Seat Belt Laws: At Any Cost

People need to mind their own business.
Click to expand...

+9999999999999999999

Best response ever.

:) :) :) :) :)

Thank You!

In my view, stay out of my car, unless I am driving in a dangerous way - swerving, excessive speeds (faster then the speed of traffic, or to fast in a neighborhood), impeding traffic, driving in an aggressive manner towards another vehicle, car matches (exactly, no BS to get somebody pulled over) description of crime scene vehicle...
 
Just out of curiousity, all of those who disagree with seatbelt laws, if you live in a jurisdiction that requires their use, what measures have you taken to get the law repealed?
Click to expand...

Written letters, called... Laughed at "That law has saved lives".... No the law did not save lives, I will give credit to the seat belts though... Funny how that argument is effectively the same as "Guns are dangerous" - Nope, just the way some people use them....
 
Hellooooo differential enforcement. Cool, I can be legislator AND cop.
Click to expand...

The point is to use "common sense".


When I was 16 and wanted to be a cop (not any more) I was a member of the Sherrifs Explorers. We got to ride along with the local deputies... On the very first ride along I did, the Sgt I was riding with came upon an elderly lady doing 25mph on the freeway, so he pulled her over (took a bit for her to realize the pretty lights meant to stop, as she put it).

Long story short, after explaining to the dispatcher that yes her D.O.B. was something\something of 1905, it was determined that her license was suspended and she had a warrant for failing to appear or something like that (I think, that was a few, err uhm, many, crap I am getting old, 20 years ago)

The Sgt, rather then cuffing her, considered the situation and we drover her to her house. Once at her house, we tracked down her son (scared the heck out of him, he was very concerned about his mother) and he was due to be out visiting her the next week or something like that. He agreed to work with her, get an attorney out there to help keep her issues in order, and solve this open issue.

Granted, he may very well have been just saying what the Sgt wanted to hear, however, is there any argument that society was better off by letting her sleep in her own bed (aside from her 25mph on the freeway, that was scary) and not take up space and resources in a jail?

My point is that I was taught (and believe) that the point of government is to protect us from each-other (not ourselves). In other words, to protect a normal regular person from a bad guy - such as somebody that commits armed robbery, murders people, drives at 80+ mph in a 25, conducts business in a way that impedes free trade... etc etc

Now that even has some flaws in it - if everbody was required to stay indoors and resources were all delivered to the house by government aproved transportation then the level of safety would increase... But that is just silly, we then loose the ability to enjoy life, so we have to seek a balance. In my view the Sgt I was riding with was using common sense to balance his job with the actuall needs of society in respect to this elderly lady. I believe he made the correct decision in that circumstance. He very well may have made the same choice with this older guy, or he may have ended up spraying him just like these guys did. We were not there and do not know the circumstances.

Still if the law regarding seatbelts was not in place, that warrant would not have existed.... Of course its possible that he would have had some other warrant, that is just an impossible argument.
 
"If the unnecessary law had not been in place in the first place, there would have been no problem with the police and he would still be alive."

And if his parents hadnt had sex he never would have been born, so it'd be moot.

He made a series of bad decisions - Whatever happened to personal responsibility? He made a series of decisions, he is responsible for their outcome.

And am I the only one who finds it ironic that Peru is complaining? It wasnt that long ago their police had death squads


And if the penalty for not paying was asphyxiation you'd have a point, but it isnt. If, and that still remains to be seen, his death was proximately caused by OC, then the only issue is whether that level of force was justified by his resistance.. You cannot claim he was killed because he didnt pay, that is an inferential leap not supported by facts in evidence.

Just out of curiousity, all of those who disagree with seatbelt laws, if you live in a jurisdiction that requires their use, what measures have you taken to get the law repealed?


The sole reason for his arrest was his failure to pay for or contest the ticket. He had a chance at his day in court and did'nt take it. Blaming his death on a seatbelt law is spurious.
Click to expand...
smiley-good-post-sign.gif
 
stephen426 said:
As for skydiving, the only expense comes from having the road kill crew scrape you up. No much chance of needing treatment for that one!
Click to expand...
This is absolutely untrue. Death on impact is extremely rare, typically the result of extreme stupidity and/or total parachute malfunction. Most everything else, even badly damaged or tangled parachutes, will generally buy you enough time to accrue a hefty ambulance and hospital bill. Many skydiving injuries aren't even related to parachute problems.

Injuries range from death, to paralysis, to non-permanent treatable injuries like broken bones, to dislocations and scrapes and bruises and wounded pride.

Skydivers with malfunctioning parachutes tend to be at their most conservative. Many deaths and serious injuries occur when people with less experience, using high-performance (less forgiving) parachutes, try difficult manuevers at low altitudes.
 
Seatbelt laws= Govt and insurance companies in collusion to separate you from your money.

Police PR talking-head types will argue it's for your safety.

Insurance companies argue it'll lower your premiums.

I've yet to find a govt toady that really gives a damn whether I get launched through a windshield, nor have I received my "safety dividend" in the form of lower insurance rates due to less claims being paid out because of seatbelt/helmet laws.

BTW, I do wear my seatbelt just because I think it makes good sense to do so, but I don't believe it's govt's duty to impose it on me.
I also choose to excercise my discretion an not write seatbelt citations myself.
 
stevelyn said:
I also choose to excercise my discretion an not write seatbelt citations myself.
Click to expand...
I find it truly disturbing that people like me have to ask LEO's like you to take this position. Increasingly, the government puts good cops like yourself in the middle....and that is simply WRONG. All I can say is Thank You for recognizing the difference between your marching orders and your true role in society. Wish we had a couple hundred thousand more just like you and Invssgt.
Rich
 
Wear your seatbelt for your own safety, but, more importantly, wear it for everyone else's safety. It keeps you in the seat.
 
5) If warrant, expect police to make you unhappy at some future time
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess that killing someone over an unpaid seatbelt violation (or any minor violation that is unpaid) is justification.

I guess us "citizens" life is only worth the unpaid tax/fine that one may have :barf: .

Here in Oregon, that would be $94 dollars. Glad to see that my life is worth less than $100 to the state :barf: .

(Pepper spray and tasers have been shown to kill. Tasers will kill me if hit, so what the LEO's are saying here is that unless I march to their tune that my life isn't worth squat to them. And they keep on with the arguement that they want to go home at night, I'm sure this gentleman wanted to go home that night also).

Wayne
 
USP45usp said:
Yeah, I guess that killing someone over an unpaid seatbelt violation (or any minor violation that is unpaid) is justification.

I guess us "citizens" life is only worth the unpaid tax/fine that one may have .
Click to expand...

Wayne,

I have always seen you as a logical guy. Whats going on with THIS post? The guy got pepper sprayed because he resisted.

Why do you guys confuse this issue with all this other crap like was he legally in the country? If a law is stupid and enough people contest it, it will be repealed. He violated a law and was ticketed. He FAILED to pay the fine. I'm not sure if the led to a suspended license since the article was not clear, but last time I checked, driving with a suspended license is an arrestable offense. Should the police not do anything about people who IGNORE the laws? Police are there to enfore the laws, not to interpret them.

Now lets look at this differently. Lets say this guy got a ticket for a seatbelt violation. Lets say he paid it. Would this have happened. What if he didn't pay it but went to court to appeal it. Would this have happened. Now here is the kicker... WHAT IF HE DID NOT RESIST??? WOULD HE BE ALIVE TODAY??? How are the police supposed to do their jobs if they worry about whether they can pepper spray a person who is resisting arrest without killing them? How about the police officer just pulls out a gun and shoots him for resisting? That is a bunch of crap. Our police officers are given the right to use force to enforce the law. If the police go overboard, there is an investigation and hopefully internal affairs pulls their badges and has them thrown in jail (ala Rodney King). The artile also doesn't say how this guy was resisting. What if he was trying to fight the police officer? Was the officer justified in spraying the guy then?

Don't confuse the facts here people. The person who died brought it upon himself first and foremost for resisting. Secondly, he did not handle the citation in a responsible manner. Finally, he chose to ignore the law. Thats it.
 
The guy got pepper sprayed because he resisted.
Click to expand...

stephen,

It's been shown and documented that "resisting" can be as little as not obeying a LEO's command in a timely manner in the LEO's mind, which can be as little as a second.

My God man, it was a fine and failure to appear in count or pay the fine. How in the heck can that be justification for excessive force and death?

Wayne

*side note: What happened to Sendec and Blackmind? I don't know if I should ask this out loud but they seem to be, well, not here :confused: .
 
Wayne,

You seem to think pepper spray is excessive force. We still don't know for sure how the guy resisted. Did the police officer know that the guy would die from the pepper spray? Is pepper spray considered a lethal weapon? His death may have been from an allergic reaction or preexisting medical condition. I still believe that police officers have the right to enforce the laws. Imagine if everyone took their orders as mere suggestions rather than obeying them. It sucks that he died as the result of a "stupid nanny state law" but it only got to that point because of his actions. Please don't confuse the issues.
 
"How in the heck can that be justification for excessive force and death?"

His death was not reasonably forseeable under the circumstances confronting the officer. See Graham vs Connor

For every death in which OC or Tasers may be implicated (and keep in mind that there is next to no proof that either have been the sole cause of death) there have been thousands of applications without complications.

No resistance = No OC. The initial violation is a red herring. It coulda been assault, non-support, or anything else. No warrant = no arrest. And who caused the warrant to be issued? He did, by failing to uphold his end of the social contract. I'll bet he signed the citation, thereby promising to appear, without any bond or bail. He violated his promise, thus the bench warrant. The cops making the arrest on the warrant likely didnt even know what the original offense was - the warrant would read "failure to appear".
 
Whether or not the guy did this or that, or the Police responded reasonably, etc. etc. is not the point, as far as I'm concerned.

We know that sending police to arrest people creates tense situations. That can happen with anyone. I could see myself being furious at having to be cuffed over a seatbelt fine.

Here's the point: Why create a situation that you KNOW can result in problems over something like a seatbelt fine?

Save the risky situations for thieves and real criminals. That's my idea. That way, when something does go wrong, we don't have to wonder "What the heck were they trying to handcuff this guy for?"

Sendec: This isn't a case of "either we send the police to arrest him or No One ever pays a fine!!!" As an alternative, Rich pointed out above registration bars. There are numerous ways to enforce mundane fines without relying on two armed police.
 
Stephen,

The man died didn't he? So pepper spray has been proven to be lethal force. People have died from tasers, so they have been proven to be lethal force.

Imagine if everyone took their orders as mere suggestions rather than obeying them.
Click to expand...

That excuse didn't hold up in the Nuremberg Trials, why should they hold up now?

I don't think that LEO's are that stupid as to just obey all orders or laws that they know are unconstitutional. It's not stupidity that they do so, they do so because they like the power over the People. There are too many LEO's out there that once that badge is pinned onto their breast they will just "follow orders" blindly and without question. Those that know the law is unjust or know that a persons life, using ANY method of restraint, is much more important then a simple failure to pay a fine or for minor violations.

Then you have those that will blindly follow what they are told and a person's life is meaningless to them. Use whatever lethal (and yes, I've already said that I consider pepper spray and tasers as being lethal, they have been proven so) method at hand is their first thought and action.

And it was mentioned that if the law is so bad, why don't the people act to repeal it. I'll explain:

States have tried to get the no helmet law and the no seatbelt law repealed in their states. The great federal government comes down with a "if you do that then we will continue to tax the roads and you have to pay but we will not give you any money for repair/expansion".

So the People, as well as the State, are being extorted to comply with the law via money. So the State, wanting that money, will extort the People, by force if necessary to get it.

It's actually a lose, lose situation but more so for the LEO's that the State uses (yes, I said uses). It widened the gap in the Us vs. Them debate and thus the respect and awe of the LEO's is waning quickly by the People.

You, as an LEO, will have to admit that the respect for LEO's by the People has been on the downfall because of stories just like this (and the internet being such a powerful tool) for years now. It has been shown upon this board as well as others. Yet what really surprises me is that the LEO's will blame the People for this downfall and try to uphold the "we are gods, obey or die" attitudes without trying to get together with the People and find a solution to the widening gap that continues to get wider and wider with each report and personal experience of the People.

What gets me is how the LEO's will justify the death of this man, over a MINOR violation, and then basically tells us, the People, that I am an LEO, obey or die.

Wayne
 
We know that sending police to arrest people creates tense situations.
Click to expand...

Nobody sent the police to arrest him. They were there for other business and it just happened that they discovered he had the warrant.
 
Wayne,

Same situation, different issue: If I'm not mistaken, the federal govt threatened to cut Montana's highway funding if they didn't post speed limits (same as they are doing with the seatbelt law, now). Before, it was unlimited, but threats caused Montana to post 75 mph (again, just off memory here). Anyone who lives in Montana or knows more of this, feel free to correct me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top