Click it or ticket

[CADsortaGUY]

This is another topic which needs addressing.

I'm sure most of you have seen the click it or ticket commercials lately and I'm wondering what you think of it. I was also watching the evening news tonight and saw that they are setting up checkpoints for seatbelts and was rather offended.
I am outraged at the tactics that are being implemented for this campaign. No, I'm not talking about it supposedly targeting Hispanics(which supposedly buckle up the least) but rather that they are setting up seatbelt checkpoints!

"In North Carolina and across America, millions of deaths and injuries are caused because people don't use seat belts and child safety seats. Research shows that appeals to "do the right thing" don't work for the remaining people who don't use belts. What gets them to buckle up is high visibility enforcement. That means checkpoints and traffic tickets for drivers not using belts. " - North Carolina DOT

Are checkpoints really neccessary? I can see giving a ticket (since it is still the law) for not wearing a seatbelt if you are stopped for another traffic violation but checkpoints? Do you realize how much this is costing us in police force labor? Sure they are supposedly getting the funding from Federal grants but this is the type of gov't waste we need to get rid of.

Do seatbelts save lives? Sure do and I wear mine all the time (well almost ). Also, I sure as hell make sure my kids are buckled in, because I am responsible for them. But an adult not wearing a seatbelt isn't a threat to public safety and therefore shouldn't be law in the first place but checkpoints?

Legitimate or not You can also do a google search of "click it or ticket" and have plenty to read
Another link

I'm sure some of you can post better written arguments than I since I am still steaming hot about this issue. So have at it

CkG

Edit - oops wrong link

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
This is another topic which needs addressing.

I'm sure most of you have seen the click it or ticket commercials lately and I'm wondering what you think of it. I was also watching the evening news tonight and saw that they are setting up checkpoints for seatbelts and was rather offended.
I am outraged at the tactics that are being implemented for this campaign. No, I'm not talking about it supposedly targeting Hispanics(which supposedly buckle up the least) but rather that they are setting up seatbelt checkpoints!

"In North Carolina and across America, millions of deaths and injuries are caused because people don't use seat belts and child safety seats. Research shows that appeals to "do the right thing" don't work for the remaining people who don't use belts. What gets them to buckle up is high visibility enforcement. That means checkpoints and traffic tickets for drivers not using belts. " - North Carolina DOT

Are checkpoints really neccessary? I can see giving a ticket (since it is still the law) for not wearing a seatbelt if you are stopped for another traffic violation but checkpoints? Do you realize how much this is costing us in police force labor? Sure they are supposedly getting the funding from Federal grants but this is the type of gov't waste we need to get rid of.

Do seatbelts save lives? Sure do and I wear mine all the time (well almost ). Also, I sure as hell make sure my kids are buckled in, because I am responsible for them. But an adult not wearing a seatbelt isn't a threat to public safety and therefore shouldn't be law in the first place but checkpoints?

Legitimate or not You can also do a google search of "click it or ticket" and have plenty to read

I'm sure some of you can post better written arguments than I since I am still steaming hot about this issue. So have at it

CkG

Dont ya just love it when our nanny goverment is out trying to protect us.....

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: charrison
Dont ya just love it when our nanny goverment is out trying to protect us.....

No:|

 

[glugglug]

If you think it is actually an attempt to protect U.S. citizens you are more naive than a 3 year old.

Its yet another revenue source being scrambled to, as the federal gov't has squandered any money that could have been used to aid states.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: glugglug
If you think it is actually an attempt to protect U.S. citizens you are more naive than a 3 year old.

Its yet another revenue source being scrambled to, as the federal gov't has squandered any money that could have been used to aid states.

Federal gov't grants are paying for it but yes the ticket $ usually ends up in the state's general fund.

CkG

 

[Rogue9]

I think if police are allowed to pull you over for not having your seatbelt buckled, we have a problem. But if they pull you over for something else (such as reckless driving) and give you an additional ticket for not having your seatbelt buckled, I think that's maybe OK.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Buahaha this one is great

----------------------
Two police agencies decline participation in seat belt program

ANDERSON, Ind. (AP) -- Drivers across Indiana are being warned to "click it or ticket" as part of a nationwide police crackdown on seat belt use -- but not in two of the state's largest cities.

Police in Evansville -- Indiana's third-largest city -- and Anderson -- the ninth-largest -- declined to participate in the program, which runs through June 1.

The $20 million national advertising campaign calls attention to the dangers of riding in a vehicle without using a seat belt, laws on seat belt use, and a heightened enforcement effort among police.

Agencies taking part in the program set up random checkpoints at which officers ticket passengers without seat belts.

Of the state's larger cities, only Evansville and Anderson declined to participate, said Jerry McCory, director of the Governor's Council of Impaired and Dangerous Driving.

"I was shocked last year when they said they wouldn't be participating," he said of Anderson.

Anderson, which has participated in the past, missed out on about $50,000 in National Highway Traffic Safety Administration grants by opting out of the program.

Police Chief Ed Leonard said he decided not to take part because of the ill will created by the checkpoints.

"The comments more often than not are that it's like a Gestapo police department," he said.

The Associated Press left a message seeking comment Wednesday at the office of Evansville Assistant Chief Kent Burnworth.

Officials say seat belt laws have contributed to the lowest number of traffic deaths in years. The official total for traffic deaths in Indiana last year was the fewest in the state's history.

Figures from the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute released Tuesday showed 779 motor vehicle fatalities in 2002, compared with 909 in 2001.

A statewide survey in November showed seat-belt use at 75 percent. But some drivers -- particularly young men -- tend to resist wearing seat belts.

Programs like "Click It or Ticket" help convince them to wear them, said Don McNamara, the regional administrator for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

By not participating, cities are "robbing their citizens of the ability to start wearing seat belts," he said.

Even without the program, drivers in Anderson still run the risk of being ticketed if they don't buckle up.

"Believe me, we want to enforce traffic laws," said Chief Leonard. "If we see someone driving and their child's not buckled in, we're going to take appropriate action," he added.
------------------------------------linky

So I wonder how many towns will be sued by families of people who died in a car crash because they "robbed someone their ability to start wearing a seatbelt"

Someone call Andy Rooney "Give me a break"

CkG

 

[Insane3D]

It's funny, they don't tell you about the accidents where wearing a seatbelt actually made the injuries worse. Anyways, I am proud to live in the only state without a seatbelt law, except for children under 13, New Hampshire. So this whole click it or ticket campaign has no effect on me thankfully. Not only that, but it's nice not having a sales or income tax either.

 

[YingYang]

Sounds like a good excuse for checking up on possible terrorists.

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: YingYang
Sounds like a good excuse for checking up on possible terrorists.

Yeah...I heard those wackos don't wear seatbelts!

 

[Moonbeam]

Every car should have a camera and a GPS devise on board. The camera could monitor activity in the car and outside including stop lights and other regulations. Automatic fines could be levied against a credit card number and your car switch off, booted, remotely. You should drive properly or not at all. Abeyance to the law must become instinctual.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Every car should have a camera and a GPS devise on board. The camera could monitor activity in the car and outside including stop lights and other regulations. Automatic fines could be levied against a credit card number and your car switch off, booted, remotely. You should drive properly or not at all. Abeyance to the law must become instinctual.

Please tell me your post was entirely sacastic. Oh wait, this is Moonbeam I'm talking to here.

<gasp> we agree on something? :Q

CkG

 

[Moonbeam]

You likey my plan, comrad?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
You likey my plan, comrad?

You forgot to mention the breathalizer and drug screens before your car will start but otherwise yes

CkG

 

[Insane3D]

No! If that happens...I won't be able to drive well over the speed limit in my Mustang all the time. Do you have any idea how fun it is to put a high horsepower V8 car sideways?

 

[Moonbeam]

You forgot to mention the breathalizer and drug screens before your car will start but otherwise yes
-------------------------------
Well then for crap sakes what's the problem with check points, cause you got to stop where as in the camera car you just pay a fine. In my world you don't buckle, you don't drive. I don't see a big difference. Hum, maybe the money?

 

[LunarRay]

Moonbeam,
when you become mayor when the current one retires or is elected president, I intend to leave and never come back. Camera in cars, auto ticket, jeez where will it end. I'll bet you don't have seat belts in your space ship... I don't in mine and don't intend to be ticketed by some robot in a dress at a check point in space... no sir, not me.
I'm not gonna stand for it.. I just won't go for it.... no sir, no way!

Now for ya'all I think its a great idea... what makes you think my insurance rates should climb because you guys are mo dangerous... levy heavy fines so ya stay legal while on my roads and stay outta my space unless you fly in a certified vehicle and you carry the manditory insurance levels and meteor belts.

 

[Moonbeam]

You can check out, HJ but you can never leave. I will know wherever you go by the implant. You will obey. Smile, there's a camera in your tooth.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
It's funny, they don't tell you about the accidents where wearing a seatbelt actually made the injuries worse.

That's because such accidents are a fluke, a drop in the bucket compared to the number of accidents where seatbelts save lives and reduce injury. Seatbelts do save lives - lots of them.

Having said that, I have mixed feelings about the "Click It or Ticket" campaign. On the surface it seems to be a petty use of expensive - and valuable - police time. "Why aren't you out catching bad guys," is a question they'll probably hear a lot. I also agree that the check-point approach is extremely intrusive and heavy-handed. One could even argue that it violates our civil liberties, though such claims have been refuted in similar cases. At a minimum, this isn't going to foster trust and respect towards law enforcement for a broad segment of the community.

On the other hand, if you think about the role of the police as "public safety" instead of "law enforcement", this kind of makes sense. Seatbelts save lives; the more people who wear seatbelts, the more lives saved. The Memorial Day weekend is one of the most dangerous traffic weekends of the year. By staging this campaign now -- coordinated nationwide -- public safety organizations garner fantastic publicity for seatbelt usage. People become more aware of the importance of using seatbelts. Compliance will improve significantly, not just this weekend, but for months to come. The result will be better public safety, i.e., fewer deaths and injuries.

The final question is "Should government be in the business of protecting us from ourselves? If someone wants to be stupid and get himself killed by not wearing a seatbelt, why is that the government's business? Who does it hurt?" I think it's a valid question. In general, government is too intrusive. The Democrats want to regulate everything that happens outside our homes; the Republicans everything that happens within. Both parties view the governement as the solution to problems rather than a source.

Are seatbelt laws another example of too much government? Maybe. Where do we draw the line?

 

[jackschmittusa]

I believe that these checkpoints are the same thing as the "sobriety checkpoints". They are an unwarrented and unjustified abuse of police power that presumes that every driver may be breaking the law. There is no probable cause or even the diluted reasonable suspicion that every driver coming down the pike is breaking the law and must be stopped until they prove themselves innocent.
I was stopped once for another violation and ticketed for not wearing a seatbelt as well. I went to court to fight the ticket (did't even need a lawer) and had the other violation thrown out. When told that I would have to pay $60 and court costs for the seatbelt violation, I refused to pay and accepted 5hr community service instead. The court personel also had it fouled up about which courtroom and what I time I was to appear, This resulted in a delay that meant the parking meter expired (by 5 minutes) and got me a $20 parking ticket. I fought this and won too. I just refused to contribute to the city's revenue stream. Maybe if enough people did this, they would loose interest.
We have arguments about motorcycle helmet laws in my state as well and it is always mentioned in the local paper whether a motorcycle rider was wearing a helmet or not if he/she is involved in an accident. A guy I know was killed in a wreck where a roadside signpost went through his chest. The paper did not report his injuries but did point out that he was not wearing a helmet. I'm sure that there were people who thought a helmet might have saved his life. I'm sure that the great motorcycle fatality database does not have a field for "helmet wouldn't have made a difference". I doubt that the seatbelt databases have such a field either.
I also find it funny that if you are a seatbelt crusader, seatbelt use is responsible for the greatest reduction in fatalities. If you are a DUI crusader, it is tougher DUI laws that have the big effect. Speed limit crusader .......

 

[Moonbeam]

Fortunately our PDA's will handle all these, at present, expensive law enforcement costs by automatically rendering us unconscious for arrest the moment we begin to perpetrate a crime. Removing the option to violate the law will represent an limitation of personal freedom, but the payback will be a crime free life.

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Insane3D
It's funny, they don't tell you about the accidents where wearing a seatbelt actually made the injuries worse.

That's because such accidents are a fluke, a drop in the bucket compared to the number of accidents where seatbelts save lives and reduce injury. Seatbelts do save lives - lots of them.

If you are talking about the lap + shoulder belts found in all new cars, then yes they probably qualify as a fluke.
With the old lap-only belts found in most back seats until the early 90s, its fairly normal for the belt to do more harm than good.

 

[syberscott]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
No! If that happens...I won't be able to drive well over the speed limit in my Mustang all the time. Do you have any idea how fun it is to put a high horsepower V8 car sideways?

It is fun to put a high horsepower V8 car sideways. So why are you mentioning a Mustang?

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: syberscott

Originally posted by: Insane3D
No! If that happens...I won't be able to drive well over the speed limit in my Mustang all the time. Do you have any idea how fun it is to put a high horsepower V8 car sideways?

It is fun to put a high horsepower V8 car sideways. So why are you mentioning a Mustang?

Yeah yeah...I guess you have never heard of modifications? The only thing stock on my car is the block and pistons.

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Buahaha this one is great

----------------------
Two police agencies decline participation in seat belt program

Police in Evansville -- Indiana's third-largest city -- and Anderson -- the ninth-largest -- declined to participate in the program, which runs through June 1.

I am proud of my local law enforcement.