parent...I never went through that however, had friends that did. I never wore my seat belt until my boys returned on leave...Air Force gives a heavy fine to the Airman plus each person in car that isn't wearing seat belt. So I learned to buckle up...can't go back to the way it was before. Go figure...have a friend that has put her SUV into a ditch three times texting and calling on cell. Almost been run off road and hit by those doing same. Never a cop around!

[472 R/T SE]

Automobile accidents are the second leading cause of traumatic brain injuries yet no state requires helmets in cars. Why? Because there is a limit to the authority people will cede to the state in the name of "safety".

I wonder how many here who are advocating the mandatory use of belts in cars and helmets on motorcycles would sit mute if they mandated helmets in cars.....the logic is irrefutable, helmets in cars would save lives and ease the burden on the state for under-insured vegetables with permanent brain injuries due to lack of head protection.

The current belt/helmet/cell phone laws are there because there hasn't been a sufficient outcry to the powers usurped by the "nanny state". Maybe someday.   

Helmets in cars will just determine the next weakest point.   



How many folks have parents who still reach their arm straight out when applying brakes real hard.  Years back I was up front with my Mom & laughed at her when she done it

[b5blue]

  Funny story...I was 16, helmets were required back then for motorcycles, mopeds, even mini bikes. My pal bought a new street/trail bike so I drove over to see it. He asked if I wanted to try it out around the block a few times. As I drove around his block 2 times all the kids were laughing and pointing at me. I figured it was because I was terrible at shifting. A cop had gotten behind me just as I went around the first corner and been following me the whole time. Not even having adjusted the mirrors I never saw him. (He was laughing too!) He wrote me my ticket and filled in MY car on the information, a 64 Nova wagon. So I came home with a ticket that looked like I had a ticket for driving my Nova without a helmet....the look on my mom and dads face when they found it was priceless!   

[Just 6T9 CHGR]

Helmets required in cars?  Sweet!   Then you could get one of these for your ride as well!

How cool would that be? 

[Charger_Fan]

I despise seat belt laws
I almost always use a seat belt, but if I don't feel like it, thats my call.
I don't need johnny law looking after me.

1) Same here.  
2) I don't use one...it's my preference. Usually the times I "strap-on" is during a particularly potential life threatening snowstorm, when I can feel a certain sense of pucker factor during the trip. Otherwise, I prefer no belt. I've driven that way for 31 years now & I'm not about to change.
3) Nor do I. As an adult, I am responsible for my actions. I'm not gonna expound on that any further, and any opinions to the contrary are just that...opinions. Everyone has one, bite me.

It's odd that Utah currently has no motorcycle helmet law, but is rapidly becoming a friggin' "Big Bro" nanny state where seat belt laws are concerned...go figure.
I prefer a full face helmet on my bike, mostly because I can see unobstructed at 100+mph & prefer it that way. I prefer to see what's coming at me. Not to mention that being caught in a rain storm without a helmet can be painful to the forehead. However, in my daily driver car, I rarely ever peak 80mph & driving in the rain is pain free, so feel just fine without a helmet OR a seat belt. Big Bro can bite me.

[charge69]

Well,  the current seatbelt laws are there because your state and every other state,s money (highway funds) they get from big brother are tied to having that law in place. no law, no funds. Personally, I wear one every time I am in a vehicle and everyone will wear them or exit my vehicle as their choice, just me and the current law here in Texas.

I have gotten so used to wearing them in my newer cars that I will wear one in my old car (1969 Charger) too and feel more comfortable about it. Besides, it came with them and it is the law if it came with them here.

Whether it is the law or not (currently your choice if over 18 in this state), I always wore a helmet while riding my motorcycle (BMW) and it did save me when I went down of my own accord years ago but that is another story.

Whether you wear a seatbelt or not, even if it is against the law to not wear one, is your choice and I respect that choice but, you better not ask me to pay for your stupidity of not wearing them cause it ain't gonna happen if I can stop it.

[Brock Samson]

OK: to further this thread I strongly suggest you read Aaron Robensons' latest article in Car & Driver...
it's not avail. online yet so you may have to go to the Magazine Stand.

[b5blue]

 

Well,  the current seat belt laws are there because your state and every other state,s money (highway funds) they get from big brother are tied to having that law in place. no law, no funds. Personally, I wear one every time I am in a vehicle and everyone will wear them or exit my vehicle as their choice, just me and the current law here in Texas.

I have gotten so used to wearing them in my newer cars that I will wear one in my old car (1969 Charger) too and feel more comfortable about it. Besides, it came with them and it is the law if it came with them here.

Whether it is the law or not (currently your choice if over 18 in this state), I always wore a helmet while riding my motorcycle (BMW) and it did save me when I went down of my own accord years ago but that is another story.

Whether you wear a seat belt or not, even if it is against the law to not wear one, is your choice and I respect that choice but, you better not ask me to pay for your stupidity of not wearing them cause it ain't gonna happen if I can stop it.

Jeez! Now I'm stupid? So stupid I'll kill myself going 20 MPH for 6 blocks if my belt isn't on? OH the horror of knowing what scary world YOU live in! Here come the air bag helmets and 5 MPH bumpers on motorcycles! More laws, just what we need.
  As this is my topic I would rather you refrain from insults to anyone, I do agree that stupid people should take extra care and caution in any endeavor they undertake be it buckling up to drive or posting comments judging others harshly.
  If you read MY comments you might have garnered from it my main issue was the randomness that my state chooses to enforce there laws, as I live in a state with a large population of much older drivers if anything I am hyper alert to the dangers driving presents and trained my children accordingly.
  But possibly your not that smart.     (I went ahead and corrected your spelling, seat belt is 2 words, not one.)   

[mpdlawdog]

I just have to throw my  in....at work I drive a white car with perty lights on it..(please dont hold it against me..I have a 68 charger...I dont write speeding tickets over 100 MPH...I dont write drag racing tickets unless you beat a mopar...and the better the burnout the less chance you will get a ticket)...I dont write seat belt tickets because its a matter of choice i guess.....I have been on three crashes recently that killed two drivers and a passenger.  All would have survived if they had their seat belt on...I've never been on a crash where a person was killed wearing their seat belt....better safe than dead I guess....

[daveco]

This is not an issue as to whether or not seat belt usage is a good idea. This is an issue regarding freedom of choice.
It seems that the primary issue cited for justifying mandatory seat belt usage is the cost to taxpayers for the rehabilitation (or mopping up of) of an accident victim that was not seat belted.

...yet it is apparently acceptable to everyone here to drive a vehicle with totally antiquated safety features.
   -NO Anti-lock brakes
   -NO Airbags
   -Ancient fuel system
   -Stone-age tire technology (if your restoration is faithful)
   -Crumple zones / Roof Strength / Side Impact Standards from yesteryear
   -Hell, the darned seat belts themselves are state-of-the-ark and so old as to be of questionable integrity

So if the argument is unreasonable public burden for personal choice, I don't see how even driving a classic Mopar passes muster.

Once again, I am not "Anti-Seat Belt" I regularly wear mine.
I am TOTALLY against overly intrusive laws regarding matters of personal choice.

[stripedelete]

This is an issue regarding freedom of choice.

OK, but doesn't ones freedom stop where it impacts someone else's freedom.?

Stupid is where and when "nanny" shows up.  But, at the end of the day, you can't legislate against stupid, therefore, I come down on your side. 

But, I still don't want to pay the bill for stupid Ninja rider blowing between lanes at 105 mph on one wheel with no helmet.  Or for stupid Harley Guy that won't wear a helmet because he's big tough guy.