There Are 67 Responses So Far. »

1. Comment by Michelle Caperton on 11 February 2009:

   In addition to the valuable points above, I’d like to add that I have suffered ten serious auto accidents in my life at the fault of the driver in the Other vehicle every time. Once I was not wearing a seat belt and was in a 50 mile and hour head on collision when a woman ran a red light and crossed my path. Although the car flipped and rolled, I was shaken up, but, I didn’t even have a bruise on me or a cut. My vehicle was a tiny Ford Festiva. Upon an officer asking me if I was wearing my seat belt, I lied and said, ‘yes’, so that he would not give me a citation for not wearing one. So, the statistics are completely unreliable.

   I think it should be a criminal offense to be the ‘at-fault’ party of an auto accident. We are driving killing machines and, therefore, driving should be approached with as much seriousness and responsibility as guns are. Financial restitution never does cover the losses a vistim suffers. It helps, but, if a wreckless person can climb back in their car, passing all responsibility to a big insurance company, leaving the victim to struggle with attorneys, and continue to drive with no more threat than a few extra dollars on their premium, fatalities and losses will continue. The only real winners are the attorneys. Criminal responsibility will make us all pay attention and the dangerous drivers will pay the high insurance prices through restitution and special insurance. Three strikes & you’re out!

   I have never been the ‘at-fault’ party in an auto accident because I take driving seriously.

2. Comment by Chris on 12 May 2009:

   Right on. Some (but certainly not all) of your arguments might be losers, regardless, I am SO sick of being told how to scratch my ass by the government and their chummy lobbyists. Cell phone laws, seat belt laws, helmet laws, etc. We would make all of our roads a bit safer if we just emphasized courtesy and common sense, rather than passing laws that already exist (last time I checked it was ALREADY against the law to drive while distracted). fyi- This includes getting out of the way if you are a slow driver too. Just because you can’t see and want to drive slow, doesn’t mean your the only safe one. Also if the time and place are right, most humans can handle, talking on a cell phone or using an ipod while driving, some however lack the courtesy to recognize when they need to ignore that desire.

   To point out one fact/anecdote in support of no seat belt laws, a friend was broadsided by a drunk (not a 0.09 BAC drunk -don’t get me started-, but a guy who was lit up) while backing out his driveway. The only thing that saved his life (when the door replaced him as the driver seat occupant) was NOT WEARING his seat belt. …As a a rule I don’t put my belt on until I get onto the highway or some main roads. (cost me a ticket in MD @#&!)

   -Chris

3. Comment by John on 25 May 2009:

   I would be interested in an update to this topic considering that this country has plunged headlong into socialism since this article was written in 2002. I did a little research and was surprised to see that NM and DC actually record 2 points for seat belt violations. In fact, in NM if fate handed you a really bad deck you could drive four consecutive times without your belt on, get a ticket for each offense and lose your license for three months. In FL it is permissible to report seat belt tickets to insurance companies.

   This is not about safety at all but another sleight of hand to collect revenue from the citizen. Given the troubling economic times it is no wonder that we are seeing stepped up “seat belt enforcement” by the states. This is a cash cow for them; it is much less expensive than traditional speed enforcement and generally the drivers who are stopped for seat belt infractions pose much less risk to law enforcement than those drivers stopped for speeding or drunken driving.

   Big brother needs to keep his nose out of our cars and pay more attention to serious issues such as stopping the reckless, out of control printing of money by the Treasury. What a sham and we Joe Taxpayer are letting this travesty occur right under our noses by subsidizing this crockery. Uncle Sam needs to get out the banking business and stop meddling in the private sector.

4. Comment by Beck on 4 June 2009:

   MAD also pushed for seat belt use. Rate of death corresponds more to highway speeds than using/not using a seatbelt (if you hit something going 80+ mph its just not going to be good). Every \"seat belt saves lives\" campaign does NOT have a statistic to back it up–I guess they stopped publishing those as I can no longer find them. If you look at the statistics, the rate of serious injury (ie whiplash, neck injuries, etc) has gone WAY up with mandatory seat belt laws. Is it an improvement to be alive but a vegetable?

5. Comment by Joe on 17 October 2009:

   I’d like to thank the kind officer who gave me a $95 seat belt ticket yesterday for destroying any illusion I had left that we live in a “free” country.

6. Comment by Leesa Ricci on 18 October 2009:

   How would one go about comparing injuries due to lack of seatbelts and any other car related injury? If you’re not wearing a seatbelt and you get injured in a crash, would you have been injured anyway without the seatbelt? If you’re in an 80 mph car crash your organs are still going to go through your back pocket whether you’re wearing a seatbelt or not.

   Also, if paternal laws are so important to society because they protect us all, why aren’t there seatbelts on school buses? Oh that’s right, because grade schoolers don’t have a spare $95.

7. Comment by Rafael Colindres on 2 May 2010:

   Alchohol consuptions is legal. Tobacco use is legal. Suicide is legal. Self-mutilation is legal. Being un-restained while in possesion of personal property (automovile) by an adult is ILLEGAL. What's wrong with this picture? Do we need to be baby-sitted as adults by our government? Until when are WE THE PEOPLE who vote on the basis of self- convenience and or political fanatism, remain powerless to the political Lobby and the morally corrupt politicians?

8. Comment by Cry_Aboutit on 3 August 2010:

   There is a more insidious reason to enact seat belt laws that I didn’t see in the article or comments, though I admit to skimming over some in my haste to make this point:
   This is carte blanche for the police to pull people over, whatever their suspicions.
   “I didn’t see his seat belt attached, so I pulled him over to ensure he was following the law. I then noticed the odor of marijuana/alcohol/suspicious identification…(pick something)”
   This is an especially simple avenue to arrests at night.

9. Comment by Albert on 9 August 2010:

   I never buckle my belt but I do jam the roller with a quickly removable object and hang it over my shoulder every time I drive to avoid police harrassment and fines. If I will ever be pulled over I will have to remember to free the jammed belt before the police can see what I’ve done . I do not refer to the belt as safety equipment . I call an anti-extortion device. AED !!
   My only regret is that I am appearing to be a lawful driver/ drone/wimp/wuss/sheep to statistic gatherers. Even though I would be completey comfortable driving unrestrained, I do not want to be a fine-paying martyr to be right . You can never win against stupid paranoid do-gooders.

10. Comment by Florida Civilian on 10 February 2011:

    I was given a ticket for $116.00 in the state of Florida. My driving record is top notch. All I have is two seatbelt fines in the last 14 years. Florida is unwilling to increase taxes, so they need to get the money from somewhere. I would rather be taxed $40 a year and drive in peace. A family member of mine was given a ticket while wearing their seatbelt anyway. It is a fraud law open for abuse. I carry a camera in my car so I can’t be ripped off. Try to say I didn’t have my belt on and it is going on the news. Not just Youtube, the local news.

    I don’t agree with this law. If it was about safety we would have helmets and racing harnesses.

11. Comment by Paul Minkoff on 10 March 2011:

    For decades I have strongly resented laws mandating the wearing of
    seatbelts in cars, and penalties for violating them. This was not based on injury/fatality statistics. Rather it was based on the kindergarten-level logic that said: drivers and passengers in a car without seat belts are absolutely safer than they would be on a motorcycle, with or without a helmet.

12. Comment by janice in alabama on 24 May 2011:

    I am so glad to see that other people resent the seat belt laws as much as I do. I strongly believe that anyone under eighteen should be required to buckle up, and parents who don’t have children in proper carseats should face stiff penalties. But I am an adult and I want the right to decide whether or not I buckle up. We have the right under the law to refuse medical treatment, so the same right should apply to seat belts. I’m sick of being told what I have to do and what I can’t do when it only affects me. By the way, what about motorcycle riders. Where is their seat belt or air bag?

13. Pingback by Motorcycles Must Be Outlawed « The Rockin' Conservative! on 27 May 2011:

    [...] you to the automotive and insurance lobby for your assistance on this assault on our 4th Amendment Rights and our [...]

14. Comment by joe dirt on 28 May 2011:

    I was pulled over in clement,Florida for our fourth anul click it or ticket campaign,I can’t begin to tell you how excited I am to have to pay $130 ticket when I haven’t worn a seat belt in 15 years.I told the cop about the motorcycles not wearing helmet he didt care I also told him I would have to work my add off for 12 hours to pay for his ticket while he sits there and eats donuts and hands out citations .I said man I could do your job legally stealing from hard working people

15. Comment by Dan on 8 June 2011:

    the last Gov. Doyle in wisconsin, took 17 million in fed cash, stoled from the tax payers. To pay for over time for local sheriff’s and state patrol “click it or ticket” fraud upon the people, Rep, Ron Kind was on the front page of the news papers handing out checks. treason

16. Comment by helmet law on 20 June 2011:

    In Kansas I received a seat belt ticket driving in town less than 25 mph. Policeman was not wearing his seat belt…wonder what the judge will say…

17. Comment by Mike on 22 June 2011:

    The long term use of seat belts has caused me blader and kidney problems

18. Comment by Charlie Martens on 4 July 2011:

    I live in Minneapolis and I was pulled over on the 4th of July. I am a law abiding citizen. I told the officer that the seat belt law violated my Constitutional Right. She said take it up in judge. Of course there is no winning this case. How can we repeal this law? Is it accomplished at the federal level or state by state?

19. Comment by colonel on 4 September 2011:

    I was at a stop light and took my seatbelt off to answer my cell phone put my seatbelt back on and state trooper pulled me and gave me a ticket, I never moved my vehicle while my seatbelt was off, when I pointed this out to him he told me “shutup or go to jail”. I send emails all the time to state government legislatures and get ignored until its time for reelection and then the bastards have the balls to want a financial donation?

20. Comment by Sky Captain on 5 September 2011:

    I too was issued a citation for not wearing a seatbelt-on private property. I was moving my car from the driveway to the front yard to wash it. The cop saw me drive a whole 30 feet without a belt, pulled into my driveway, and gave me a ticket. I told him that seatbelts weren’t necessary on private property, but he got arrogant and disrespectful.

    I went to court and told the judge what happened. The cop said I had the car on the road-when it was not-and then lied saying that I was being beligerant and disorderly. The judge didn’t believe my story, and I ended up paying more on the ticket and going to traffic refresher school. What a waste.

    Don’t trust cops or any other government agent-they’re enemys of the state.

21. Comment by Lee Gille on 27 September 2011:

    I was stopped for not wearing a seatbelt because of my disability.
    I used some of the information in this article in a Petition to The District Court seeking relief. I have ommitted my first name so as to not recieve retaliation.

    Here is my Petition so far in part:

    1.COMES NOW, Lee Gille, Plaintiff, and hereby respectfully petitions this Honorable Court for declaratory, injunctive and other appropriate relief in this case as a result of an illegal stop and seizure by agents of the City of Edmond and, in support thereof, would show the following:
    2.Plaintiff brings this complaint for violations of his individual rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. 1983, Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 12132 Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Oklahoma Constitution, Oklahoma General Rules of law, Bill of Rights, Supreme Court Rulings, and 76 O.S. §1, 12 O.S. §§ 1651, 1652.
    3.This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to sections 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and 76 O.S. §1, 12 O.S. §§ 1651, 1652.
    4.Mr. Gille is a qualified individual with disabilities.
    5.On September 10, 2011, at 1:24 P.M. near the location of 2nd and Blvd. in Edmond, Plaintiff was stopped by Officer Williams, a law enforcement Officer, for not wearing a seatbelt and was written a citation for no proof of insurance.
    6.The Officer was without any probable cause to stop Plaintiff.
    7.Plaintiff has the right to not wear a seatbelt because of a disability
    8.Plaintiff has the right to not be discriminated against because of his disability.
    9.Plaintiff has made the City of Edmond and Edmond Police Department aware of the fact that he does not have to wear seatbelt and that seatbelt stops are invalid by submitting formal complaints to Edmond Police Department and by filing legal documents in Edmond Municipal Court, Oklahoma County District Court and in The Court of Criminal Appeals of the State of Oklahoma.
    10.This Petition is based upon Plaintiff’s rights under the United States Constitution, Oklahoma Constitution, Supreme Court Rulings, American’s with Disabilities Act of 1990, Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Bill of Rights and Oklahoma General Rules of Law.
    COUNT I – VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF’S FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS
    11.The Edmond police officer seized Plaintiff in violation of Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights as his reasoning for seizure is fatally defective in establishing probable cause.
    12.It is not a crime to drive or ride in a car without a seat belt s if you have a restriction on your license that gives you that right to do so, which Plaintiff does have.
    13.Based on The Supreme Court’s ruling in Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 99 S. Ct. 1391 (1979), an Officer can not stop someone they see driving or riding without a seatbelt on to see if they are properly licensed to do so.
    14.Plaintiff has received permission from the Commissioner of Public Safety in the form of a restriction added to his driver’s license which allows him to drive without a seatbelt.
    15.Plaintiff has suffered for years with a medical condition that makes it impractical for him to wear a seatbelt and has obtained a license to drive without a seatbelt.
    16.The Officer did not know prior to the stop if Plaintiff had in his possession a license to drive without a seatbelt or not. He was therefore without the required information to even create a suspicion of a violation of the law.
    17.The Officer had to pull over Plaintiff to find out if the crime was being committed by looking at his license. Plaintiff has a license to drive without a seatbelt so no crime is being committed.
    18.Since the Officer was unable to know if a crime was being committed in his presence prior to stopping Plaintiff, the Officer did not have probable cause for stopping Plaintiff.
    19.A person may sue for an award of money damages against anyone who, under color of any State law or custom, violates his rights under the Constitution of the United States.
    COUNT II – VIOLATION OF THE REHABILITATION ACT AND AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
    20.The Officer violated the Americans with Disabilities Act Of 1990 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 by discriminating against Plaintiff because of his disability.
    21.Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, prohibits disability discrimination by all public entities at state and local levels.
    22.It is unlawful to treat someone less favorably on the grounds of a disability.
    23.The Officer stopped Plaintiff for not wearing a seatbelt because he is disabled.
    24.Plaintiff was not breaking any laws, yet Plaintiff was subjected to disability discrimination.
    25.The remedy to stop the discrimination is to make a reasonable modification to the policy, which is to not stop people for not wearing seatbelts. This modification will not fundamentally alter the nature of the privilege nor will it result in an undue burden.
    26.The removal of this barrier is readily achievable. According to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, for the reasons listed above, the policy must be changed.
    27.Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 states, No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States, shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
    28.Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by state and local governmental entities while § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits discrimination by recipients of federal funding.
    29.Section 504 applies to arrests and actions related thereto as they constitute operations of the police department. See Gorman v. Bartch, 152 F.3d 907, 913 (8th Cir. 1998)
    30.Plaintiff seeks monetary and equitable relief for constitutional violations by Defendants through the Federal Civil Rights Act 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and for constitutional violations.
    31.Plaintiff was deprived of liberty without due process of law.
    32.Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory damages of which Defendants are liable for.
    33.Damages must be in an amount that is fair compensation for all of Plaintiff’s damages to compensate Plaintiff for the damages that he suffers.
    34.Plaintiff deserves to recover proper compensation for the local government violations of the ADA and Rehabilitation Act.
    35.The Officer violated clearly established law and is not entitled to immunity.
    36.The rights at stake were sufficiently apparent and obvious enough to give a reasonable official fair warning of what the law requires.
    37.Defendants conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.
    38.The Edmond Police Department is a public entity that receives federal funding. By failing to have appropriate policies, they discriminated against Plaintiff because of his disability.
    COUNT III – HARASSMENT
    39.Plaintiff was harassed by the officer by engaging Plaintiff with unwanted conduct, which had the purpose and effect of violating Plaintiff’s dignity, creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating and offensive environment for him, in violation of 21 O.S. 1173.
    40.Citizens subject to a systematic scheme of harassment and intimidation by the police are protected by a Section 1983 of the United States Code.
    41.Under Section 1983 of the United States Code, Plaintiff may collect money damages for being deprived rights under the Constitution and Federal law.
    42.Personal humiliation, embarrassment, and mental distress imposed as a result of the deprivation of constitutional rights are injuries whose redress is considered compensatory. Baski v. Parker, 588 F.2d 965, 970 (5th Cir. 1979)
    43.Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory damages for physical injury, pain and suffering, mental anguish, shock and discomfort that he suffers because of Defendant’s conduct.
    44.The law does not require Plaintiff prove the amount of his losses with mathematical precision, but only with as much definiteness and accuracy as the circumstances permit.
    COUNT IV – VIOLATION OF DEFENDANTS RIGHTS UNDER THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION
    45.Plaintiff was denied full and equal enjoyment of driving on the streets of Edmond because of his disability.
    46.Plaintiff was deprived of his enjoyment of life, liberty and property as his privileges and immunities were abridged without due process of law.
    47.The stop was illegal and in violation of Plaintiff’s constitutional rights as provided in the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
    48.Defendants, while acting under color of state law, intentionally deprived the plaintiff of rights under the Constitution of the United States, Bill of Rights and for a substantive violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
    49.The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.
    50.Right to be secure in one’s person is an aspect of liberty protected by the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
    COUNT V – VIOLATION OF THE ARTICLE II SECTION 30 OF THE OKLAHOMA CONSTITUTION
    51.The right of the people to be secure in their persons, house, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated. The Constitution of the State of Oklahoma, Article 2, Section 30
    52.Defendants violated Plaintiff’s rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.
    53.When the Officer initiated the stop by turning on his overhead lights, Plaintiff was seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.
    54.The right to be free from a Fourth Amendment seizure without adequate probable cause is clearly established. Cox v. Hainey, 391 F.3d 25, 31 (2004)
    COUNT VI – FALSE IMPRISONMENT
    55.The Officer intended to stop Plaintiff and did stop Plaintiff by turning on his lights.
    56. A seizure is defined as those circumstances in which a reasonable person would have believed he was not free to leave. U.S. v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 554, 100 Sup. Ct. (1870)
    57.Supervisory officers and a municipality are liable for their own negligence in failing to select, train, or supervise adequately their subordinates or for their establishment, directly or implicitly, of an official policy or procedure that violates an individual’s constitutional rights. Holland v. Conners 491 F2d. 539 (5th Cir 1974)
    58.Municipalities are liable for deprivations of constitutional rights that are affirmatively linked to a policy, ordinance, regulation, decision, or custom of the municipality. Custom refers to those practices of city officials that are so permanent and well settled as to have the force of law.
    59.Defendants acted under color of the authority of the State of Oklahoma.
    60.Defendants’ acts were the legal cause of Plaintiff’s damages.
    61.Plaintiff has sustained pain and suffering, mental anguish, and loss of capacity for enjoyment of life in the past and he will experience more in the future as a result of his injury.
    62.Defendants acted with malice and willfulness and with callous and reckless indifference to the safety and rights of Plaintiff. Defendants acted in disregard of a high and excessive degree of illegality about which they know and would be apparent to a reasonable person in his condition.
    63.Under the doctrine of respondent superior, employers are responsible for its worker’s actions.
    64.The Officer was acting “under the color of law” and actually deprived Plaintiff of his freedom.
    65.The Officer illegally arrested Plaintiff, which deprived him of liberty because of his disability.
    66.The underlying claim is directly related to issues protected by the United States Constitution.
    67.A local government is said to have an unconstitutional policy when it fails to train its employees, and the failure to train amounts to deliberate indifference to an obvious need for such training, and the failure train will likely result in the employee making a wrong decision.
    68.Plaintiff was deprived of rights secured by the United States Constitution and federal statutes.
    69.Plaintiff possesses constitutionally protected property interests and was deprived of those interests without due process of law.
    70.Plaintiff has more than an abstract need or desire for his rights. Plaintiff has a unilateral expectation of them. He has a legitimate claim of entitlement to his rights.
    71.Every person is bound, without contract, to abstain from injuring the person or property of another, or infringing upon any of his rights. Oklahoma Statute 76 O.S. § 1
    72.Plaintiff has notified Defendants of his situation by filing formal complaints, and fighting criminal malicious prosecution in such cases as The City of Edmond v. Lee Gille, CS-2006-2214 in District Court and related cases in the Court of Criminal Appeals.
    73.A determination of rights may be obtained by a pleading seeking relief and when a party seeks relief, a court may grant declaratory relief where appropriate. See 12 O.S. § 1652.
    74.District courts may, in cases of actual controversy, determine rights, status, or other legal relations, including but not limited to a determination of the construction or validity of any foreign judgment or decree, deed, contract, trust, or other instrument or agreement or of any statute, municipal ordinance, or other governmental regulation. 12 O.S. § 1651.
    75.Seatbelt stops infringe a person’s rights as guaranteed in the Fourth, Fifth, and the Ninth Amendments, and the civil rights section of the Fourteenth Amendment.
    76.Seatbelt stops are unwarranted intrusions by government into the personal lives of citizens; they deny through restraint the right to determine individual’s personal healthcare standards.
    77.Individual freedom is the very foundation of our country.
    78.American’s should not accept stops that take liberty away while claiming to do good. History has shown this to be the easy road to power for tyrants.
    WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Lee Gille respectfully asks this Court to grant him such declaratory, injunctive and other relief as it deems just and proper.

22. Comment by Revel on 2 October 2011:

    Who ever knew you could get a seat belt violation (which is considered a “moving violation”) while parked. That is so interesting…

23. Comment by Alex on 15 November 2011:

    I got a seatbelt ticket for pulling out of my driveway into the street……

24. Comment by Steven on 17 November 2011:

    I was at a complete and total stop at a stop sign in Stuart, Florida when a city policeman stood peering through my windshield in order to invade my privacy so that he could determine whether or not I was in compliance with the state’s unjust – privacy invading – rights infringing seat belt law. The officer determined that I was not wearing a seat belt, and, without advising me to first buckle up, told me to move my vehicle to a certain location on the public road. This so-called public servant wrote me a citation for $113. After reading the back of the ticket, I learned that if I had the gall to attend a court hearing of my alleged infraction, that I could be fined by the judge up to $500 plus be required to complete traffic school should I lose my case in court. I am a disabled person/driver. I feel that I am being legally extorted by a badge wearing racketeer and his municipal employers. I intend to have my day in court regardless the outcome.

25. Comment by ParadiseLost on 22 November 2011:

    Let’s get together and do away with these laws that take away our liberty. The problem is nobody cares until they get a $116 ticket. I looked up the law and the fine is $30 for the seatbelt violation but these scumbags put a trick in the law which allows them to tack on giant extra costs. $86 worth of extras on a $30 fine.
    It can’t be tolerated but what do we do. As individual citizens we can do nothing. Somebody help!
    I’m going to fight it and ask for a jury trial. I will shoot for jury nullification! Think it’ll work?

26. Comment by Ron on 13 December 2011:

    I got stoped for not having my belt on and had to pay the $116 fine. I mean if I want to go flying out my windshield and skidding across the pavement thats my right I’m an organ donor. That’s why on my old car I broke the shoulder belt and kept the lap belt in tact so if I got pulled over I would just hit the lap belt and be fine.

27. Comment by Chuck on 18 December 2011:

    My wife got a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt in illinois, when she was wearing it but had the shoulder strap behind her, she was definitely wearing the seatbelt!!! and this cost us $55 ,I spoke to the arresting officer about 15 minutes after she got the ticket ,and he wouldn’t change the ticket to say improperly wearing the seat belt. he also had her birth date wrong and had her listed as being a passenger instead of the driver. They now use night vision to catch people who want to drive without a seatbelt ,be it intentional or not ,they don’t care . they just want the money that the ticket generates.
    the amount has gone up since last year and they give out hundreds of tickets per week ,so if you’re driving through Illinois be sure to use your seat belt and turn signals and don’t J-walk they give tickets for those infractions as well, also be sure to park less than 15 inches from the curb and come to a complete stop at a stop sign.
    it feels like a police state when driving through Illinois,( unless you are friends or family of a cop ,then you can expect a verbal warning) sign me ,What’s Up Chuck.

28. Comment by Tony on 19 December 2011:

    Lee Gille- you will most likely lose since you appear to not understand Probable Cause. Probable Cause requires that the officer reasonably believe that a crime is occuring; it does not require him to know beyond all doubt. He saw you not wearing the seatbelt, not wearing a seatbelt is illegal for most people, therefore it is reasonable to believe you were doing something illegal. Your point #6 and #16 are the crux of it. He DID have cause to suspect a law was being broken- you were NOT wearing your seatbelt, and by your own statement he did not know till AFTER he stopped you that you have an exemption to that law. Therefore he was entirely within his rights and duty to stop you. Prouse says you cant stop people randomly without cause to go fishing for violations, but this officer did have cause to stop you so Prouse doesnt apply; he did not stop you at random.

    Your only chance is to prove that the police knew beforehand that you had an exemption, and knew or should have known that you were driver of the car before stopping you. That would require that either all officers know you by sight (not reasonable unless its a REALLY small town), or that officers have time to run the plates of all vehicles they wish to stop, and then license of the registered owner of that vehicle, before being allowed to stop any vehicle, which doesnt sound terribly reasonable either if theyve already seen a likely illegal act.

    In the end you were not ticketed for the seatbelt, you were ticketed for not having insurance, which is entirely irresponsible, and being disabled in no way absolves you of that. Man up and get the insurance.

29. Comment by Anonymous on 28 December 2011:

    please insurance is another money pit

30. Comment by Charles on 25 January 2012:

    Interesting article fact is whereever they are people dont complain till they actually get pulled over and harassed.

    Though I wear one for safety Im completely opposed to laws for adults. The forced medicine argument makes the most sense.

31. Comment by iodincasync on 3 February 2012:

    shows. Yep, this collocation is very popular recently.Hurry up; just renew your idea in the fashion pattern.the shows from this designer label have been packed to the gills with stars, celebrities, singers, fashiona tremendous open head and purple can hold up one’s spirits. The minute any time you enter a residence with this sort of fabulousattractions only waiting to be discovered!Explore the streets of Dublin with an open up top double-decker busfeatures a number of high street brands such as Topshop, Warehouse, Oasis and Karen Millen at the same time as more karen millenAustralia are the emissary of sun, entire of energy of lifestyle, by the way, they’re also very good to lessen your stress andachieve that dignity is always upheld and that all employees are treated with respect and fairness. To be ablepeople including tourists, opera and theatre-goers and shoppers.Covent Garden ShopsThere are several youngfashion house gracing catwalks from Rome to New York with stores in 29 countries. They started sellingGarden would be the place to explore next time you visit London. You can find lots of theatres, restaurants, pubs,

32. Comment by Jesse Correia on 4 February 2012:

    (2) $85 tickets in a week. R.I. State Pigs, I am unemployed out looking for work, getting chased down like I am a fuckin’ felon because of my seatbelt. Most likely you can’t do shit about it. All I wish for is some lovely events that may occur @ 12/21/2012 I am praying for it now that is what this whole shit eating world needs, a reboot. Hope your souls are in check, scumbags. Hope your money comforts you while you are dying slowly.

33. Comment by a2811240 on 5 February 2012:

    I’ve said that least 2811240 times. SCK was here

34. Comment by Condo rentals in Siesta Key on 5 February 2012:

    I was looking through some of your content on this site and I conceive this internet site is very informative! Retain putting up.

35. Comment by Drivers License on 5 February 2012:

    This is the first that I’ve read online! Keep up the nice work.

36. Comment by poulan parts on 6 February 2012:

    Whats up are using WordPress for your blog platform? I’m new to the blog world but I’m trying to get started and set up my own. Do you need any html coding expertise to make your own blog? Any help would be really appreciated!

37. Comment by sittingbourne electricians on 6 February 2012:

    awesome things here. I am very glad to peer your post. Thank you a lot and i’m having a look forward to touch you. Will you kindly drop me a e-mail?

38. Comment by fotografia slubna bydgoszcz on 6 February 2012:

    dude are rich man i …
    dude are rich man i wouldn’t spend theres a 99.9% im gonna crash it

39. Comment by DawnAnony on 6 February 2012:

    clubs have private ponds within the estate and hunters have the option to go for MallardsDuring particular elements ofdown to make certain warmth it also utilizes coyote fur about the hoodsThe jackets are identified to get a highly$150 million in very little item products revenue annually”We’re even now just finding a mid-dimension corporation”gloves too as suits for people today who needed these types of clothingFeature down elements Canada Goose Chilliwack issingle part of lawn at any given time then leaving at the rear of huge downpayment onto it their particular canada goose parka windIn this way the Arctic-Tech (polyester and cotton) material employed on the Expedition is slightly far moreinjuredReflects the canada goose parka world metropolitan human getting pioneer and recognize a extremeera of clothingIt is extensively recognized because of the trend industryThe outside the house of a down jacket isgeese from roosting or nesting on your own residence can save you many grief and expenseSmall flocks of geeseJackets Scalloped flaps really should really be tidy and firmCanada gooseIt’s feasible you will suppose this ought to be

40. Comment by Jimmy Turk on 6 February 2012:

    You made some decent factors there. I appeared on the web for the problem and found most individuals will associate with with your website.

41. Comment by cheap vps on 6 February 2012:

    You got a very great website, Glad I discovered it through yahoo. cheap vps | best vps host |

42. Comment by photocopier london on 6 February 2012:

    I am commenting to let you know what a awesome encounter my wife’s child developed viewing your blog. She came to understand a wide variety of details, not to mention how it is like to possess an awesome giving character to have certain people easily fully understand specified grueling topics. You undoubtedly did more than my expected results. Many thanks for delivering such great, safe, educational as well as cool guidance on your topic to Mary.

43. Comment by Automatic Toilet Seat on 7 February 2012:

    hi,glad to read your post

44. Comment by kent seo on 7 February 2012:

    Hi my loved one! I want to say that this post is amazing, great written and include almost all important infos. I would like to see extra posts like this .

45. Comment by facebook marketing in india on 7 February 2012:

    Would really like to perpetually get updated fantastic weblog ! .

46. Comment by what is halitosis on 7 February 2012:

    Good day! I know this is kind of off topic but I was wondering if you knew where I could find a captcha plugin for my comment form? I’m using the same blog platform as yours and I’m having problems finding one? Thanks a lot!

47. Comment by office photocopier on 7 February 2012:

    wonderful publish, very informative. I ponder why the other experts of this sector do not notice this. You should proceed your writing. I’m sure, you have a huge readers’ base already!

48. Comment by luty 6 on 7 February 2012:

    It’s actually a great and helpful piece of info. I am glad that you shared this helpful info with us. Please keep us informed like this. Thanks for sharing.

49. Comment by Mark Stearnes on 7 February 2012:

    You actually make it seem so easy along with your presentation but I find this matter to be actually one thing that I believe I might by no means understand. It sort of feels too complex and extremely extensive for me. I am having a look ahead to your subsequent submit, I will try to get the grasp of it!

50. Comment by Titus Grebs on 7 February 2012:

    There are some interesting cut-off dates in this article however I don’t know if I see all of them center to heart. There is some validity but I will take maintain opinion till I look into it further. Good article , thanks and we wish extra! Added to FeedBurner as nicely

51. Comment by Rocky Luinstra on 7 February 2012:

    We’re a gaggle of volunteers and opening a brand new scheme in our community. Your site offered us with helpful information to work on. You have performed an impressive task and our whole neighborhood might be thankful to you.

52. Comment by hens night on 7 February 2012:

    I’m sure this might be amazingly useful for people that blog day-after-day – all of those look like pretty excellent concepts for tips on how to spend a while with your site. http://www.thepartybus.co.nz

53. Trackback by stop spam plugin on 7 February 2012:

    Valuable wordpress plugin…

    [...]we came across a cool site that you might enjoy. Take a look if you are looking for a way to clean your blog from spam links.[...]……

54. Comment by free pantyhose videos on 7 February 2012:

    Exceptional blog here! Also your internet web site loads up rapidly! What host are you using? Can I get your affiliate link to your host? I wish my site loaded up as swiftly as yours lol

55. Comment by Angry Patriot on 5 March 2012:

    I habitually wear my seat belt. When I was a government contractor in South Korea, the seat belt saved my life when I was hit by a drunk driver. It didn’t save me from injury, I had a large black and blue seat belt bruise across my left shoulder chest and abdomen and since the drunk drivers car struck my left front fender, my head broke my drivers side window and I was uncouncious for a few minutes. Woke up outside the car where medics had pulled me. The car was a 1985 chevy chevette and was totaled. If my drivers side door had been hit instead of my front fender I would’ve died regardless of the seat belt. I had not developed the habit of wearing a seatbelt at the time I had just put it on for some unkown reason; devine intervention?

    Even so, seat belt laws are completely against everything I fought for in the 15+ years that I served in this great nations Army. I like to pretend that I fought for freedom, but then laws like this prove that this country is becoming more and more a police state that controls every single action of its citizens and strives to invade their privacy any way they can. And officers wonder why citizens hate them more and more every single year. When laws are unjust and unconstitutional and obvious insults to the sensibilities of just about every single citizen in your country, and you are the enforcer, what can you expect. Some of the stories I have read in this blog are BLATANT abuse by our “public servants” (jack booted enforcers of hypocrisy)and severely anger me.

    It’s time for citizen’s to put an end to this, NOW!!

56. Comment by Lmf12 on 27 March 2012:

    So what can we do to stop the seat belt law?

57. Comment by Anonymous on 3 April 2012:

    ..So I get into this HUGE debate …FOR REAL…it seems EVEN if you have a ‘legit prescription’ for medication…Like painkillers Valiums…and other pills that hinder your driving ability or ‘could’ hinder…you can get a D.W.I. ( D.riving W.hile under the I.nfluence of Drugs) and if you have had a previous D.W.I. in 10 years it can be held against you and you’ll be charged with a FELONY D.W.I. …

    If you’re stopped and you test positive for it. (yes.. just positive)
    There’s no level that is obtainable for drugs not even prescribed ones.
    LIKE with Alcohol…like .08 you’re ‘LEGALLY DRUNK’ …you’re either ‘POSITIVE’ or ‘NEGATIVE’…even if the pill was taken days before.
    Dr’s WON’T write you an excuse, in fear if you crash, they will get sued.

    READY….???….Think about this….Is this right ??

    This was part of the conversation …the other part was this…I wear my seat belt ‘underneath ‘ my arm..THROUGH MY ARMPIT AND ACROSS MY CHEST (not ‘over’ my shoulder)..I broke my left collar bone 2 years ago and it irritates me if it’s over my shoulder.My Dr would ‘not’ write me an excuse for not wearing a seatbelt in fear that if I got into a car accident and got hurt a lawyer would sue him for signing such a slip.

    Regardless of that…I got a ticket and ‘beat it’ in court because NO WHERES in the statutes of NOT WEARING a seat belt does it say it HAS to be over your shoulder. It says it’s to be worn properly. It doesn’t define what properly is…and as we all know the LAW is to be spelled out so that there is no room for ASSUMPTIONS.

    Anywho…as i was searching for a way to explain it to the court I came across a very STRANGE STRANGE thing…HERE IT GOES…

    The reason that the ‘insurance companies’ want STATES to enforce the NO SEATBELT LAWS, is because SEATBELTS cause more fatalities (deaths) then they do IN saving lives (statistically proven) .It’s more economically viable (or cheaper) to pay out for a death then long term hospitalization. In short…they want you to die then to be in the hospital for a long time, so WEAR A SEATBELT (and hopefully die to save a $$)

    *A death payout is on the average around $30,000
    *Hospitalization is about an AVERAGE of $10,000 A DAY….(Big difference in money PAY OUTS)

    Insurance companies DO NOT want to ‘PAY OUT’ long term hospital care …

    For example, The ANTI-SMOKING CAMPAIGN…They don’t want to pay out for cancer treatments or ANY …LONG TERM health care for health issues caused by cigarettes. I understand this (and i smoke like a fuckin chimney)…If you CHOOSE to smoke they shouldn’t have to PAY OUT for your choice of slowly killing yourself and then in the end having to payout for MONTHS or YEARS of long term hospitalization.

    Here’s the DEBATE,,,I understand that If you choose to harm yourself (like smoking)..that’s your choice and NO ACCIDENT.

    SEAT BELTS are ‘death traps’ to insure the insurance companies of your death in the event of an ‘ACCIDENT’ …SO INSURANCE COMPANIES CAN SAVE $$

    An accident is NOT by choice,AND NEITHER IS being MADE or FORCED to wear a seatbelt.

    READY….???….Think about this….

    Is it right that KNOWING ‘Seatbelts’ CAUSE MORE deaths (via an accident) that we are ‘FORCED’ to wear them under the ‘false pretense’..that they HELP SAVE LIVES ??????….
    (2 QUOTES AND RESOURCES ATTACHED BELOW )

    While seat-belt use might save some people in certain kinds of traffic accidents, there is ample evidence that in other kinds, people have been more seriously injured and even killed only because they used seat belts. Some people have been saved from death in certain kinds of accidents only because a seat belt was not used. In those cases, the malicious nature of seat-belt laws is further revealed: such persons are subject to fines for not dying in the accident while using a so-called safety device arbitrarily chosen by politicians.

    http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/the-fraud-of-seat-belt-laws/

    Why would an Insurance company offer this !! ….*** answer me that !!

    Standard Accidental Death & Dismemberment Provisions:

    24 Hour Coverage.
    Education Benefit – payable in the event of an insured employees’ accidental death. This benefit provides
    each qualified dependent a percentage of the employee’s life insurance for up to four years.

    **Seat Belt Benefit – an additional 50% of the AD&D benefit is payable if the insured’s death is the result of
    an automobile accident while the insured was wearing a properly secured seat belt.

    Repatriation of Remains Benefit – payable up to $5,000 to cover expenses occurred to return the body if the
    insured’s accidental death occurs 100 miles outside of his/her primary residence.

    an automobile accident while the insured was wearing a properly secured seat belt.

    http://www.bostonmutual.com/products-group.html

58. Comment by ~Apple on 3 April 2012:

    ..So I get into this HUGE debate …FOR REAL…it seems EVEN if you have a ‘legit prescription’ for medication…Like painkillers Valiums…and other pills that hinder your driving ability or ‘could’ hinder…you can get a D.W.I. ( D.riving W.hile under the I.nfluence of Drugs) and if you have had a previous D.W.I. in 10 years it can be held against you and you’ll be charged with a FELONY D.W.I. …

    If you’re stopped and you test positive for it. (yes.. just positive)
    There’s no level that is obtainable for drugs not even prescribed ones.
    LIKE with Alcohol…like .08 you’re ‘LEGALLY DRUNK’ …you’re either ‘POSITIVE’ or ‘NEGATIVE’…even if the pill was taken days before.
    Dr’s WON’T write you an excuse, in fear if you crash, they will get sued.

    READY….???….Think about this….Is this right ??

    This was part of the conversation …the other part was this…I wear my seat belt ‘underneath ‘ my arm..THROUGH MY ARMPIT AND ACROSS MY CHEST (not ‘over’ my shoulder)..I broke my left collar bone 2 years ago and it irritates me if it’s over my shoulder.My Dr would ‘not’ write me an excuse for not wearing a seatbelt in fear that if I got into a car accident and got hurt a lawyer would sue him for signing such a slip.

    Regardless of that…I got a ticket and ‘beat it’ in court because NO WHERES in the statutes of NOT WEARING a seat belt does it say it HAS to be over your shoulder. It says it’s to be worn properly. It doesn’t define what properly is…and as we all know the LAW is to be spelled out so that there is no room for ASSUMPTIONS.

    Anywho…as i was searching for a way to explain it to the court I came across a very STRANGE STRANGE thing…HERE IT GOES…

    The reason that the ‘insurance companies’ want STATES to enforce the NO SEATBELT LAWS, is because SEATBELTS cause more fatalities (deaths) then they do IN saving lives (statistically proven) .It’s more economically viable (or cheaper) to pay out for a death then long term hospitalization. In short…they want you to die then to be in the hospital for a long time, so WEAR A SEATBELT (and hopefully die to save a $$)

    *A death payout is on the average around $30,000
    *Hospitalization is about an AVERAGE of $10,000 A DAY….(Big difference in money PAY OUTS)

    Insurance companies DO NOT want to ‘PAY OUT’ long term hospital care …

    For example, The ANTI-SMOKING CAMPAIGN…They don’t want to pay out for cancer treatments or ANY …LONG TERM health care for health issues caused by cigarettes. I understand this (and i smoke like a fuckin chimney)…If you CHOOSE to smoke they shouldn’t have to PAY OUT for your choice of slowly killing yourself and then in the end having to payout for MONTHS or YEARS of long term hospitalization.

    Here’s the DEBATE,,,I understand that If you choose to harm yourself (like smoking)..that’s your choice and NO ACCIDENT.

    SEAT BELTS are ‘death traps’ to insure the insurance companies of your death in the event of an ‘ACCIDENT’ …SO INSURANCE COMPANIES CAN SAVE $$

    An accident is NOT by choice,AND NEITHER IS being MADE or FORCED to wear a seatbelt.

    READY….???….Think about this….

    Is it right that KNOWING ‘Seatbelts’ CAUSE MORE deaths (via an accident) that we are ‘FORCED’ to wear them under the ‘false pretense’..that they HELP SAVE LIVES ??????….
    (2 QUOTES AND RESOURCES ATTACHED BELOW )

    While seat-belt use might save some people in certain kinds of traffic accidents, there is ample evidence that in other kinds, people have been more seriously injured and even killed only because they used seat belts. Some people have been saved from death in certain kinds of accidents only because a seat belt was not used. In those cases, the malicious nature of seat-belt laws is further revealed: such persons are subject to fines for not dying in the accident while using a so-called safety device arbitrarily chosen by politicians.

    http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/the-fraud-of-seat-belt-laws/

    Why would an Insurance company offer this !! ….*** answer me that !!

    Standard Accidental Death & Dismemberment Provisions:

    24 Hour Coverage.
    Education Benefit – payable in the event of an insured employees’ accidental death. This benefit provides
    each qualified dependent a percentage of the employee’s life insurance for up to four years.

    **Seat Belt Benefit – an additional 50% of the AD&D benefit is payable if the insured’s death is the result of
    an automobile accident while the insured was wearing a properly secured seat belt.

    Repatriation of Remains Benefit – payable up to $5,000 to cover expenses occurred to return the body if the
    insured’s accidental death occurs 100 miles outside of his/her primary residence.

    an automobile accident while the insured was wearing a properly secured seat belt.

    http://www.bostonmutual.com/products-group.html

59. Comment by ed on 3 April 2012:

    I got a $150 no setbelt ticket while setting at the redlight from a pig hidding behind a stop sign. The pigs set in front of my job blocking the entrance to my office jumping out in traffic writing tickets everyday. Right accross the street their is a Home Depot with at least 300 illegal mexixans in the parking lot everyday and the pigs don’ t fuck with them at all WTF?

60. Comment by origin eon11-s on 2 May 2012:

    There are some attention-grabbing time limits on this article however I don’t know if I see all of them center to heart. There may be some validity but I’ll take hold opinion till I look into it further. Good article , thanks and we wish extra! Added to FeedBurner as properly

61. Comment by Kobe Evans on 11 May 2012:

    I am very happy about the strict implementation of the seat belt law. I realized that wearing
    seat belts can prevent severe injuries especially to children. Parents should take good care of their children to prevent regrets when accidents happen. Even if I am an adult, I also need to buckle up my safety belt whenever I drive my vehicle. There is no need for other people to force me to buckle up since it is a benefit for me.

62. Comment by MrMalikai on 14 May 2012:

    As I was reading this blog it occurred to me.
    Why do we even need seat belts in this day and age?
    When most all cars – vehicles are equipped with passive restraints – air bags.

    passive restraint…
    a safety device, as an air bag or special seat belt, that is activated automatically to protect an automobile passenger at the moment of impact when a collision occurs.
    Origin:
    1965–70

63. Comment by Matt on 20 May 2012:

    I think and feel that seat belt laws are completely BS. How can a state inforce a seatbelt law and then allow motorcyclists no helmets??? This in anyone’s mind is completely stupid! How can anyone think this is ok?

64. Comment by kavnir on 21 May 2012:

    I’d like to thank everybody for protesting seatbelt laws in so many different places. It is important to note that New Hampshire still has zero seatbelt enforcement. We must look to them as a last bastion of hope that other states can still see tyrannical laws removed from the books. I personally protest seatbelt check stations in my town and am trying to garner support for a wide-spread petition process. i will report back here with more information as available. Also, please use not having helmet laws as a good reason to have neither safety device be legally required instead of merely saying they should exist if seatbelts will be enforced. Haven’t we all heard of 2 wrongs never making a right?

65. Comment by so sick of Crook County Illinois on 24 May 2012:

    How is it in this day and age, we are required by law to be told what regards of personal safety we must take for ourselves. If you want to wear it, then wear it, i have no problems with that, but if you dont like me, it should not result in the government making $$$ off your decision. Whats next, will they fine me for smoking??? Im putting myself at risk. Will they fine me for not eating healty??? Im putting myself at risk. Will they fine me for not exercising??? Im putting myself at risk. I do a very high risk job in the worst neighborhoods in Illinois and i cannot carry a firearm to protect myself while working, thats putting myself at risk. Will they fine me for my job next??? Where will this end????? This is not a just law, this is just another bad beggining to our corrupt government. How is it that i can ride a motorcycle in Illinois and not have to wear a helmet, or if you ride a bike the law wants you to ride it on the street and not a sidewalk??? There is no safety in that, and no fines either, but if youre in a car you better buckle up. Can someone please explain the logic in that??? Please.

66. Comment by Anonymous on 26 May 2012:

    you are a saladpuncher

67. Comment by PAUL dOC dUbOIS on 27 May 2012:

    WHEN YOU ARE IN YOUR VEHICLE THE gOVT CANT TELL YOU WHAT TO WEAR

Post a Response