Help with argument that Seat Belt laws are unconstitutional?

1/3/03 | Richard Brengman

[Cultural Jihad]

Winning by default because a police office didn't show up is not a case. For that matter, all he needs to bring to the court are his crayon drawings he did as a 5 year old, offering them as proof of his innocence, while hoping the police officer is too busy to appear and force him to show what a fool he is.

[mvpel]

Please note that I didn't include the Echazabal case in the motion to dismiss, since it came out after I had submitted it. It is a key case, though, and I had planned to raise it on appeal and touched on it in my planned closing. You should try to scare up a copy. If you had posted this earlier, I might have been able to dig up my copy for you.

The US Supreme Court called Chevron's efforts to protect Echazabal from debilitating disease that would arise due to his exposure to workplace chemicals in conjunction with his liver dysfunction "paternalistic." How much more so when the State does it!

I also observed that even INMATES in California have the right to refuse unwanted medical intervention. The seat belt law says we're even less free to choose our own medical course of action than prisoners.

[mvpel]

You take your wins where you can get 'em, says an attorney friend of mine.

[biffalobull]

I think you're stuck. I don't wear mine either. Use to till they told me I had to.

Jack; I don't(won't) wear mine either. I think it is very discriminating.

Why are kids on a shool bus not required to wear belts? If a bus has an accident the 50 kids all become projectiles.

Why is it on street cars, subways, trains, buses, ect. no one wears a selt belt. When they make this law universal for everyone I will wear mine. Good Luck

[Cultural Jihad]

Gov. Org. has no business dictating my choice for me.

Then go ahead and refuse to pay the fine they levy, but don't come whining to us about how oppressed you are when they throw you into the county jail.

[mvpel]

From the moment of injury, society picks the person up off the highway; delivers him to a municipal hospital and municipal doctors; provides him with unemployment compensation if, after recovery, he cannot replace his lost job, and if the injury causes permanent disability, may assume the responsibility for his and his family's continued subsistence.

The court just pulled this out of their copious flat a$$ses.

The last time I was injured and conveyed to a hospital, my insurance covered the $900, 15-minute ambulance ride, paid for the X-ray and treatment, and if I'd had no insurance, I would have been fined by the State and been forced by the courts to set up a payment plan with the hospital and ambulance companies. During my entire working career in California I have been paying in to the "SDI" - State Disability Insurance - fund that will pay me a monthly pittance if I am unable to work.

Just because the State takes it upon itself to do things that it has no Constitutional authority to do, and which were done quite adequately by private charities in the past, such as providing for indigent people, that doesn't mean that they then gain property rights over the bodies of its citizens.

Besides, this legal principle has been overruled by the US Supreme Court in Echazabal v. Chevron.

What about the guy who burned to death in front of horrified onlookers because his seatbelt jammed? Shall the State take responsibility for that result of their oppressive policies?

[Mad Dawgg]

If you were ticketed on private property you have a legitimate beef. However I am willing to bet you were ticketed on either a state or city road. And I believe that you must abide by the laws which govern those who wish to drive on the government's roads.

However, if you got an illegal search of your vehicle you got some running room because I believe even if they stop you for speeding they cannot search your vehicle without a warrant or your permission.

Other than that I would suggest you pay the fine and be done with it.

[mvpel]

BTW - this is one of a laundry list of reasons I'm moving to New Hampshire. I'll still wear my seatbelt and my motorcycle helmet, since that's the choice I've made for myself, but I prefer being in a state with fewer, rather than more, excuses for the police to interrupt your business and scrutinize your paperz.

[Cultural Jihad]

Just because the State takes it upon itself to do things that it has no Constitutional authority to do, ...

Besides, this legal principle has been overruled by the US Supreme Court in Echazabal v. Chevron.

There you go, Richard. I'll bet mvpel is so sure of his free legal opinion that he is willing to serve any jail time for you in your stead!

[mvpel]

It doesn't cost him anything but a little time and effort to fight the ticket. If he loses, the fine doesn't go up.

[TheAngryClam]

um, yeah.

That's about all I can say over this one.

At least it's not a Terri Schiavo for Senate thread.

[mvpel]

Don't be such a dork, Jihad.

Like I just said, in an apparently prescient response to your post, it doesn't cost him anything except some time and effort and a few copies at Kinko's to fight the case. If he loses, he either appeals, or pays the measley fine.

"Jail time" enters into the scenario only in your fevered imagination.

[Cultural Jihad]

Just hand the judge this card:

And then claim that since the American flag has a gold fringe on it you are going to effect a citizen's arrest upon him for using a standard of maritime law in a land-locked courtroom!

[Cultural Jihad]

The reference to jail came from the UberPatriot's lauding of civil disobedience.

[mvpel]

I guess my definition of "civil disobedience" includes taking the fight to court, like Brown v. Board of Education, rather than just ignoring the legal process altogether.

I've been tempted since the last time around to drive unbelted back and forth in front of the San Jose Police Department downtown to take another pass at my seat belt argument, particularly in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling on Echazabal, but I'm moving to New Hampshire in about 10 days, so I guess someone else will have to do it.

[Richard-SIA]

I seriously believe that everyone should be allowed to make their own choice!

I KNOW that the factory (and Fed. approved!) belt design is badly flawed, I have been a corner worker at SCCA races and saw cars hit concrete barriers at over 100 mph and no injury to the driver. You will NEVER see that with a factory belt. But racing belts are too inconvenient for most people, so the Fed. knows too few people would tolerate them for enforcement to be practical. The result would be repeal of the seatbelt law.

The same nanny state that insist I wear an inferior belt also claims I do not have the right to fit effective belts to my car, which is the "law" I usually ignore when I have the chance.

[mvpel]

There's some evidence that the Seat Belt laws were pushed through by the auto companies in cooperation with Senator Feinstein as an effort to forestall the Federal airbag mandate.

[John H K]

I KNOW that the factory (and Fed. approved!) belt design is badly flawed, I have been a corner worker at SCCA races and saw cars hit concrete barriers at over 100 mph and no injury to the driver. You will NEVER see that with a factory belt.

I can't remember doing 100 mph on a public road; maybe that's your problem.

[John H K]

What about the guy who burned to death in front of horrified onlookers because his seatbelt jammed? Shall the State take responsibility for that result of their oppressive policies?

Leaving aside the legal and political issues involved (and actually I'm fairly concerned at the "Safety Nazis" taking over society myself) regarding the simple issues of seatbelt safety I'm always fascinated where people allow their emotions to skew their risk perception.

The fear of being burned alive is so overwhelming (helped along by EVERY car crash on TV and in film resulting in a fire and explosion) that it's clearly counterbalancing the patently obvious, that is, when you're involved in 99.99% of potentially life threatening collisions, which are going to be hitting something at 40-60 mph, or perhaps hitting another car with a combined speed of 70-100 mph, that not going through the windshield and flying through the air ten miles is by far the biggest goal.

There are so many car accidents in this country that you can find a few where someone would have survived without a seatbelt, but died with one. But it's the mundane, routine car accidents that are forgotten.

[Brandon]

Unless we allow you to be left on the side of the road if you fail to buckle up, not buckling up affects more than just those who don't wear their seat beltd.

Yep. In certain circumstances, you might also be flung about the passenger compartment, whereas if you had been belted properly you would have stayed in your seat and (possibly) been able to retain control of your vehicle.