• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

RANT: Seatbelt law!!! BULLCHP! *UPDATED*

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Yax

Platinum Member
Feb 11, 2003
2,866
0
0
Here's an exerpt of the law I alledgely broke, and yup, it does say "Properly":

27315. (a) The Legislature finds that a mandatory seatbelt law will contribute to reducing highway deaths and injuries by encouraging greater usage of existing manual seatbelts, that automatic crash protection systems which require no action by vehicle occupants offer the best hope of reducing deaths and injuries, and that encouraging the use of manual safety belts is only a partial remedy for addressing this major cause of death and injury. The Legislature declares that the enactment of this section is intended to be compatible with support for federal safety standards requiring automatic crash protection systems and should not be used in any manner to rescind federal requirements for installation of automatic restraints in new cars.

(b) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Motor Vehicle Safety Act.

(c) (1) As used in this section, "motor vehicle" means any passenger vehicle or any motortruck or truck tractor, but does not include a motorcycle.

(2) Until May 1, 2000, for purposes of this section, a "motor vehicle" also means any farm labor vehicle that was first issued an inspection certificate under Section 31401 on or after October 1, 1999.

(3) On and after May 1, 2000, for purposes of this section, a "motor vehicle" also means any farm labor vehicle, regardless of date of certification under Section 31401.

(d) (1) ( )1 A person may not operate a motor vehicle on a highway unless that person and all passengers 16 years of age or over are properly restrained by a safety belt. This paragraph does not apply to the operator of a taxicab, as defined in Section 27908, when the taxicab is driven on a city street and is engaged in the transportation of a fare-paying passenger. The safety belt requirement established by this paragraph is the minimum safety standard applicable to employees being transported in a motor vehicle. This paragraph does not preempt any more stringent or restrictive standards imposed by the Labor Code or any other state or federal regulation regarding the transportation of employees in a motor vehicle.

 

Yax

Platinum Member
Feb 11, 2003
2,866
0
0
I imagine, pregnant women should not drive anymore because they'd violate the seatbelt law for sure if they kept the belt from going across their belly.
 

kenshorin

Golden Member
Apr 14, 2001
1,160
0
0
Ugh that sucks. And the traffic jam was probably from all the brakers who feel the need to slow down to 40mph on the highway because a cop is there. I was caught in a huge traffic jam last week, took me a half hour to go two miles. I saw his blues in the distance and figured there was an accident. Get to where he's sitting, there's NOTHING happening, and as soon as traffic went by him it was wide open driving. Ugh.
 

WinkOsmosis

Banned
Sep 18, 2002
13,990
0
0
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: cheapbidder01
I was stopped and cited by the CHP this morning for:

"Driver not wearing seatbelt properly"

I had the seatbelt under my arm for a few mins during a traffic jam to relieve the pressure on my shoulder.

Later, I spoke with a guy who said his brother was a CHP. Apparently, they're trying to fill seat belt violation quotas so they can get more govt. money for their department.

WTF!

The nanny state in all its glory.
That's not a result of a "nanny state". It's the result of the police department needing funding.

Don't you yearn for socialism, where taxes are higher to pay the PD rather than having the police harvest cash from you??
 

Balthazar

Golden Member
Apr 16, 2000
1,834
0
0
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
You broke the law, period.

Don't like it, don't drive.


Yeah because as a race were too stupid to differentiate the ACTUAL reason for that law....that being that seatbelts save lives at speeds OVER 15MPH....and were all so stupid we cant think for ourselves to determine that "hey, maybe at this particular point in time IT DOESNT MATTER IF HE HAS HIS SEATBELT ON!".

Welcome to stupidity.
 

Yax

Platinum Member
Feb 11, 2003
2,866
0
0
Originally posted by: Balthazar
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
You broke the law, period.

Don't like it, don't drive.


Yeah because as a race were too stupid to differentiate the ACTUAL reason for that law....that being that seatbelts save lives at speeds OVER 15MPH....and were all so stupid we cant think for ourselves to determine that "hey, maybe at this particular point in time IT DOESNT MATTER IF HE HAS HIS SEATBELT ON!".

Welcome to stupidity.
That is why cops need to be better educated.
 

Yax

Platinum Member
Feb 11, 2003
2,866
0
0
Originally posted by: Bateluer
Can't you contest the ticket in court?
If its under $100, I'm probably not going to fight it since I'd be losing more than that if I took time off work to appear in court.
 

AvesPKS

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2000
4,729
0
0
I've gotten a seatbelt ticket before. It was only $25, but man was I pissed at the time. I got pulled over for speeding (42 in a 25), pulled off into a parking lot, and turned off my car. I then took my seatbelt off to get my wallet out. PO comes up and asks for license and reg. He goes back to his car. When he comes back, he tells me he's only giving me a warning for the speeding, but that as he approached my car, he noticed I wasn't wearing my seatbelt. I argued for a minute with him until he threatened to arrest me and take me to jail, at which point I finally signed the ticket. It wasn't until later that I figured out he was really doing me a favor.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
141
116
Fight it by mail; submit discovery; case dismissed.

Ticketassassin.com
 

Yax

Platinum Member
Feb 11, 2003
2,866
0
0
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Fight it by mail; submit discovery; case dismissed.

Ticketassassin.com
? could that be done? I had a ticket for fishing off season once. I was told by the guy at the Fish and Games office that I could fish there since the book said it was off season for Salmon and another section of the book said Bass was opened year round. When I got the ticket, I informed the officer of what I was told, but he gave me a ticket anyway. I wrote into the judge, but they just marked it as must appear in court or something like that. I couldn't go to court because it was too far out of my way so I paid the $150 fine. The courthouse was over 70 miles away from my hometown and I didn't want to take a day off work.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY