"You WILL respect my Auth-hor-it-tie!
Like there isn't enough real crime in Maryland.......
Could someone tell me how not using seat belt's after dark makes the roads more dangerous?? This is plan and simple back door tax collection
>>>Police say 40 percent of drivers don't use their seat belts at night, making the roads much more dangerous after sunset. >>>
Dangerous for whom? The non-seatbelt wearers? If someone wants to take a chance with their life, why should the police be used for safety patrol? This is a joke, it's about being able to generate more revenue by seat belt tickets.
It's legalized theft, and highway robbery. It's also lazy -- instead of spending time on patrol, they pull people over for these minor infractions and go fishing.
Where I live, there is a cop on the interstate that hides behind a bridge column and catches people speeding before they even have a chance to brake. If it was really about getting people to slow down, he'd sit out in the open. Instead, he gets one speeder out of many.
I can't even imagine it if he had night vision goggles.
"You WILL respect my Auth-hor-it-tie!
Meanwhile, in downtown Rockville, some woman is being raped, a small boy was just kidnapped, and drug deal #435 just ended with the transaction of $5,300 from the illegal alien to the stranger from Syria.
Citizens are simply criminals who have yet to be convicted.
This is not a debate about the pros and cons of the value of seat belts. It is about presenting an issue as innocuous, insignificant and an expansion of choice; then over time, converting it into repressive totalitarian mandatory money-making enterprise.
The seat belt hysteria began in the mid 50s. I am not sure who originally presented the idea, but at the time the proposal was limited to requiring auto manufacturers to install seat belts in all cars, for the sole benefit of allowing people who valued the ability to enjoy the increased protection.
That clearly is not what we are enjoying now.
I have become convinced, 50 years later that, if a "law" were passed requiring law enforcement to shoot every 12th driver to reduce traffic congestion, most of them would go right ahead and enforce "the law". I reject in the strongest terms, that mentality.
I am searching for a way to recruit people across the country to review the original debates for a simple idea that evolved from a provision of choice, to a mandatory revenue requirement. I am certain that assurances were made initially that it would never become mandatory. Unfortunately, that "self-destruct" provision in the original law was overlooked. Citizens naively failed to protect themselves from, if not the immediate lies of the proponents, the certain perversion of "good intentions" transformed into onerous requirements by subsequent politicians and othe controlling types.
The State, so far as I know, has no obligation to rescue me from bad choices. It should not. Allowing that idiot idea is the only way for the state to argue that "the public" good is best served by fascist tactics.
(Look up the characteristics of a fascist state; the real thing. This concept is not hyperbole or exaggeration. That is in fact the main argument of any fascist state.)
It would be a pleasant surprise if enough people would be outraged to keep the requirements of having seat belts made available, but permanently to prohibit their mandatory use by any jurisdiction under the guise of protecting me.
People are too stupid to make that choice for themselves?
Can they point to one unbiased study that proves wearing a seatbelt makes the roads safer? I know it makes the driver wearing the belt safer during a crash.....but has no effect on the road or the way people drive.
I wonder if the equipment was bought with the funds to control terrorism?
Police State Ping
Purely revenue enhancement!
So the purpose is revenue generation - NOT getting people to wear their belts?
Begin cop bashing...NOW!
kidding...
You won't be fined if you observe the law, citizen.
Your papers, please.
I know I'm going to be listening to Chris Core tonight.
I feel so much safer now. I am so happy our governments spend so much money and time on this effort and not piss away needed resources on our country's borders. It's wonderful to have numbnuts running governments.
These half-baked measures at creating an orderly society should be dispensed with. What we really need is just a War On Freedom. Sort of "one-stop-shopping" for the police state to which we are headed.
Not only do we pay outrageous insurance costs - in order to fund the Attorney Frivilous Lawsuit Complex, but we are not apparently being double soaked AGAIN by funding the salaries and equipment of the INSURANCE POLICE while paying those same elevated premiums.
Is wearing a seat belt a good idea? Yes.
But should the State (that means US) be enforcing a rule that benefits an already overpaid and subsidized industry so that trial court attorneys can continue to get rich?
I don't think so.
Besides the legal consequnces of this are chilling. The "War on Drugs" has ALREADY spawned legal outrages like the recent idiotic law in New Jersey whereby the State can confiscate a person's car or home because they happened to violate one of the nebulous, Byzantine and illogical New Jersey State gun laws.
How much more of this will we be willing to take??