Injured motorists could be liable under seatbelt bill

Riverton Ranger ^ | 2-5-05 | Robert W. Black

[rwh]

CHEYENNE (AP) — A House committee debated Thursday morning whether it should strengthen the seat belt law by allowing motorists to be held partly responsible for their crash injuries when they fail to buckle up. The measure also would allow a driver to be pulled over solely for not using a seat belt and would increase the fine for drivers from $25 to $50 and for passengers from $10 to $25. “This is a bill that’s not going to stop accidents, but it will reduce fatalities,” said the sponsor, Rep. Jerry Iekel, R-Sheridan. Under current law, authorities can only cite a motorist for violation of the seat belt law if the driver was pulled over for another offense. But drawing the most interest from the House Judiciary Committee was the provision that could allow partial blame for injuries to be assigned to vehicle occupants who don’t buckle up. Current law prohibits a defendant from introducing evidence that a person injured in an accident was partly at fault for his injuries because he failed to wear a seat belt. “You would share in the division of responsibility,” Iekel told the panel. “It seems to fit with the intent of the bill ... that has to do with personal responsibility.” Brent Kunz, a lobbyist for State Farm Insurance Co., spoke in favor of the bill. “As a Wyomingite, I respect our way of life. I, too, would like to have the freedom and not have government restriction on what I can and can’t do, but with the seat belt law it’s a little bit different,” he said. The measure could save not only lives but costs to society and costs to insured drivers, he said. But Rep. Edward Buchanan, R-Torrington, wondered if the Legislature should shift responsibility away from a person who causes a crash. “Do you expect me to wear to wear a crash helmet too because of your negligence?” he said. “How far is the government going to go in making sure we’re safe in everything we do? ... How about adult car seats?” He suggested a better approach might be to further reward motorists for seat belt use when they’re convicted of other traffic violations. Currently, a person receives a $10 reduction of a fine if wearing a belt. Buchanan suggested increasing the credit to $30 or $40. The bill is House Bill 301.

[rwh]

"How about adult car seats"

That's funny. Hope this is shot down.

[GeronL]

Its a fundraising, nanny-state bill

[ikka]

Looks like the Free State Project made the right decision in choosing NH over Wyoming.

[Smartaleck]

This guy is Republican?

[Tabi Katz]

I personally don't believe the state goes far enough in protecting adults from their own foolish behavior, so I propose the following:

1) Re-instate prohibition, and extend it to tobacco, fatty foods, and Kool-Aid,

2) Require window guards in all apartments, regardless of whether any children live there,

3) Refusing to follow our doctor's orders should result in mandatory jail time.

Any other suggestions?

[Slyfox]

I watched one of those Emergency Room shows. A guy arrived with a concussion and face lacerations. First question out of the doctor's mouths. "Was he wearing a seatbelt?" "No." They sadly shook their heads.

The next guy who came through the door was in a similar accident. This second guy WAS wearing his seatbelt. The doctors ended up having to do exploratory surgery because they did not know where or why he was bleeding internally.

Wearing a seatbelt only saves people in 50% of potentially fatal accidents. The other 50% still die while wearing a seatbelt.

[rwh]

On the bright side of things they are considering a law making it legal for all non-felon Wyoming residents to carry concealed weapons.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1334833/posts

[spinestein]

[The measure also would allow a driver to be pulled over solely for not using a seat belt and would increase the fine for drivers from $25 to $50 and for passengers from $10 to $25. “This is a bill that’s not going to stop accidents, but it will reduce fatalities,” said the sponsor, Rep. Jerry Iekel, R-Sheridan.]

It will also generate a lot of revenue for local governments, but I suspect that's only a coincidence.

[spinestein]

[Any other suggestions?]

4) We should give all our money to the government so that they can redistribute it to where it's most needed.



WHAT? It's already been suggested?

[Larry Lucido]

I don't care for seat belt laws, but think about what is being proposed here. It doesn't impose an obligation to wear a seat belt. It allows a defendant to raise the failure to wear a seat belt as a defense regarding the extent of liabilty for a plaintiff's injuries. Since the plaintiff is bringing a suit under the state's civil statutes, and enforcement of the judgment would be backed by state powers, the proposed legislation is actually a limitaton on state power.

[KingNo155]

Is Brent Kunz, a lobbyist for State Farm Insurance Co., willing to allow those injured while wearing a seat belt to collect 10 times more ? Whats he willing to trade?

[spinestein]

As a certified EMT, we are taught that seat belts prevent or lessen the severity of injuries caused by certain types of vehicle trauma, most notably head injuries and injuries resulting from impact with the street or being crushed under the car after being thrown from the vehicle.

Seat belts increase the likelihood, however, of injuries caused by different trauma, most notably internal injuries to the abdominal area and chest cavity.

When all this is added up, you have a much better CHANCE (remember this is just statistics, it doesn't say anything about what happens to any individual) of surviving and having less severe injuries WITH the seat belt.

Having said that, however, the nanny state nincompoops should SHUT THE HELL UP AND LET PEOPLE MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS.

[spinestein]

[Since the plaintiff is bringing a suit under the state's civil statutes, and enforcement of the judgment would be backed by state powers, the proposed legislation is actually a limitaton on state power.]

Read the article again. It says:
[The measure also would allow a driver to be pulled over solely for not using a seat belt and would increase the fine for drivers from $25 to $50 and for passengers from $10 to $25.]

[Larry Lucido]

You're right, that should be opposed. I was addressing the defense-to-liability proposal.

[Larry Lucido]

Injured motorists could be liable under seatbelt bill

And, actually, the title is misleading. It should read "Injured motorists could be held contributorily negligent under seatbelt bill."

[opinionator]

Bogus statistic alert!

[backhoe]

As a certified EMT, we are taught that seat belts prevent or lessen the severity of injuries caused by certain types of vehicle trauma, most notably head injuries and injuries resulting from impact with the street or being crushed under the car after being thrown from the vehicle. Seat belts increase the likelihood, however, of injuries caused by different trauma, most notably internal injuries to the abdominal area and chest cavity. When all this is added up, you have a much better CHANCE (remember this is just statistics, it doesn't say anything about what happens to any individual) of surviving and having less severe injuries WITH the seat belt. Having said that, however, the nanny state nincompoops should SHUT THE HELL UP AND LET PEOPLE MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS.

Thank you for saying that.

As the operator/owner of John's Wrecker Service ( 1991-1999 ) here, I've seen every type of car wreck you can imagine.

Seat belts improve your chances of surviving most accidents- but they are not a universal cure-all.

In some types of wrecks, all they do is hold you in place while you are crushed, pierced, or burned to death. Or drowned.

I think you should be informed, first, of they types of accidents belts may help you survive, and then- second- given the choice of whether you should wear them.

Not coerced, by some "one size fits all" law.

[Just A Nobody]

the nanny state nincompoops should SHUT THE HELL UP AND LET PEOPLE MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS.

Exactly!!!

[Just A Nobody]

"...by ALLOWING motorists to be..."

That's my favorite line.

[Just A Nobody]

[Any other suggestions?]

What a great game.
6. outlaw vehicles altogether - they are just to dangerous
7. outlaw bicycles - afterall I broke my arm once riding
that trecherous thing.
8. roller skates, skate boards, walking - must be banned
9. oh "heck" - OUTLAW BREATHING AND GET IT OVER WITH