New Jersey Nanny State Mandates Car Seats for 8 Yr OIds

New Jersey Laws

[d-back]

New Jersey Child Passenger Restraint Law

Effective December 1, 2001

This NJ law requires that children under the age of 8 and less than 80 pounds must be secured in a child passenger restraint system or booster seat. For children less than 8 but over 80 pounds and for children between 8 and 18, the law requires the driver to ensure that they are in a properly adjusted and fastened seatbelt (properly adjusted and fastened seatbelt is also required for the driver and any front seat passenger).

The actual law follows . . .

CHAPTER 244

AN ACT concerning the use of child passenger restraint systems, booster seats, and seat belts,amending P.L.1983, c.128 and P.L.1984, c.179and repealing section 2 of P.L.1983, c.128.

BE IT ENACTED by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:

1. Section 1 of P.L.1983, c.128 (C.39:3-76.2a) is amended to read as follows: C.39:3-76.2a Child passenger restraint system; booster seat, use; failure to use not contributory negligence; inadmissibility in evidence.

1. Every person operating a motor vehicle, other than a school bus, equipped with safety belts who is transporting a child under the age of eight years and weighing less than 80 pounds on roadways, streets or highways of this State, shall secure the child in a child passenger restraint system or booster seat, as described in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Number 213, in a rear seat. If there are no rear seats, the child shall be secured in a child passenger restraint system or booster seat, as described in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Number 213. In no event shall failure to wear a child passenger restraint system or to use a booster seat be considered as contributory negligence, nor shall the failure to wear the child passenger restraint system be admissible as evidence in the trial of any civil action.

2. Section 2 of P.L.1984, c.179 (C.39:3-76.2f) is amended to read as follows:C.39:3-76.2f Seat belt usage requirements for persons ages 8-18; driver's responsibility. 2. a. Except as provided in P.L.1983, c.128 (C.39:3-76.2a et al.) for children under eight years of age and weighing less than 80 pounds, all passengers under eight years of age and weighing more than 80 pounds, and all passengers who are at least eight years of age but less than 18 years of age, and each driver and front seat passenger of a passenger automobile operated on a street or highway in this State shall wear a properly adjusted and fastened safety seat belt system as defined by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Number 209. b. The driver of a passenger automobile shall secure or cause to be secured in a properly adjusted and fastened safety seat belt system, as defined by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Number 209, any passenger who is at least eight years of age but less than 18 years of age.

For the purposes of the "Passenger Automobile Seat Belt Usage Act," the term "passenger automobile" shall include vans, pick-up trucks and utility vehicles.

3. Section 2 of P.L.1983, c.128 (C.39:3-76.2b) is repealed.

4. This act shall take effect on the first day of the third month after enactment.

Approved September 6, 2001.

[d-back]

The New Jersey Nanny State, those intrepid souls who have banned runny eggs and mandated bike helmets, have done it again. Got an 8 year old? Stuff him in a car seat. Anyone else resent this stupid, intrusive, We-know-better-than-you law?

[ppaul]

Awwwwww. How nice. Now every child can be safe. Sometimes it takes a villlage.....

[TopDog2]

Do they even make car seats big enough for an 8-year old?

[d-back]

OOOPS! Law applies to SEVEN year olds--those under eight. My bad.

But it STILL stinks.

[TopDog2]

It doesn't matter. A child at 7 years, 364 days is still pretty large for a car seat. Besides, how are the cops going to know who to ticket? Will they make the children carry some form of ID so they will know when they are "legal?"

[Roy Tucker]

My 8 year old would rather die than be seen in a car seat at his age. Where does this creeping regulation stop?

[Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)]

This is so pathetic it’s hysterical. How about those families that have several children 8 years and under? This could go on and on so I’ll stop here.

[Thinkin' Gal]

Every person operating a motor vehicle, other than a school bus...

That says a lot.

[DWSUWF]

"...Anyone else resent this stupid, intrusive, We-know-better-than-you law?..."

Part of our problem is that we don't challenge our enemies when they call a toaster a hat-rack.

In fact, like zombies, we often repeat what they say.

This isn't a 'law'.

This is simply tyranny.

We have no moral obligation to obey it.

But we do have an obligation, as Americans, to sweep it, and much more of its ilk, into the dustbin of history.

And how you go about discharging that responsibility is your business.

[Dahoser]

Another indication of the uphill battle that Bret Schundler faces in this braindead state.

[dubyagee]

They will now, with the assurance people will HAVE to purchase them.

[d-back]

But you're not supposed to have "several" children--you're supposed to have two! Big families are not consistent with the New World Order--they tend to be patriarchal, the mother tends to work full-time minding the children, and the kids consume too much of Mother Earth's resources!

By the way, I'm one of eight, and we thought we were doing just fine crammed into the back of our station wagon. How unenlightened we were.

[AppyPappy]

My 7 year-old rides in a car seat and she better like it because she's not coming out of it. The seat belt cuts her across the throat without it.

[riley1992]

Same here. My 7 year old is pretty small and without the booster the seatbelt rides right across her neck. However, I am totally against this being law.

[12B]

This is actually a good idea. Safety belts are made for adult-sized people. A "booster seat" is just one of those styrofoam thingies which adjusts the child's height to the seat belt. They only cost about $10.00. It ain't a big deal. Unless you really want to make it into a big deal.

[Roy Tucker]

Look, if it makes your daughter and you feel safer, you can wear a crash helmet while sitting in your car. I don't mind. I am tired of more and more regulation over matters of personal choice in our society. This is one of them. What is to stop them from making it mandatory for 12 year olds? Did we elect the legislators to pass this kind of regulation? Kids can't sit in the front seat in a lot of states because airbags have been proven to kill children under 12. Why isn't Ralph Nader being brought on the carpet for that? Now that I think about it, I think a lot of the problem stems from the increasing creep of socialized medicine. If the government pays for more and more of the middle-class medical bills, they will increasingly dictate what we have to do in our daily lives. End middle-class welfare now!

[US_MilitaryRules]

Can't wait to go get my new seat at Wal-mart! Example: Congress passes new law requiring everyone under 40 years old to get a saftey seat. Neeexxxxt

[Joe Hadenuf]

I heard that there is a new law being proposed that will requre Mothers and Fathers to attended a mandatory 4 hour car seat safety class, where you will be certified at the conclusion of the program.

To be more specific, you will be certified as a total complete idiot for putting up with this big government bull sh*t.

[Nathan Jr.]

When I was growing up (one of eight also), we all traveled in the back of an empty panel van, sitting on kitchen chairs because we couldn't afford better. We all held on to each other during stops and starts, so no one ever fell over or got hurt (okay, it would happen from time to time). It was weird, but what memories!

[mom of 2 GOP kids]

I think a lot of the problem stems from the increasing creep of socialized medicine. If the government pays for more and more of the middle-class medical bills, they will increasingly dictate what we have to do in our daily lives.

Actually, speaking from experience, it is the hospitals who eat the costs of irresponsible parents - most of the time. Government (or private ins.) doesn't even begin to cover the costs of trauma medicine. Add to the mix the large number of uninsured. What to do? If it is the person's right not to wear a seatbelt, then should the hospital should have the right not to treat, since the patient's irresponsibility caused the trauma?

I am a real believer in personal responsibility, but those who refuse to take that responsibility, demand the finest technology to fix them up, then sue if the results are less than satisfactory. People need to be responsible for their own safety, but if they don't, they shouldn't expect to have someone else swoop in and clean up the mess they've made for themselves. BTW, I think that requiring a car seat for an 8 yr old is ridiculous, but having them wear a seat belt is not.

[d-back]

Ten bucks for a booster seat? My eye. Try thirty to a hundred.

That one costs fifty.

And if you want to stuff your seven year old in one, 12B, be my guest. Just don't tell me to put my seven year old into one. I mean, seven year olds are in second grade, for cryin' out loud. Who's the parent here--me or the State of New Jersey?

Bear in mind that New Jersey's Supreme Court found that it was "unconstitutional" to require abortionists to notify a parent before sucking a baby out of your teenage girl's uterus. This new "seatbelt" law now requires drivers to make sure their seventeen year old daughter is wearing a seatbelt, but that same parent has no "right" to know if an abortionist is going to operate on his daughter.

Old enough for abortion, not old enough to sit in a car without a seatbelt. Go figure that one.

[dead]

It sounds like your daughter still needs a car seat, and you are right to provide it.

But should my friend, who has a six-year-old, 75lb son be required by law to treat his bruiser in the same manner? This kid could eat a oncoming car.

[dead]

We were six kids, stacked like cordwood with the luggage, in the back of a Ford Fairlane station wagon, barreling down the turnpike to the Jersey shore.

Now my dad would be headed to prison, especially after they found out he had beer in the cooler.

[Dan C]

As a kid we had an official store bought station wagon matress in the back of the wagon for us kids to sleep/play on during long trips. One of the best "games" we played was to continually dive over the back seat into the way back...and back again. Hmmm... I wonder if the statue of limitations has run out on my parent's obvious and repeated instances of child endangerment?

[gridlock]

Every person operating a motor vehicle, other than a school bus...

If you are transporting your children, no amount of burdensome regulation is too great for you to bear.

If we are transporting your children, we'll handle them like the gorrilla handles the suitcase in an old American Tourister commercial, because we just don't care.

[AppyPappy]

When he reaches the age of consent, he can do whatever he wants. How is the child harmed by being in a car seat vs the harm for not having a child in a car seat?

We just had two children killed in a car wreck locally. Both were thrown from the car. No seat belt. What do you do? Do you say "If you want to kill your kids, that's your own business?". If you can't mandate car seats for kids, can you mandate seat belts for kids?

BTW for those asking, we give away car seats around here. All you have to do is ask for one.

[AppyPappy]

personal choice in our society

A child cannot make that choice. That aren't old enough.

[TLBSHOW]

more BS from jersey

[Dr. Frank fan]

This is actually a good idea.

Why are there always one or two people on these threads who can't tell the difference between "it is a good idea for people to do X" and "it is a good idea for the law to FORCE people to do X"?

12B, it is a Good Idea for people to get a certain amount of exercise each day. Does that mean it should become law, with under-exercisers cited and/or arrested?

Let me know....

[Dr. Frank fan]

If it is the person's right not to wear a seatbelt, then should the hospital should have the right not to treat, since the patient's irresponsibility caused the trauma?

In fact, the answer to this question is Yes.

[AppyPappy]

And what are the chances of that being true in the real world?

[Roy Tucker]

So who makes the choice the parents or the State? I vote for the parents.

[d-back]

Oh, but they do care, Gridlock. It's for the children.

That's the argument of the creeping Nanny State, isn't it. The State has an interest in the well being of children, so it can pass a law that positively impacts their well being.

Which leads to other possibilities: Why doesn't New Jersey pass a law requiring that parents feed their children vegetables at dinner? Everyone knows that kids need vegetables--let's just make it the law.

Why doesn't New Jersey require that children be taken to the zoo once a year? How's this one look:

"WHEREAS, the State of New Jersey finds that the mental, emotional, and psychological well being of children is significantly enhanced by seeing animals at the zoo; and

WHEREAS, the State of New Jersey finds that there are numerous zoos located within the state, with reasonable entry fees and nice snack bars;

NOW, it is hereby enacted that all children shall be taken to the zoo by their parent and/or guardian not less than one (1) time per calendar year, from the age of two years to the age of ten years.

Violation of this statute shall be a Class A misdemeanor."

Hey 12B, got any laws like that in Germany? Should you?

[Woodman]

The 64 Ford Galaxy XL my parents had didn't have seat belts in the rear seat. They were optional and I assume no one wanted to pay for it.

My 7 year old is tall and thin. His hieght makes a Booster or Saftey seat "Unsafe" for him because his ears are above the back of the seat. He also only weighs about 60 Lbs. Now what am I supposed to do when I cross the Bridge into NJ? BTW I do have a belt adjuster in place to keep it down low on his waist and change the cross angle on his chest.

[Capt.YankeeMike]

you must have some little, tiny kids...maybe feed em more?

[Dr. Frank fan]

Hey, she asked... :)

[AppyPappy]

A. Not everyone has a belt adjuster.
B. Cars today aren't built like a 64 Ford. When you hit a 64 Ford, people don't fly out the windows. They look up.
C. In Virginia, the law is based on age/height/weight. I have no idea what the whole NJ law says.
D. I don't consider the nanny state to be seat belt laws. I consider it to be the government telling me I have to pay for some numbskull's hospital bill because he wasn't wearing a safety belt and got tossed into a ditch. Why is it my fault that he is an idiot? As long as people want the government to be their nanny, they will have to accept these types of laws.
E> I have no problem with parents making the decision but if they make the wrong one, they should be nailed for it.

[gridlock]

I just find it amusing that when the state carries your children in a school bus, they can stack them like cordwood and nobody cares. But if your private vehicle does not have the right endorsement on the child seat, your goin' down. If it is so important that children wear seatbelts, why does the state exempt itself from this regulation?

PS. I have seen parents move car seats from car to car, without buckling them to the car! Needless to say, these parents are morons. But they are required to keep the child strapped into a car seat, so they move the seat, strap the child in, and off they go. Actually attaching the seat to the car is just too much trouble. It would be easier for them, and safer for the child, if they just buckled the kid into the car's seatbelt. But then the child would be obviously unrestrained, and they would get a ticket.

[gumbo]

You think this is bad, have you heard of the NJ Supreme Court's Abbott decision?

The socialist grandees who sit on that panel have decreed mandatory pre-school for 3 and 4 year olds in 28 so-called "Abbott districts" in mostly urban areas of NJ.

Here's their reasoning...

The Court reiterated that early childhood education is "essential" for the education of low-income children and stated that "pre-school education also has strong constitutional underpinning."

[spunkets]

"Anyone else resent this stupid, intrusive, We-know-better-than-you law?"

Yep! Glad I don't live there. This is typical of their nanny crap.

[d-back]

Right you are, Gumbo. The Abbott decision is outrageous, and New Jersey had to adopt an income tax because of its Supreme Court's rulings on education back in the seventies. The NJ Supremes relied on the state constitution's infamous "T&E" clause to find a constitutional "right" to equal school funding. (The clause reads, essentially, that the Legislature shall provide "thorough and efficient" free public schools, and the judges interpreted "thorough and efficient" to mean "funded with exactly equal dollar amounts regardless of local disparities in income, property taxes, or local public sentiment as to appropriate levels of expenditure.")

The New Jersey Supreme Court is one of the last, great Brennanite courts in the country, issuing agenda-based decrees from Mount Olympus to us mere mortals below with shameless zeal. These black-robed tyrants are the ones who UNANIMOUSLY found that there was nothing wrong with compelling the Boy Scouts of America to accept open homosexuals to act as guardians of young men. This outrage proved too much even for the spineless judges of the Supreme Court of the United States--who joined with stalwarts Scalia and Thomas to reverse the NJ Supreme Court by only the slimmest of margins.

New Jersey--The Garden State! And don't even ask me about our gun laws. . .

[mom of 2 GOP kids]

If it is the person's right not to wear a seatbelt, then should the hospital should have the right not to treat, since the patient's irresponsibility caused the trauma?

In fact, the answer to this question is Yes.

Yes, they should have the right, but they don't, plus, they won't - even if it were legal. It's not ethical. Is Dr. Frank an M.D? If you are, I'm sure you are well aware of those hefty malpractice premiums, ;)

Still, it burns me to see these people wheeled in after a fender bender in which all those belted walk away, but for the one to go through the windshield, while their family members look through the phone book for lawyers.

[Dr. Frank fan]

[refusing treatment] ... plus, they won't - even if it were legal. It's not ethical.

I agree with you, it's not ethical. And accordingly hospitals/doctors, being ethical decent people in this country for the most part, would never refuse treatment on such grounds in the first place. Good for them!

Not refusing treatment on ethical grounds is good. But when they turn around and say that in addition the government should mandate certain behavior among the general populace, just to alleviate the costs of their having ethics: that's where I draw the line.

You can't have it both ways: if you are doing something because of ethics, you can't argue that at the same time you should pay no cost. If you aren't doing something out of ethics, but merely because you are being forced to, then you should indeed argue that it is the force which is unjust, and that you should be free to be unethical if you wish.

Is Dr. Frank an M.D?

Heh, I get that a lot. "Dr. Frank" is the lead singer of my favorite silly punk rock band and that's who I was listening when I signed up for FR, so that's the nickname I chose at the time. I've often regretted it (everyone assumes I'm a "doctor", some even are resentful and make nasty comments about it...) but I'm too lazy to pick a different nick by now... :)

[Dr. Frank fan]

Still, it burns me to see these people wheeled in after a fender bender in which all those belted walk away, but for the one to go through the windshield, while their family members look through the phone book for lawyers.

P.S. yes that burns me too. Ridiculous lawsuits should be reined in. Not more laws passed.

[Focault's Pendulum]

. Anyone else resent this stupid, intrusive, We-know-better-than-you law?

Oh Yeah!!!! Living in one of the highest taxed states in the country.....the highest car insurance rate.....over regulated car inspection/emissions test (yeah right, it took over six months to get it working correctly, and don't get me started on that!), most densely populated in the country, all the taxes collected from the casinos goes to education (then why is my school tax so damn high) and senior citizens (80 year old mother derives 0% benefit), Garden State Parkway tolls, the "smooth" transition to EZ Pass, tax reassessments that caused me to lose my last house, and I'm only on my first scotch, mind you.....

I think the car seat law is just fu&%#ng nifty!!!!

[agrace]

You called it the "way back"? It was the "back in the back" in our family. :) One of my fondest memories is driving to FL from PA - leaving at about 2 am, falling asleep in the back in the back and waking up in hot humid Georgia. As a kid I would lie back there on the way home from Grandma's and try to follow where we were based on nothing but the turns we were making.