Ted Murphy Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Cops are doing these seat belt checkpoints around my area. They cordon off the road and give written warnings to all who pass through about not wearing seatbelts. They also give the same warnings to those wearing them, which seems like a waste of paper and my time. What I don't understand is the mixed message. They just repealed the helmet law for motorcycles, but want to tighten up on seatbelt use. Seems in the spirit of the helmet law being zapped, they shouldn't care about belt use either. I wear my belt so it does not affect me, but I resent the roadblocks big time. TEd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 If the govt wants to mandate that juniors must wear the seat belts, ok by me, but being WAY over 21, it should be my personal choice if I want to wear the darn thing or not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJPoLo Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 They also give the same warnings to those wearing them... Huh? WTF? That makes no sense. -Chet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
standles Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 A classic example of the Gov trying to solve a problem when it is easier solved by industry. Simple.. If your not wearing your helmet or other protectvie clothing (motorcycle) or seatbelt then the inusrance companies can charge higer rates and/or the helath insurance can charge higher rates or deny coverage. Simple as that. The rate disparagy in coverages is done all the time. I also don't understand why it is so important for me in a car that has airbags, roof, et.c etc. to be forced to wear a seatbelt but a motorcycle rider helmet is optioinal in FL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl @ GT Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Hey Ted, I live outside Philadelphia, went thru one yesterday. 8 or 10 police cars, signs, cones and lights flashing. I asked the policeman if this was a DUI checkpoint and if the checkpoint was legal if it not a DUI checkpoint. He said "no DUI just a seat belt check and it was approved by the state, so therefore it is legal" I said "just because the state approves the checkpoint does not make it legal". I do not know if these new checkpoints have been challenged but seems like an intrusion to me. They did have several cars pulled over to the side having a close look by the police. Went the long way around the stop on the return trip. BTW: I always wear my seat belt. Later, Karl @ GT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Murphy Posted June 3, 2005 Author Share Posted June 3, 2005 They also give the same warnings to those wearing them... Huh? WTF? That makes no sense. -Chet <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yep didn't make much sense to me either. Got in a little fracas with the PD over that one. They had a sign that said, "seat belt checkpoint, be prepared to stop". Seeing how I was wearing the belt I coasted through, waved at the cop and kept going. They started yelling so I stopped, and they ran over and gave me hell for not stopping, "can't you read the sign!". I told them I was in fact "prepared to stop" but since they didn't flag me down and I was wearing my belt I didn't. Then they went and gave me a written warning on this preprinted card, saying that not wearing my belt will get me 2 tickets. I looked at the cop, my buckled belt, cop again. thanked them and left. I'm assuming they were under orders to give the warnings to everyone- because the other alternatives are kind of embarrasing. Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 If your not wearing your helmet or other protectvie clothing (motorcycle) or seatbelt then the inusrance companies can charge higer rates and/or the helath insurance can charge higher rates or deny coverage. Simple as that. The rate disparagy in coverages is done all the time. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Exactly. You want to take the risk - YOU pay the price. That's the way it should be. Kids below the age of majority - Mandatory! Over 21 - your choice - right or wrong. You roll the dice and if it comes up snake eyes - blame yourself. As for me - You can believe I wear mine. I lost my brother when a door came open and he fell from a car. No seatbelt. I lost my 23 yr old daughter in a single car rollover with virtually no damage to the car. Partially ejected through an open window - no seatbelt. As for roadblocks - Seems like it should not be allowed to me. What next? Come in your homes to check you electrical plugs for proper grounding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Murphy Posted June 3, 2005 Author Share Posted June 3, 2005 As for roadblocks - Seems like it should not be allowed to me. What next? Come in your homes to check you electrical plugs for proper grounding? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Um, that's been done already. U&O inspections of rental properties, and sometimes for U&O when a house is being sold. Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kellyn Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 What a use of law enforcement resources! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerT Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 If the govt wants to mandate that juniors must wear the seat belts, ok by me, but being WAY over 21, it should be my personal choice if I want to wear the darn thing or not... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> As some have already said, you as an adult should be able to make the choice. The BIG PROBLEM there is that when a person gets turned into a veg for the rest of their lives who is going to pay for their care? The insurance companies, is that fair to them as a company? The rest of society? You can say it is your problem all you want, but for the most part we don't turn our backs on people who need mediacl help. They might not get the best, but they aren't left to rot either. My wife works day in and day out with people who have had MAJOR injuries from the type of accidents we are talking about. Go spend a few hours with one, and their family. FWIW.. Cops giving warnings to people wearing their belts is a complete waste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redmercury2 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 BETTER use may be to catch criminals, investigate real crimes or maybe give warnings out at the borders to illegal entrants,... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENE S Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Seat belts are a life saver, and I beleave that you should use them, BUT, what next will the state or local government be looking into... your bed room ? If you don't want to use a belt, that should be up to you. As a adult you should be able to make that decision. A minor in the car should be made to use them though. Just with helmets while riding a motocycle. If you want to temp fate and not use one, great, just means that there may be more doners for orgens if you have a fender-bender while on two wheels. Gene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerT Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 I totally agree with our right to make our own decisions as adults. Afterall, this is supposed to be a free country. The sticky part comes in to play when the rest of us end up paying for the long term care of people. This isn't just seat belts, or motorcylce helmets I am talking about either. It comes to your right to do something that many of us might consider unsafe, and the consequences that society has to deal with when things go wrong. I think this is an issue that people just see as black or white, and you wont change peoples minds. Again, I think that the law enforcement people should have higher priorities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDH Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 BETTER use may be to catch criminals, investigate real crimes or maybe give warnings out at the borders to illegal entrants,... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> RIGHT ON TARGET!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 TriggerT wrote: " It comes to your right to do something that many of us might consider unsafe, and the consequences that society has to deal with when things go wrong." "Right to do something . . . unsafe" - like own a firearm? As a former street rider who ALWAYS wore a helmet, I support a citizen having the privilege to ride a motorcycle with or without a helmet. As for my right to own and carry my guns, that is not negociable no matter what goes wrong or what some people might think. TriggerT wrote: "I totally agree with our right to make our own decisions as adults." Well put. Regards, D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 catching criminals like murders and rapists does not generate any revenue for the city, county, state...seat belt tickets generate a lot of revenue...now do you get the picture... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerT Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 You should have the right do do as you please. The rest of society should have the right to say go vegatate in the corner and drool on yourself till the end of your days, you did it to yourself. This has gone from an "Enforcement" debate to an "Priciple" one. I think we all are on the same page when it comes to the enforcement part. We just agree to disagree on if there should be a law in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhurd Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 What I would like to see is the crimes that were commited while they were flagging people down for seat belts. Here in MI they don't stop you unless yer not buckled then it is 65.00 they have a scout watching and radio ahead and bust yer sorry.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 At some point, I think we're legislating Natural Selection out of the picture... I mean, Natural Selection is a phenomenon that exists to prevent the weaker members of a species (whether they be physically weaker, or just plain dumb) from reproducing, thus strengthening the species long term. By forcing the stupid ones to wear a seat belt, we're promoting their reproduction and thus *weakening* the species. Same goes for all those fun signs like "smoking is bad for your health... no really!", and "don't stick your tongue in this light socket!", and "dont' rest your head on this air bag deployment point during an accident", etc. Put it another way - it should be "Your choice. Your funeral." Period.... Used to be that people knew what was dangerous and what wasn't, and those that couldn't figure it out weren't left running around for the rest of us to worry about.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 A long, long time ago, in an America far, far away they taught me this in school: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. This used to be called the Fourth Amendment. It was a part of the Bill of Rights. A part of the Constitution of the United States of America which guaranteed the rights of Americans. Over the years it became obvious this was very inconvenient for the government employees who were just trying to provide for the general welfare so it was adjudicated and legislated into an historical footnote. Now that we have entered the 21st century and are more enlightened we know that Obeience is Freedom. Better close now or we are going to get REAL Political..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJPoLo Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 The BIG PROBLEM there is that when a person gets turned into a veg for the rest of their lives who is going to pay for their care? The insurance companies, is that fair to them as a company? Yes. That's precisely why we have insurance. That's why millions of people pay premiums each year and never place a claim. That's why the insurance companies then, in turn, make billions in profits. That's why the math works in their (the insurance companies) favor. That's why they should cultivate the veggies (as long as the veggies had insurance). -Chet Pardon the thread drift here. We're treading into improper forum waters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerT Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 The BIG PROBLEM there is that when a person gets turned into a veg for the rest of their lives who is going to pay for their care? The insurance companies, is that fair to them as a company? Yes. That's precisely why we have insurance. That's why millions of people pay premiums each year and never place a claim. That's why the insurance companies then, in turn, make billions in profits. That's why the math works in their (the insurance companies) favor. That's why they should cultivate the veggies (as long as the veggies had insurance). -Chet Pardon the thread drift here. We're treading into improper forum waters... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ABSOLUTELY!! And the ones who don't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 ABSOLUTELY!! And the ones who don't? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Can fend for themselves...... or not.... refer to my post above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerT Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 If it only worked that way. Then we would have had this way off topic, rambling thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts