lawman
Apprentice Cog
Posts: 237
|
Post by lawman on May 31, 2007 16:15:06 GMT -5
I never knew New Hampshire was to be admired....until now! www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070525/NEWS02/705250387/1003/NEWS02N.H. panel: No seat-belt law
May 25, 2007
By Katie Zezima New York Times BOSTON — An effort to end New Hampshire's status as the only state in the country without a law requiring adults to wear seat belts suffered a setback on Wednesday, when the state Senate transportation committee recommended that it not pass.
By a vote of 3-2, the committee recommended that the Senate reject the bill when it comes up for vote sometime in the next two weeks. The bill passed the House 153-140 in April.
Bills requiring seat belt use have failed in New Hampshire for years, most recently in 2006. But a coalition of lawmakers, law enforcement organizations and medical groups banded together this year to push the bill before the legislature, which is controlled by Democrats for the first time since 1874.
"We feel it's the most cost-effective and simplest means of cutting deaths and serious injuries in highway collisions," said Earl Sweeney, assistant commissioner of the New Hampshire Safety Department, which has endorsed the bill. "It seems like a simple act, to fasten a seat belt."
But for many in rock-ribbed New Hampshire, buckling up and being told you have to buckle up are two very different things.
"It harkens to the libertarian 'don't tell me what to do' streak that characterizes much of our politics here," said the chairman of the House transportation committee, Jim Ryan, a proponent of the bill.
Sen. Robert J. Letourneau, a committee member who voted against the bill, said that he thinks that citizens, especially children, should be educated about the benefits of seat belts but that adults should not be required to use them. Requiring people to do things breeds resentment, Letourneau said, while encouragement does not.
"We can't legislate common sense," he said. "The point of view to put these things into law, to change people's personal lifestyle, is not what I consider good policy. I trust our citizens to make those decisions for themselves."
Colin Manning, a spokesman for Gov. John H. Lynch, said Lynch had not taken a position on the bill and was talking to lawmakers about it.
The state would receive $3.7 million in federal money for enacting a primary seat belt law, which allows a driver to be stopped solely for not wearing a seat belt. The bill's supporters say it will save the state $48 million in medical costs.
New Hampshire has the lowest rate of seat belt use in the country, 49.6 percent, according to the National Transportation Safety Board, which supports the bill. Last year, 77 percent of fatal crashes in the state involved occupants who were not wearing seat belts, according to the state's Safety Department.
If the bill passes, New Hampshire will join 26 states that have primary seat belt laws. All other states have secondary seat belt laws, under which drivers may be cited for not wearing a seat belt only if they are stopped for another offense. Children under 18 are required to wear seat belts in New Hampshire.
Under the proposed legislation, a driver would be fined $50 for a first offense and $100 for a subsequent offense, a steep fine that also has numerous critics, including the New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union.
Rep. Jennifer Brown, who sponsored the bill in the House, said the issue was not only about safety, but the money residents of a state without an income or sales tax would save in medical costs.
"Safety is an issue, but it's not the only issue, it's also a money issue," Brown said. "The only thing that trumps 'Live Free or Die' in New Hampshire is 'No broad-based taxes."'
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on May 31, 2007 16:23:58 GMT -5
Just so I make sure I understand where you stand on this: Are you saying you support not having seat-belt laws?
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on May 31, 2007 17:23:30 GMT -5
The last several fatality crashes our department has worked, they fatalities would have survived if they had been wearing belts. They would not have been ejected from the safety of their vehicle.
|
|
|
Post by kevin on May 31, 2007 19:00:59 GMT -5
I've never understood the mentality of resisting such a simple law. I feel very odd NOT wearing my seat belt in the car. Its almost uncomfortable. And when my kids get in the car its the first thing I remind them to do -- not because of a law, because I value their life and safety.
I can understand the "you can't tell me what to do" mentality, but this is just the silliest.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on May 31, 2007 19:20:46 GMT -5
My kids remind me if I forget. It took me a long time to get used to it, because I am claustrophobic, but after a wreck that almost killed me, I rarely forget these days.
|
|
|
Post by Hoboprobe on May 31, 2007 21:53:55 GMT -5
I've never understood the mentality of resisting such a simple law. I feel very odd NOT wearing my seat belt in the car. Its almost uncomfortable. And when my kids get in the car its the first thing I remind them to do -- not because of a law, because I value their life and safety. I can understand the "you can't tell me what to do" mentality, but this is just the silliest. What is silly about making your own decision about your protection? Why not tell me what food I can eat and stay healthy? And why the $$$$$$ the seat-belt violations bring the damn state, yet nothing dangerous about driving with a cell phone stuck on your ear. $$$$$$$$$ for the the bums that make up these stupid laws!
|
|
|
Post by kevin on May 31, 2007 22:43:05 GMT -5
Sure buddy. Ask the average cop about how many actual tickets he writes for seat belt violations. I'd wager its not many but I could be wrong. Besides, one Big Mac isn't going to kill you. One time not wearing your seat belt may. youtube.com/watch?v=9Q0uiEix8UU
|
|
|
Post by Hoboprobe on May 31, 2007 22:53:09 GMT -5
Sure buddy. Ask the average cop about how many actual tickets he writes for seat belt violations. I'd wager its not many but I could be wrong. Besides, one Big Mac isn't going to kill you. One time not wearing your seat belt may. youtube.com/watch?v=9Q0uiEix8UUIt's my damn business what I do, buddy, so long as it doesn't harm anyone else! More likely that damn cell phone you drive and talk on, are more harmful to us, than if I choose not to buckle-up because you think I should! What's the problem?
|
|
|
Post by kevin on May 31, 2007 23:09:43 GMT -5
No problem other than you assuming I use a cell phone while driving. While you're at it, please do ride a motorcycle without a helmet, refuse to wear safety apparel at a construction site, etc. After all, its your body.
|
|
lawman
Apprentice Cog
Posts: 237
|
Post by lawman on May 31, 2007 23:38:32 GMT -5
This is a good example why I started the Thread! It amazes me to see people who think it's their duty/right to dictate their tastes, lifestyles, attitudes or whatever you want to call it.....on the ones who just want what this Country has offered us until recently --- [glow=red,2,300]Freedom and Liberty![/glow]
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Jun 1, 2007 6:46:55 GMT -5
Why don't we do away with OSHA and NIOSH then? After all, they're constantly sticking their nose into the safety business of companies, who in turn inflict such personal invasive rules as wearing hard hats, safety glasses, steel-toed boots, tying off on ladders, etc.
I work for a manufacturing company that is very close to establishing a world class safety record. They have instilled safety in us so well that often people speak of the things they do at home now to be safer. I'm sure spouses and children are very appreciative that their loved ones come home in one piece every day because the company they work for is safety conscientious.
In many other things I'd agree with you. This is not one of them. You call it government invasion, and perhaps it is, but I look at it as raising your awareness and perhaps saving your life.
Glass half-full.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jun 1, 2007 8:14:52 GMT -5
How about this? Until the law is repealed, it is the LAW. Breaking it gets you a piddley little $10.00 fine that does not even show points against your license, and does not get reported to your insurance company. I guess next you will be pissing and whining bout what an invasion child restraint laws are on your personal freedoms.
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Jun 1, 2007 9:08:22 GMT -5
This is a good example why I started the Thread! It amazes me to see people who think it's their duty/right to dictate their tastes, lifestyles, attitudes or whatever you want to call it.....on the ones who just want what this Country has offered us until recently --- [glow=red,2,300]Freedom and Liberty![/glow] I'm just trying to clarify your position here. So you think we shouldn't have seat-belt laws but should have cell-phone laws?
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Jun 1, 2007 9:11:51 GMT -5
How about this? Until the law is repealed, it is the LAW. Breaking it gets you a piddley little $10.00 fine that does not even show points against your license, and does not get reported to your insurance company. I guess next you will be pissing and whining bout what an invasion child restraint laws are on your personal freedoms. As a clarification, Insurance companies do charge for seat-belt violations. Any violation you get will show up on your MVR.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jun 1, 2007 10:45:27 GMT -5
How about this? Until the law is repealed, it is the LAW. Breaking it gets you a piddley little $10.00 fine that does not even show points against your license, and does not get reported to your insurance company. I guess next you will be pissing and whining bout what an invasion child restraint laws are on your personal freedoms. As a clarification, Insurance companies do charge for seat-belt violations. Any violation you get will show up on your MVR. Sorry, but on this one, you are not correct. Seat belt tickets don't show on the MVR, as they are not moving violations. The only things that show are moving violations,DUIs and accidents. The only way it would show anywhere is if you got a FTA or a FTP, then it would be on your criminal record, not your driving record.
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Jun 1, 2007 10:48:40 GMT -5
Sorry, but on this one, you are not correct. Seat belt tickets don't show on the MVR, as they are not moving violations. The only things that show are moving violations and accidents. The only way it would show anywhere is if you got a FTA or a FTP, then it would be on your criminal record, not your driving record. I work in the Insurance Business. There is a charge for seat-belt violations. Now, it's different from state to state so maybe you're thinking of a different state but Insurance companies do charge for seat-belt violations in the state of Alabama.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jun 1, 2007 10:49:59 GMT -5
Sorry, but I work in law enforcement and I look at MVRs every day. I know what is reported, and I know what will show when a driving history is pulled.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jun 1, 2007 10:55:01 GMT -5
It is perfectly clear in Alabama Title Code 32, but who am I to question someone in insurance?
Section 32-5B-7 Failure to wear safety belt; not evidence of contributory negligence; liability of insurer not limited; driving record of individual charged.
Failure to wear a safety belt in violation of this chapter shall not be considered evidence of contributory negligence and shall not limit the liability of an insurer, nor shall the conviction be entered on the driving record of any individual charged under the provisions of this chapter. (Acts 1991, No. 91-255, p. 483, §7.)
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jun 1, 2007 11:15:27 GMT -5
this is why some of the citizens that have the ability to think and use their common sense, cant square reality with what government tells us.... a seat belt violation is NOT "moving violation" the car isnt in motion? the vehicle being pulled over wasnt "moving"?
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Jun 1, 2007 11:24:24 GMT -5
Okay. I'm not trying to get into an argument here but I will kindly disagree with you to a degree. The company I work for writes Standard PPA in about 14 different states (including AL), and Non-Standard PPA in about 23 states. We also write Classic Auto in 47 states. Every state has different guidelines for what they require in insurance and what the insurance companies are able to charge for. This violation is often filed as a "Minor Moving Violation" or "Other Moving Violation" and those are worth 2 points each. You're right about the specific "Seat-Belt Violation" but that is often not how it is filed. So, if it shows up on the MVR as a Minor Moving Violation or something similar (which is usually how it recorded as) then the person will get two points on their MVR.
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Jun 1, 2007 11:25:42 GMT -5
It is perfectly clear in Alabama Title Code 32, but who am I to question someone in insurance? Section 32-5B-7 Failure to wear safety belt; not evidence of contributory negligence; liability of insurer not limited; driving record of individual charged. Failure to wear a safety belt in violation of this chapter shall not be considered evidence of contributory negligence and shall not limit the liability of an insurer, nor shall the conviction be entered on the driving record of any individual charged under the provisions of this chapter. (Acts 1991, No. 91-255, p. 483, §7.) You must have woken up on the wrong side of the bed today. One could almost take your sarcasm as hostility.
|
|
lawman
Apprentice Cog
Posts: 237
|
Post by lawman on Jun 1, 2007 14:26:48 GMT -5
In many other things I'd agree with you. This is not one of them. You call it government invasion, and perhaps it is, but I look at it as raising your awareness and perhaps saving your life. Glass half-full. Raise my (our) awareness.......Fine and Good! But they haven't STOPPED at ''raising our awareness!'' Making seat-belt usage a LAW and stopping 'us' and giving a ticket that takes (steals) $100.00 from me (us), just as a rotten thief with a gun pointed at a 'victim'.... IS WRONG and a major infringement on my Constitutional Rights and Liberty! THE PROBLEM IS.....THE Citizens have become the 'Victims' of the Evil Lawmakers!
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Jun 1, 2007 14:43:21 GMT -5
Raise my (our) awareness.......Fine and Good! But they haven't STOPPED at ''raising our awareness!'' Making seat-belt usage a LAW and stopping 'us' and giving a ticket that takes (steals) $100.00 from me (us), just as a rotten thief with a gun pointed at a 'victim'.... IS WRONG and a major infringement on my Constitutional Rights and Liberty! THE PROBLEM IS.....THE Citizens have become the 'Victims' of the Evil Lawmakers! I understand what you're saying. However, you support a cell-phone ban which seems to contradict what you've just stated. Why do you support a cell-phone ban but not seat-belt laws?
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Jun 1, 2007 15:40:22 GMT -5
Lawman has not put forward that he is looking for a cell-phone ban. That was homophobe. Although use of a cell-phone while driving is more apt to cause an accident -- thereby potentially injuring others -- while not wearing a seat belt shouldn't (in theory) put others in danger.
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Jun 1, 2007 15:48:47 GMT -5
Lawman has not put forward that he is looking for a cell-phone ban. That was homophobe. Although use of a cell-phone while driving is more apt to cause an accident -- thereby potentially injuring others -- while not wearing a seat belt shouldn't (in theory) put others in danger. Actually, he did here.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jun 1, 2007 18:37:11 GMT -5
In many other things I'd agree with you. This is not one of them. You call it government invasion, and perhaps it is, but I look at it as raising your awareness and perhaps saving your life. Glass half-full. Raise my (our) awareness.......Fine and Good! But they haven't STOPPED at ''raising our awareness!'' Making seat-belt usage a LAW and stopping 'us' and giving a ticket that takes (steals) $100.00 from me (us), just as a rotten thief with a gun pointed at a 'victim'.... IS WRONG and a major infringement on my Constitutional Rights and Liberty! THE PROBLEM IS.....THE Citizens have become the 'Victims' of the Evil Lawmakers! Who is stealing $100.00 from you? Did you get 10 seatbelt tickets? The fine for a seatbelt citation is $10.00 not $100.00. And it is the only ticket written that a judge can not attach court costs to.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jun 1, 2007 18:39:01 GMT -5
this is why some of the citizens that have the ability to think and use their common sense, cant square reality with what government tells us.... a seat belt violation is NOT "moving violation" the car isnt in motion? the vehicle being pulled over wasnt "moving"? A moving violation: Following too close, improper lane usage, failure to signal, DUI...Something that causes the moving vehicle to become a danger to others.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jun 1, 2007 18:40:49 GMT -5
You must have woken up on the wrong side of the bed today. One could almost take your sarcasm as hostility. Sorry, I have been going non stop without sleep for a few days. Everyone at my house is sick, and between work, school and illness I am the only one not getting to sleep.
|
|
|
Post by solomon on Jun 1, 2007 18:48:33 GMT -5
Seat belts saved lives in numerous traffic accidents. But on the other hand people have been mangled and ripped in half from side impact collisions. There have been accidents where people may have survived but a seatbelt prevented it. I wear my seatbelt and I put my baby in a child restraint seat. But I don't think it is the job of any government to tell me to wear one because they MAY save my life. There are plenty of things that MAY save someone's life. Guns were reported to have been used to deter criminals as much as 500,000 times in one year according to some FBI stats I read a while back. Guns save lives but I don't see the government requiring everyone to own guns or threaten to withhold Federal Highway Funds $$$$ for not having "laws" requiring their usage. A healthy diet has been proven time and time again but there is no laws regulating diet...and I don't want any. Illegal aliens are said to have killed over 48,000 people or more per year here in America in DUI related accidents but the Government surely doesn't believe in protecting its citizens with laws that have existed since our country's conception. Abortion kills on the average of 1,000,000 children per year in America but it is protected under law. So anytime I hear about this "loving government" worried about "the children" or me I think about all of the things above (and many other injustices) and I feel like punching them in the nose and sometimes I feel like doing much worse. Seatbelt laws also infringe on Americans' 4th Amendments rights of protection against unreasonable searches and SEIZURES. When a vehicle is stopped by a police car it is considered to be a seizure under law because the person is required to stop hence they are not FREE to go. Constitutional Cop Bill Clinton promoted this so why would anyone want to be on his side of anything? [glow=red,2,300] Ron Paul 2008[/glow]
|
|
|
Post by solomon on Jun 1, 2007 18:51:39 GMT -5
Plus it is unconstitutional. It is another way the government benefits from the sheeple $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ 10$ or more at a time.
|
|