Dec. 11, 2013 |
See complete forecast
Copy and paste the link:
Umm. Why are tickets higher for kids 14-17?
If a child passenger is in the car without a seat belt, the police officer might cite the driver of the car, who would be the responsible party. Ian Cummings, Lawrence Journal-World.
Does anyone know if the seat belt law applies to antique vehicles that were made before they started installing seat belts in cars? My antique car doesn't have belts and tops out at about 45 mph. Am I going to get busted?
No. If a car did not come with an option such as seat belts or third brake lights, you cannot be ticketed for not having them. Cars that did not come with seat belts not only lack the belts, but also the anchor points where they can be bolted in. You can install seat belts in cars with sheet metal floorboards, but you have to run the bolts thru large steel plates under the car. An LS1 engine will fix that 45 MPH problem.
Thanks for the info. I've actually been thinking of updating the engine.
Isn't an LS1 a Mustang engine?
LS1 is a Aluminum pushrod V-8 GM Engine used for the 1997-2004 Chevrolet Corvette C5, 1998-2002 Chevrolet Camaro Z28, SS, 1998-2002 Pontiac Firebird Formula, Trans Am and 2004 Pontiac GTO
I actually think a Rocketdyne F-1 strapped to the top would get you a bit more horsepower.
Jack, at that speed you could be partially ejected from the car in a wreck, that is though the windshield, and then others would have to deal with your gruesome remains.
What happens if you are riding a bicycle and you get hit by a car going 45?
How about they start aggressively start writting tickets for all the red light runners in this town. They would make a bit more on the ticket AND reduce accidents.
Or for tailgating?
I want to see a return on the investment in police and administrative time and resources used to "remind" people to wear their seat belt. What is the objective here? Sounds like we have criminalize even more people by adding failure to wear your seat-belt to the criminal code. The city police might pull over a handful of cars in an evening and make contact with a handful of people. They lecture the occupant, and write a ten dollar ticket and say we gotcha. I think we can do equally as well to improve seat-belt usage by using communication that actually works. Try Facebook and throw in a few pictures of mangled vehicles covered in white sheets and be far more successful at reaching the target audience. We can also take satisfaction that we have stopped using "The Law" to violate even more of our rights. Instead share with the target audience the results of their actions and letting them decide for themselves if they want to wear a seat-belt. We can go about our business the police back to the serious tasks already on their plate, and get far better results.
Because sometimes direct and intermittent punishment works better than boring ole media.
The government knows what is best for you and can make a bit of cash making sure you obey. What could possibly be wrong with such an idea?
Actually, wearing seat belts is "best for you." And considering the small fine, and the costs of enforcement, it is not a money making proposition.
In California, for the first time it's $150, not $10. That's more like it. People need to have their seat belts on at all times when they are driving.
It shouldn't be anybody's business whether a adult wears a seat belt or not. I wouldn't be quoting anything California does, that disfunctional state can't get anything right.
Just so you sign a waiver saying that when you are disabled as the result of your accident while not wearing a seatbelt, and lose your job and your health insurance, you don't ask the taxpayers to pay your ongoing medical bills and costs for care.....
Except if you hit me with your car and fly out and die a mangled mess on the road. Then it is my business.
They should write tickets for people creating their own turn lane too
Seat belt laws are, like all driving laws, designed to protect people. Car crashes and those accidents which involve pedestrians or bikers, are not to be taken lightly. They cause a great deal of damage, both in terms of human emotional and physical trauma, and monetary.
Even if you are willing to take the risk it is unlikely you will be in a one car accident. Do you really have the right to endanger others? As for babies and small children they are at the mercy of the adults who have been charged with their care.
Have you ever been in a wreck? I've rolled a few cars and I can tell you that the amount of control you have over a car during a wreck is nil. How do you propose controlling a car with a tie rod or ball joint broken off? To dispose of an airbag, you put it inside several tires and keep all people 50 feet away while you ignite the charge. Do you think your brain will be functional enough to allow you to drive just after such a device explodes 16 inches from your face?
Not wearing a seatbelt doesn't pose a threat to anyone but the person that doesn't wear it. You guys can stop using that red herring.
Agreed. But there are costs that the general public absorbs for the folks that choose not to wear seat-belts. It is a well known fact that seat-belts can lessen the extent of injuries in an automobile accident. The lower frequency of injuries means insurance claims are lower, hence lower insurance premiums for all of us.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
Find more businesses on Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment ·