Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New law ups age for child restraints
The Albuquerque Tribune ^ | June 14, 2005 | Jan Jonas

Posted on 06/16/2005 10:28:10 AM PDT by Disambiguator

Your children are cute, but if they're not buckled in correctly, they're going to cost you a ticket.

Albuquerque police and law enforcement officers around the state say parents of children ages 5 and up are going to be scrutinized more than ever when a new law on child safety seats goes into effect Friday.

The current law requires safety restraints for children through age 4 or less than 40 pounds. The new law says children ages 5 or 6 or less than 60 pounds must be protected.

Children 7 through 12 also require safety restraints - either a child safety seat if they weigh less than 60 pounds or seat belts.

All seats must meet federal standards.

"A properly secured seat belt fits over thighs, not the abdomen, with knees bent over the seat edge," said Jeannie Chavez, spokeswoman for AAA New Mexico. "A seat belt should go over heaviest part of the bone structure, the shoulder bone, chest bone and over the hip portion of the upper thighs."

The law was proposed by AAA New Mexico and Safer New Mexico Now and passed during the 2005 legislative session.

"Nine out of 10 car seats are installed incorrectly," said Lisa Kelloff, president of Safer New Mexico Now.

Safer New Mexico Now opened five fitting stations statewide last year and is looking to add three this year, she said.

Each station provides proper installation of child safety seats by trained technicians and information on proper use, she said.

"Stations are at permanent locations on a specific day of the month every month at a specific time," Kelloff said. "People should come in with the car and seat, and the child as well."

Fittings at the stations are by appointment only.

The organization also has car seat distribution programs for low-income families in 30 locations around the state.

Albuquerque police spokeswoman Sgt. Beth Paiz said officers will begin enforcing the new law right away.

"There will be no grace period," she said.

Children who move around the back seat, whose heads pop up or who lean over to get something from the front seat are easy to spot, Paiz said. That would constitute probable cause for a traffic stop.

If the child is not in a safety restraint, the driver will be cited, she said.

The fine is $84, Kelloff said, and two points against the driver's license.

However, judges have the discretion to require the offender to take part in a violator education program by Safer New Mexico Now. That would waive the two points, Kelloff said.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; US: New Mexico
KEYWORDS: childrestraints; newmexico; policefundraiser; seatbelts
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last
It's for the Children!

For NM Freepers and anyone driving through the state of New Mexico, this new law takes effect on 6/17/05.

1 posted on 06/16/2005 10:28:10 AM PDT by Disambiguator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator
Thank God the government is there to think for us, otherwise it just wouldn't get done.
2 posted on 06/16/2005 10:31:34 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Drug prohibition laws spawned the runaway federal health care monopoly and fund terrorism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator

My 4 year-old is already having trouble finding room for her feet in her car seat. This just seems like get more $$$$ legislation disguised as It's for the Children law.


3 posted on 06/16/2005 10:32:43 AM PDT by Millee (So you're a feminist......isn't that cute??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator
The next time I hear a politician spout the usual bullshit about how "free" we are (July 4th seems like the next likely opportunity), I'm going to moon the bastard.

Especially the Republicans, with their "limited government" lies. At least the 'Rats are upfront about their Big Stupid Government intentions.

4 posted on 06/16/2005 10:33:59 AM PDT by Hank Rearden (Never allow anyone who could only get a government job attempt to tell you how to run your life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

These laws are for irresponsible idiots. The vast majority of parents would buckle their kids up, with or without a law.


5 posted on 06/16/2005 10:34:54 AM PDT by Ron in Acreage (It's the borders stupid! (ours, not theirs!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator

I don't know how previous generations survived without nanny laws dictating safety gear for kids in cars..Does any evidence show that children are safer today with overprotective seatbelts than before???


6 posted on 06/16/2005 10:35:42 AM PDT by BerniesFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

lmao~~~


7 posted on 06/16/2005 10:36:08 AM PDT by petpeeve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ron in Acreage

The irresponsible idiots will continue to let their kids climb around the car like monkeys, and drive with babies on their laps. I see them on the road regularly.


8 posted on 06/16/2005 10:36:54 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("Children don't need counting, because whatever number you have, you never have enough.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ron in Acreage
These laws are for irresponsible idiots.

One person's "irresponsibility" is another person's freedom.

Lots of people consider gun ownership to be irresponsible.

9 posted on 06/16/2005 10:37:45 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Drug prohibition laws spawned the runaway federal health care monopoly and fund terrorism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

My child likes to ride out on the front of the car and pretend she's a hood ornament. Who's the government to tell she can't!


10 posted on 06/16/2005 10:39:38 AM PDT by gridlock (ELIMINATE PERVERSE INCENTIVES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ron in Acreage

However, if you are in an accident and a child is injured because of you, it seems like the law could protect you if the parents were not following the law.

Without the law, it seems like the injured child's parents could sue you even more.


11 posted on 06/16/2005 10:39:40 AM PDT by luckystarmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator
I disagree with the new law.

New Mexico has gone politically correct with all the North Easterner's that have moved into the state.

Evidently these do-gooders don't have children.

When does all this bull shit stop?

I am all for the safety of children but this is going to far.

The police and do-gooding politically correct public officials are fast becoming more dreaded than terrorism.
12 posted on 06/16/2005 10:41:08 AM PDT by OKIEDOC (LL THE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gridlock
My child likes to ride out on the front of the car and pretend she's a hood ornament. Who's the government to tell she can't!

The good news is, those genes will be removed from the gene pool.

Darwin loves you.

13 posted on 06/16/2005 10:42:23 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Drug prohibition laws spawned the runaway federal health care monopoly and fund terrorism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator
"Nine out of 10 car seats are installed incorrectly,"

"People should come in with the car and seat, and the child as well."

Is Ms. Kelloff telling 90% of parents to endanger their children?

14 posted on 06/16/2005 10:42:42 AM PDT by tnlibertarian ("In my opinion, they have no rights, except a safe return to their homeland. - "Robert Vazquez")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

These laws are horrible for small kids.

Can you imagine the grief a twelve year old would get if he had to have a CAR SEAT??

My son is almost twelve and just hit 70 pounds, but his feet more than hit the floor.


15 posted on 06/16/2005 10:43:08 AM PDT by Politicalmom (Just one more reason to hate the government....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

*******NITPICKER AND POLITICALLY CORRECT POST ALERT



16 posted on 06/16/2005 10:44:33 AM PDT by OKIEDOC (LL THE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OKIEDOC

Thanks. It's always nice to be appreciated.


17 posted on 06/16/2005 10:46:08 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("Children don't need counting, because whatever number you have, you never have enough.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: Politicalmom

12 and only 70 pounds? Give that boy a Big Mac.


19 posted on 06/16/2005 10:48:40 AM PDT by darkangel82
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Children don't have adult freedoms. They don't have 2nd amendment rights as you and I do. Driving or riding in a car is not a freedom or a right. It can be taken away for a number of reasons. Using your logic, DUI laws shoud be removed because it takes away your freedom to be irresposible? You are free not to wear the seatbelt, but you will be fined if you don't.


20 posted on 06/16/2005 10:50:02 AM PDT by Ron in Acreage (It's the borders stupid! (ours, not theirs!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson