Posted on 06/26/2004 12:06:50 PM PDT by pageonetoo
I am trying to figure out how to get a national petition started, to overturn the "Click it or Ticket" laws and its erosion, further, of individual rights.
I am curious how many folk consider The "Click it"campaign to be good, and whether it come through legislation, or did it come about by beaurocratic decree?
(From the NHTA site:
What Impact Have Primary Safety Belt Laws Had?
Primary safety belt laws – laws that allow police officers to pull over a driver and issue a safety belt citation without first observing another offense – have had an enormous effect on belt use. Belt use rates in States with primary laws are on average 11 percentage points higher than those with only secondary laws – laws that require officers to first observe another driving offense before being able to issue a belt citation.
Better illustrated, of the States and territories that achieved 80 percent or better safety belt use this past spring, 17 were primary law States. In contrast, the State with the lowest belt use in the country – New Hampshire with a use rate at roughly 50 percent – has no adult safety belt law at all.)
and what is New Hampshires license plate say? (Live Free or Die)
I saw commercialas for the Click it Campaign here in KS, which lasted for only a week or so (shows how much the cops really care about the issue to only have the campaign for a week...lol).
The commercials were hilarious......had some cop interviewed acting like they were going to get tough and you couldn't hide from from them if you dared not wear a seatbelt.
Well, then they quickly ran through the little tidbit that for them to do jack on you, you had to break another traffic law.
I already knew this, as in Kansas, they can't stop you for only not wearing your seatbelt. But, I was a bit concerned with the deceitful commerical that basically did an audio version of fine print.
Deceitful on the part of our law enforcement agencies to try to pull that crap.
I agree...and while we are at it let's suspend that pesky law about robbing banks. I need some money.
I agree. I recall it was originally passed in Michigan with the stipulation that it was not a basis to pull a driver over. That has changed like the prommise of short term taxes. My family always wears seat belts but it's part of our effort to protect ourselves not because bureaucrats feel it necessary by law.
A recent "click it or ticket" campaign locally involved over 8 vehicles in a mile stretch with 6 lined up like keystone cops licking their chops. The concept of "protect and serve" is history.
And it seems to me if the motorcycle helmet law is repealed per ongoing efforts then seatbelt regulations should follow. It is after all a matter of personal protection. Parents have the responsibility to protect their children and I can see a legal requirement to hold them accountable for that.
Rant off
mc
Oh, they still protect and serve......their own interests.
I think it's annoying and insulting. It's another example of the Government having wanting too much money which could be better spent by me!
Excuse me, but seat belts protect me from you as well. If you have an accident without one and are seriously injured, the rest of us often wind up paying for your care when insurance does not. I am not happy about paying taxes to take care of some simpleton who did not have the good sense to buckle up.
Some people are so anti-police or anti-intrusion that they do not see a good law when it is passed.
Not wearing seatbelts does not endanger other drivers.
DUI's and speeding do (well, if you are basically 15 above the speed limit you start to endager other drivers......less than that is fairly safe as long as you are careful, but I would still not advise it because you never know).
I sound like a darn libertarian. Uggh.
There are a good number of states where that is still the case. I almost want to show the police I am not wearing my seatbelt (I wear it about half the time, don't half the time) since they can't do crap to me unless I am speeding, which I rarely do, even in the country.
Yikes....they tried that here in KS a couple years ago. The outcry was so strong it didn't even get voted on.
Thanks for your story. I do wear my seatbelt a lot (I would say 50/50...probably should try harder, even on short trips). I don't object to seatbelts. They save lives. I do object to being told to wear them or I will get in trouble with some cop with nothing better to do.
The state can enact laws that protect citizens from dangerous behavior by others, i.e. drunk driving laws. Seat belts protect only the wearer and not wearing them does not endanger others. Educate all you want, but forcing me to take actions to protect myself takes away the liberty promised by the federal and most state constitutions.
Some people are so pro-police or pro-intrusion that they do not know a restriction of liberties, for what it is, when it is passed.
I prefer my freedoms cold, thank you, not warmed over by the beaurocrats!
Yup, that's exactly the way this law was sold to us here in Connecticut. That it would never be used as a primary reason to pull you over.
You should just see all the roadblocks and "seatbelt safety checkpoints" the Gestapo has around here now. It's particularly bad this summer season.
Pull off a highway exit ramp - there they are. And everywhere else. Eyeballing you, looking for your seatbelt, your emissions sticker, registration stickers, any "safety violation" you may be committing... or maybe just a random stop to check "your papers".
It's all very convienient.
And it creates a lovely air of freedom.
Good thing seatbelts were promised never to be a primary reason to have these little meetings, huh? Nose of the camel, indeed.
It is good to be reminded about seatbelts in any case. I wear them always when on a long trip, 10 miles or longer.
Just going around town, I wear them 50/50 since I am in a small town. It is good to be reminded that wrecks can happen anywhere, even in a small town.
But, I still disagree with you that the govt. has the right to force people to protect themselves.
Every post I see here is from a non-law enforcement point of view.
MY RIGHTS.
MY PRIVACY
Driving in MY car, who cares if I wera MY seat belt.
News Flash! It is not about you.
There have been hospitals that went bankrupt, and City and County funds that went there too. Why?
Because some person thought it was more important to LIVE FREE OR DIE.
O K. Sign a living will that says DO NOT TREAT ME, and have it tattooed on your chest.
Most of the people who refuse to wear seat belts or helmets do not own a pot and can't afford a window to throw it out of, and don't have insurance. So, who pays their medical bills? YOU--the Taxpayer.
The reason law enforcement enforces it is because the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration requires every State traffic enforcement agency to certify each quarter that they have 90% compliance. If they do not, that State-or the municipality --can lose Federal Highway Funds to build and maintain roads. The Feds will not hesitate to verify the compliance rate too.
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.