Skip to comments.
New law ups age for child restraints
The Albuquerque Tribune ^
| June 14, 2005
| Jan Jonas
Posted on 06/16/2005 10:28:10 AM PDT by Disambiguator
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 next last
It's for the Children!
For NM Freepers and anyone driving through the state of New Mexico, this new law takes effect on 6/17/05.
To: Disambiguator
Thank God the government is there to think for us, otherwise it just wouldn't get done.
2
posted on
06/16/2005 10:31:34 AM PDT
by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws spawned the runaway federal health care monopoly and fund terrorism.)
To: Disambiguator
My 4 year-old is already having trouble finding room for her feet in her car seat. This just seems like get more $$$$ legislation disguised as It's for the Children law.
3
posted on
06/16/2005 10:32:43 AM PDT
by
Millee
(So you're a feminist......isn't that cute??)
To: Disambiguator
The next time I hear a politician spout the usual bullshit about how "free" we are (July 4th seems like the next likely opportunity), I'm going to moon the bastard.
Especially the Republicans, with their "limited government" lies. At least the 'Rats are upfront about their Big Stupid Government intentions.
4
posted on
06/16/2005 10:33:59 AM PDT
by
Hank Rearden
(Never allow anyone who could only get a government job attempt to tell you how to run your life.)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
These laws are for irresponsible idiots. The vast majority of parents would buckle their kids up, with or without a law.
5
posted on
06/16/2005 10:34:54 AM PDT
by
Ron in Acreage
(It's the borders stupid! (ours, not theirs!))
To: Disambiguator
I don't know how previous generations survived without nanny laws dictating safety gear for kids in cars..Does any evidence show that children are safer today with overprotective seatbelts than before???
To: E. Pluribus Unum
7
posted on
06/16/2005 10:36:08 AM PDT
by
petpeeve
To: Ron in Acreage
The irresponsible idiots will continue to let their kids climb around the car like monkeys, and drive with babies on their laps. I see them on the road regularly.
8
posted on
06/16/2005 10:36:54 AM PDT
by
Tax-chick
("Children don't need counting, because whatever number you have, you never have enough.")
To: Ron in Acreage
These laws are for irresponsible idiots. One person's "irresponsibility" is another person's freedom.
Lots of people consider gun ownership to be irresponsible.
9
posted on
06/16/2005 10:37:45 AM PDT
by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws spawned the runaway federal health care monopoly and fund terrorism.)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
My child likes to ride out on the front of the car and pretend she's a hood ornament. Who's the government to tell she can't!
10
posted on
06/16/2005 10:39:38 AM PDT
by
gridlock
(ELIMINATE PERVERSE INCENTIVES)
To: Ron in Acreage
However, if you are in an accident and a child is injured because of you, it seems like the law could protect you if the parents were not following the law.
Without the law, it seems like the injured child's parents could sue you even more.
To: Disambiguator
I disagree with the new law.
New Mexico has gone politically correct with all the North Easterner's that have moved into the state.
Evidently these do-gooders don't have children.
When does all this bull shit stop?
I am all for the safety of children but this is going to far.
The police and do-gooding politically correct public officials are fast becoming more dreaded than terrorism.
12
posted on
06/16/2005 10:41:08 AM PDT
by
OKIEDOC
(LL THE)
To: gridlock
My child likes to ride out on the front of the car and pretend she's a hood ornament. Who's the government to tell she can't! The good news is, those genes will be removed from the gene pool.
Darwin loves you.
13
posted on
06/16/2005 10:42:23 AM PDT
by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws spawned the runaway federal health care monopoly and fund terrorism.)
To: Disambiguator
"Nine out of 10 car seats are installed incorrectly," "People should come in with the car and seat, and the child as well."
Is Ms. Kelloff telling 90% of parents to endanger their children?
14
posted on
06/16/2005 10:42:42 AM PDT
by
tnlibertarian
("In my opinion, they have no rights, except a safe return to their homeland. - "Robert Vazquez")
To: All
These laws are horrible for small kids.
Can you imagine the grief a twelve year old would get if he had to have a CAR SEAT??
My son is almost twelve and just hit 70 pounds, but his feet more than hit the floor.
15
posted on
06/16/2005 10:43:08 AM PDT
by
Politicalmom
(Just one more reason to hate the government....)
To: Tax-chick
*******NITPICKER AND POLITICALLY CORRECT POST ALERT
16
posted on
06/16/2005 10:44:33 AM PDT
by
OKIEDOC
(LL THE)
To: OKIEDOC
Thanks. It's always nice to be appreciated.
17
posted on
06/16/2005 10:46:08 AM PDT
by
Tax-chick
("Children don't need counting, because whatever number you have, you never have enough.")
Comment #18 Removed by Moderator
To: Politicalmom
12 and only 70 pounds? Give that boy a Big Mac.
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Children don't have adult freedoms. They don't have 2nd amendment rights as you and I do. Driving or riding in a car is not a freedom or a right. It can be taken away for a number of reasons. Using your logic, DUI laws shoud be removed because it takes away your freedom to be irresposible? You are free not to wear the seatbelt, but you will be fined if you don't.
20
posted on
06/16/2005 10:50:02 AM PDT
by
Ron in Acreage
(It's the borders stupid! (ours, not theirs!))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson