One more unconstitutional Nanny ( we Think we know what’s best for you ) Government law. Which we were told would never be used to stop you with.
What they don’t tell you. And is suppressed big time. Is all the deaths and injures seatbelts cause!
“clicking” on you seatbelt on is a 50-50 proposition 50% chance it will save you 50% chance it will kill you.
As with the helmet laws. Let those who drive deside.
( maybe there needs to be a helmet law for cars too)/s
The coppers can do it here south of the WI border in IL. It sucks. I wear my belt all the time anyway, but ticketing someone who is stupid enough not to wear it is just plain annoying.
No. I think they should also be able to ticket anyone who owns property since the whole world now knows that all the land on the planet belongs to Robert Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe, since he is the closest living relative of Lucy.
Seatbelts actually make people better drivers. An individual is better able to control his vehicle when he's not swaying and being pushed about his seat with the acceleration, or turning of the Vehicle. Ineritia
So there are less accidents
No. If they can't even ask you if you're an illegal alien, they shouldn't be able to make you wear a seat belt.
I wear my belt all the time because if I am in an accident without it, the auto insurance companies can dispute paying for injuries.
Nanny govm't. That's what all the clowns want.
When our seatbelt law in Michigan was enacted they swore up and down that they would never stop someone for a seatbelt violation alone. Today they can do exactly that.
Seatbelts are a top notch idea but a really bad law.
No.
Voted NO. I am tired of all this statist nonsense.
What constitutional covenant would you be referring to?
All seat belt laws are STATE laws. (Granted the federales blackmail the states into passing such laws with the threat of withholding highway building funds.)
The closest covenant I could find in the Wisconsin State Constitution that could be used to declare the state seat belt law unconstitutional is:
Equality; inherent rights.
SECTION 1. [As amended Nov. 1982 and April 1986]
All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. [1979 J.R. 36, 1981 J.R. 29, vote Nov. 1982; 1983 J.R. 40, 1985 J.R. 21, vote April 1986]
The "inherent right...liberty" would imply each person shall decide whether to wear a seat belt or not.
The constitutional basis for stopping the federales at their blackmail maneuver is Amendment IX:
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights SHALL NOT be construed to DENY OR DISPARAGE others (rights) retained by the people.
The people have the retained right to decide to wear a seat belt or not.
Sources, please?
No. What good does it do to issue a citation? Why inconvenience the driver by demanding a court appearance when the same thing can be accomplished by just impounding the vehicle?
Absolutely not! Whether or not I wear seatbelts (and I absolutely religiously DO)is NOBODY'S business but mine. All it amounts to is a tax on automobiles. If these civil nannies were at all concerned, they'd get motorcycles the hell off the road for the simple reasons that there are no seatbelts, no air bags, no side impact standards, etc, etc, that the auto drivers are being drowned in.
I don't have anything against motorcycles whatsoever, but I resent them being totally immune to safety (not wearing seatbelts), air (no emission controls whatever), and noise standards (incredible amounts of noise from cycles that no car can duplicate) that the auto drivers are faced with.
Leave the motorcyclists and auto drivers ALONE. It's a TAX that the local and state governments are too cowardly to pass thru the voting booth.
Yes, if the elected reps pass such a law. Remember what it says in every state driver's manual: "driving is a privilege, not a right." If we start confusing inconvenient restrictions with Constitutional liberties, then we make the same error the Left makes when they confuse the Second Ammendment with the driving privilege, or some other act of State or Federal government.
In King Georges' country (NY) ANY moving violation is probable cause (another Mario legacy).
Why should Wisconsin be different than other areas of the country?
A few days after being a pall bearer at my best friend's funeral (he was murdered, still unsolved), I got pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt. I was fuming and lucky to not get arrested. Things like "why don't you do your G*d damned job and find the people who killed my friend instead of picking on me", etc.
The Safety Nazis are out of control in this country. It will be our ruin. If seatbelt law supporters are so GD concerned about the medical costs of injuries, why not outlaw recreational sports. Costs due to them far outweigh car accident injuries. Also, outlaw homosexual sex because AIDS costs us billions of dollars per year.
No. I'm tired of arrogant liberal laws designed to "protect us from ourselves".
Result: 66% say no.