Archive for Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Police cite 46 in Monday night seat belt enforcement

April 16, 2013


Lawrence police cited 46 motorists for not wearing their seat belts Monday night in a special enforcement effort that the department plans to repeat in the future, said Sgt. Trent McKinley, a Lawrence Police Department spokesman.

Kansas law mandates a minimum ticket of $60 for drivers and passengers ages 14 to 17 who are cited for not wearing a seat belt. The ticket is $10 for those 18 and older.

The seat belt enforcement efforts are paid for with a grant from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and often lead police officers to discover other offenses. Officers also wrote two tickets for drivers with suspended licenses, three for drivers with no license, and one for driving with no insurance. Thirteen of the motorists pulled over by police were warned but not cited.

Sixty-three percent of Kansas fatality accident victims in 2012 were not wearing seat belts, according to the Kansas Department of Transportation. On average, 88 percent of Kansas motorists did wear them.


skull 4 years, 10 months ago

Why is the ticket $50 more for those under 18? Why can't we treat adults like, well...adults. What a joke.

Ian_Cummings 4 years, 10 months ago

In the city of Lawrence, there isn't any court cost apart from the amount of the ticket. So, for example, the total for an adult's seat belt ticket is $10. Ian Cummings, LJW.

Ian_Cummings 4 years, 10 months ago

There's no real answer for that, because it is up to the individual police officers. They are allowed to use their own discretion in deciding whether to write a ticket or give a warning, depending on the circumstances. Ian Cummings, LJW.

patkindle 4 years, 10 months ago

if the ljw would just publish the names of offenders, it would accomplish alot more than filling the city coffers.

ComeOnMannnnnnn 4 years, 10 months ago

haha best post ever. I thought the samething

tomatogrower 4 years, 10 months ago

I'll tell you what. You can choose not to wear a seatbelt, if you sign a paper that states if you are disabled in an accident, because you weren't wearing your seatbelt then you will refuse Social Security disability and pay for all your medical expenses yourself. And that includes Social Security for your kids if you are killed. And if you are the driver who lost control, because you were busy flying around the car and caused a death, then you will be charged with murder. There is no guaranteed right to driving or riding in a car. It is a privilege. Try refusing to buckle your seat belt on a plane. They will probably ask you to get off.

elliottaw 4 years, 10 months ago

You do realize it already works this way, try being a heaver smoker or a cancer patient and try to get insurance

Liberty275 4 years, 10 months ago

I'll make a deal with you. I sign that exact document on the condition that you sign a similar document with the only change being you are in the accident while wearing your seat belt.

As for seatbelts, they are more cumbersome than their worth going a mile back and forth to work, but if we go out of town and do 75 a while, I'm pretty good about wearing it.

"Try refusing to buckle your seat belt on a plane."

Why not just unbuckle it after they check you? As far as I know airplanes don't have gizmos to tell the flight attendant if you have surreptitiously removed your belt.

kernal 4 years, 10 months ago

No, but when the "fasten your seatbelt" sign lights up, the attendants do walk down the aisles and do a visual check.

Paul R Getto 4 years, 10 months ago

Good points. We choose to drive and give up some rights when we enter the social contract of the highway. Good law and with the shoulder belt anyone can see if you are "wearing."

Liberty275 4 years, 10 months ago

I care about my loved ones and I care about their freedom from government micromanagement of their lives.

Tradways 4 years, 10 months ago

This is a crap law. Traffic laws are for public safety, let people make a decision for themselves, this law is made only to get inside your vechicle.

msezdsit 4 years, 10 months ago

This just allows the police to circumvent your constitutional rights of search and (lpd hopeful) seizure. They get a free pass to stick their nose into your business and harass you. It lends itself to racial profiling and whatever else the police may think about you at the time.

somebodynew 4 years, 10 months ago

Whoa -better make sure the tin foil is tight over your windows - those black helicopters are looking for you 24/7 you know.

msezdsit 4 years, 10 months ago

Typical response. If your not doing anything wrong than why not let the police do anything they want.

msezdsit 4 years, 10 months ago

Police violating the 4th amendment has nothing to do with paranoia. The paranoia part is just a cheap shot by you so you can justify the police violating the constitution. You are in the crowd that thinks that if your doing nothing wrong then you shouldn't object to being scrutinized over what your not doing wrong as if you were. Slippery slope to say the least.

jafs 4 years, 10 months ago

Stopping people without probable cause or warrant to check whether or not they're wearing their seat belt can easily be seen as an "unreasonable search", prohibited by the 4th amendment.

And, before you go ad hominem, I'm a law abiding citizen, never been arrested, don't hate cops, etc.

jafs 4 years, 10 months ago

By many who think about things critically.

I'm not easily swayed by appeals to "authority".

Our 4th amendment protections have been watered down and weakened over time by the courts - that doesn't make them right to have done that.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.