Replies

From YOUR post:

meeting applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards

It's right there, in the chart I provided.

Proper Child Safety Seat Use Chart Buckle Everyone. Children Age 12 and Under in Back!
	INFANTS	TODDLER	YOUNG CHILDREN
WEIGHT	Birth to 1 year at least 20-22 lbs.	Over 1 year and Over 20 lbs.-40 lbs.	Over 40 lbs. Ages 4-8, unless 4'9''.
TYPE of SEAT	Infant only or rear-facing convertible	Convertible / Forward-facing	Belt positioning booster seat
SEAT POSITION	Rear-facing only	Forward-facing	Forward-facing
ALWAYS MAKE SURE:	Children to one year and at least 20 lbs. in rear-facing seats Harness straps at or below shoulder level	Harness straps should be at or above shoulders Most seats require top slot for forward-facing	Belt positioning booster seats must be used with both lap and shoulder belt. Make sure the lap belt fits low and tight across the lap/upper thigh area and the shoulder belt fits snug crossing the chest and shoulder to avoid abdominal injuries
WARNING	All children age 12 and under should ride in the back seat	All children age 12 and under should ride in the back seat	All children age 12 and under should ride in the back seat

"Should ride in the back seat" is not "Must ride in the back seat".
Came in late on this "issue", but I have experience with the front seat, back seat child restraint issue, and my child always rode in the front passenger seat(no air-bag) facing the appropriate direction in (age/weight) appropriate child seats.
UNLESS another adult was also in the vehicle.
At that point, I happily ignored screams,thuds, unexplained misc sounds, etc. and concentrated on driving since it takes more that a quick glance to evaluate a situation if the rear view mirror is properly positioned for driving.
Also my daily routes put me at greater risk of rear or side impacts.(mostly divided 4 lanes)
That said,
I breast fed my baby,and I consider it insane and inexcusable to breast feed a baby while driving a vehicle.
I can not imagine a circumstance that any woman felt that keeping the wheels rolling would be more important than calmly feeding a hungry,nursing baby.
Based on the letter of the law here, she walks.
As she should.According to law.
She is stupid, but unless someone passes a law that says stupid people go to jail for stupidity, she walks and the cops were wrong.
Frankly,I am more often endangered by drivers who think it is against the law to actually use the turn signals installed on their vehicle, than I am by some nitwits stupid action involving driving while stupidly endangering an child, but not actually causing an accident.
You seem to want to punish this moron for what might have happened.
While I understand the feeling, I expect cops to have a more "letter of the law" attitude.Or did I miss the charge of driving while stupid?
I myself admit too, in my misspent youth, stupid driving stunts.At one point, I actually considered it a virtue to be admired, that I could change clothes and make-up while driving to a club.From uniform to nightclub chic, at 50 mph, in 15 minutes or less.(including nylons).
Funny, I never caused an accident,never had a traffic ticket, and nobody was ever hurt.
It makes me a little uneasy that you, and a lot of people on this forum, think a little pre-emptive,extrajudicial punishment for my previous carelessness would be just fine and dandy, and a really good thing, just to "teach me a lesson".
You might want to read this twice before you reply. :^)

From YOUR post:

meeting applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards

The words you quote are in my post. And taken out of context, which is what you've done, they can be twisted to mean just about anything, as you've done.

Your selective editing is something I expect from a RAT.

Let's look at the entire sentence to see if it means what you've slanted it to mean, shall we?

I've bolded your selective edit below.

No parent or legal guardian, when present in a motor vehicle, as defined in Section 27315, shall permit his or her child or ward to be transported upon a highway in the motor vehicle without providing and properly securing the child or ward, in a child passenger restraint system meeting applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards unless the child or ward is at least one of the following:

So, does this paragraph describe where in the vehicle to place the carseat?

It does not.

It simply says that no child may be transported in a carseat that doesn't meet federal safety standards.

It's right there, in the chart I provided.

What is? This:

All children age 12 and under should ride in the back seat

Did you miss the word, "should" in the chart you passed?

Obviously you think the word, "should" means the same thing as "shall" or "must".

Well, Howlin. They don't mean the same thing, legally or otherwise.

You just don't get it, do you, Howlin? The federal government doesn't make the rules of the road. The individual states do. That's why there's a "California Vehicle Code", a "Michigan Vehicle Code", a "Ohio Vehicle Code", a "North Carolina Vehicle Code" and not a "U.S. Federal Vehicle Code"

But, let's confine our discussion to the states in question, Michigan and Ohio.

In post #29, Hermann the Cherusker posted the relevent Michigan vehicle code that deals with child restraint systems. Michigan doesn't require that a carseat be placed in the back seat.

Don't believe me. Click on the link a read the law for yourself.

Here's the Ohio code:

Ohio Revised Code, section 4511.81, states when any child who is in either or both of the following categories is being transported in a motor vehicle, other than a taxicab or public safety vehicle that is registered in Ohio and is required by the United States Department of Transportation to be equipped with seat belts at the time of manufacture or assembly, the operator of the motor vehicle shall have the child properly secured in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions in a child restraint system that meets federal motor vehicle safety standards:

Notice that the statute makes no mention of exactly where in the vehicle the car seat is to be placed, only that whatever car seat is used has to meet federal safety standards.

You state, North Carolina, does have a requirement, but according to the relevent statute in your state, children are supposed to be place in a carseat in the back seat, but failure to do so does not constitute negligence.

Don't believe me, though. Read it for yourself: (Be sure to read subsection d, part 3)

North Carolina

º 20-137.1. Child restraint systems required.

(a) Every driver who is transporting one or more passengers of less than 16 years of age shall have all such passengers properly secured in a child passenger restraint system or seat belt which meets federal standards applicable at the time of its manufacture.

(a1)(See editor's note for applicability) A child less than five years of age and less than 40 pounds in weight shall be properly secured in a weight-appropriate child passenger restraint system. In vehicles equipped with an active passenger-side front air bag, if the vehicle has a rear seat, a child less than five years of age and less than 40 pounds in weight shall be properly secured in a rear seat, unless the child restraint system is designed for use with air bags.

(b) The provisions of this section shall not apply: (i) to ambulances or other emergency vehicles; (ii) when the child's personal needs are being attended to; (iii) if all seating positions equipped with child passenger restraint systems or seat belts are occupied; or (iv) to vehicles which are not required by federal law or regulation to be equipped with seat belts.

(c) Any driver found responsible for a violation of this section may be punished by a penalty not to exceed twenty-five dollars ($25.00), even when more than one child less than 16 years of age was not properly secured in a restraint system. No driver charged under this section for failure to have a child under five years of age properly secured in a restraint system shall be convicted if he produces at the time of his trial proof satisfactory to the court that he has subsequently acquired an approved child passenger restraint system.

(d) A violation of this section shall have all of the following consequences:
(1) Two drivers license points shall be assessed pursuant to G.S. 20-16.
(2) No insurance points shall be assessed.
(3) The violation shall not constitute negligence per se or contributory negligence per se.
(4) The violation shall not be evidence of negligence or contributory negligence. (1981, c. 804, ss. 1, 4, 5; 1985, c. 218; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 748, s. 1; 1999-183, ss. 6, 7; 2000-117, s. 1.)

It's now obvious that funny things like facts mean nothing to you.

Here's a link that you can use to check the car seat laws for all 50 states. Car Seat Laws

The legal requirement for the placement of car seats inside a motor vehicle varies from state to state. Some states have a requirement. Most do not.

Whether you agree or not does not matter.

You are wrong.

Natch, you'll never admit it.

But, that's okay. You're in good company. RATs never admit they're wrong, either.

"All children age 12 and under should ride in the back seat"

Should ride, not ARE REQUIRED to ride.