[Southack]

Since you probably got ticketed by a state or local cop rather than a federal agent, you're looking at state law.

What does federal law say about state law? It says (9th and 10th Amendments) that whatever the federal government can't do, if it isn't explicitly prohibited to the states, then the states or people can do.

Which basicly means that states can do things that aren't in the U.S. Constitution.

So next time, buckle up. If you can't pay the fine, don't do the crime!

[Bogey78O]

You don't need help. You'll need a 500$ lawyer arguing constantly for you. Then when you lose you bring it up on appeal. Then when you lose the appeal you go higher. Ten years after that you'll finally win but your citation will cost tens of thousands to fight.

[tahiti]

Amendment IX

"The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

You have the "retained" right to decide whether you will or will not wear a seat belt.

Good luck.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Find a race driver that says seat belts are dangerous.

[new cruelty]

Seat Belt Law Unconstitutional

Financial reasons stop seat belt tickets

[Experiment 6-2-6]

Ain't you kinda waiting until the last minute in asking for help on this?

Not that it would help you much...

In MY legal opinion, you're toast.

Take heart in the fact that my legal advice is free.

[GO65]

What is not prohibited by the federal constitution is empowered to the states, so you'll have to check your state constitution.

Generally driving is considered a privalege, not a right, and therefore you are required to obey the laws if you want to drive. Laws requiring you to wear a seatbelt are no different than laws requiring you to get your car inspected.

IMHO seat belt laws are a good thing, they reduce highway fatalities and injuries, thus benefiting all of us. I'd recommend you just pay the fine and buckle up next time. :-)

[Atlas Sneezed]

I have a court date tomorrow...

---

You wouldn't be one of those guys who "hates lawyers" would you, until you need one, and instead expect free legal advice on the web?

You should have hired one when one could do you good. You should have joined the NMA (www.motorists.org) before it was too late.

Perhaps you could have those loved ones who would be paying for your vegetative medical care upon a serious accident due to being unbelted, pay for your current legal bills? (I hope you don't expect me, your neighbors, and HIllary-care to pay your post-crash medical bills, do you?)

[xrp]

You may opt not to wear a seatbelt whenever you drive on your own private property. However, when you're driving with the masses [IE on public roads], you must, because in the remote event that you are thrown from your vehicle, you as a road kill, then present a possible danger to other drivers in traffic. They're public roads, not your roads. Pave your own highway and keep everyone else off and you can drive without your seatbelt all day long.

[exit82]

Forget the Constitutional approach.

You'd have better luck if you claim a religious exemption. Show up in court with a beard, Amish hat and overalls, with boots smelling of cow manure. Pulling up to the courthouse in a black buggy enhances the case.

Remember to speak with a slight German accent and not Brooklynese. Good luck.

[Semi Civil Servant]

If you were in your own driveway, you've got a case. If you were on a public road funded by you and others (others you could sue if you were injured in an accident because you did NOT buckle up), I'd say pay the piper.

I think you will find that when you choose to drive on a publically funded roadway, you implicitly agree to follow the rules of that road, one of which is the seat belt law.

[bjcintennessee]

While I agree in principle to your protest, statistics are against you. While on the one hand, it should be your choice whether to take risks or not, if another driver hits you, he/she is liable for your injuries. Statistics indicate that your injuries would be far greater if you weren't wearing a seat belt.

Maybe those who do not wish to wear a seat belt should be allowed to sign a waiver, promising not to sue for injuries.

[Gerish]

Ah yes, the seatbelt law - the best way for our law enforcement officers to make revenue for the State. Never mind that man who just robbed the bank, we need to ticket drivers who are not wearing their seatbelt!!!!!!

Okay my rant is over. Find yourself a lawyer and get the ticket reduced. It probably is your first offense so it should not be a problem. I would rather pay a lawyer than pay the State for such a ridiculous law. Most of the time the Judge will have sympathy for a first offense. I guess the problem people have with this law is Big Brother telling us what to do - AGAIN. Watch....next we will all have to wear helmets when we drive!

[AUH2OY2K]

Please don't kill the messenger, but in all likelihood the court will not entertain your arguments. If you live in Clark County, NV, you can pay a minimal fine and move on. Almost all moving violations can be reduced to parking tickets. It is just a mill here. (I'm licensed in NV, TX, PA, and the Federal District Court)

[nunya bidness]

You could argue the "equal protection clause" of the 14th amendment. Namely, that certain citizens are exempted from seat belt laws.

It's been argued and ruled in favor of the defendent, but in the case that I know of the judge was aware that the defendent was ready to appeal up after losing.

[WackyKat]

I suggest that you question the court's jurisdiction on the grounds that, as your birth certificate spelled your name in all capital letters, that was the creation of a "corporate entity" or "Strawman" and that, as you have repudiated this "Strawman" by filing a revocation action with your county court clerk, you are no longer bound by the court's juridiction over said "Strawman".
And further, that you have put your self and all personal and real property into a "blind trust" pursuant to the common law and the Magna Carta, and thus are a "Sovereign Citizen" with alloidal title over yourself and are not subject to any 14th Amendment claims of any federal, state or local court.
Or you could just be smart and pay the stupid ticket.

[Porterville]

Check the forth amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[Cultural Jihad]

Pay the fine and accept the consequences of your freewill actions, rather than trying to make whiney excuses for them. Leave that chore to the liberals.

[mvpel]

TOMORROW?? Why didn't you ask earlier????

Try for a continuance.

Meanwhile, I'll post the text of my brief in opposition here once I scare it up. It relies on Echazabal v. Chevron, a Supreme Court case where they established the principle that an individual is responsible for his own health care choices.

[mvpel]

Richard,

http://www.aidoann.com/pickup-ticket/

This is the incomplete web page of my case that I won for riding unbelted in the back of a pickup. The key document is the motion to dismiss. The judge denied it, but the cop didn't show up at the hearing and I won by default.