Posted on 10/24/2001 8:03:12 AM PDT by 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.
But it STILL stinks.
That says a lot.
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.
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.
To be more specific, you will be certified as a total complete idiot for putting up with this big government bull sh*t.
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.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.