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