Gold Dome Live is moving!
Our new spot will allow us to get the news to you even faster and make commenting easier. Please bookmark the new site and sign up for our rss feed:
http://blogs.ajc.com/gold-dome-live/
AJC.com > Legislature > Blog > Archives > 2007 > March > 01 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USBill would require seatbelt use in trucks
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Almost every year in recent memory, a state legislator has floated a proposal to require adult passengers to wear seat belts in pick-up trucks.
And every year, those proposals quietly disappear - leaving safety advocates shaking their heads in frustration.
Not this year. The Georgia Senate on Thursday voted 45-10 in favor of a bill that would get rid of the state’s seat belt exemption for pick-up trucks.
“There’s a time to buckle up and there’s a time to unbuckle,” said Sen. Don Thomas (R-Dalton), the bill’s sponsor. “The time to buckle is before you start the engine. The time to unbuckle is after you stop your engine.”
There are more than 1.5 million pickup trucks on Georgia’s roads, but both Democrats and Republicans for years have stifled attempts to require adults who ride in pickup trucks to wear seat belts, arguing that such a law would infringe on the personal freedom of Georgians.
House and Senate lawmakers who represent rural areas also have argued such a measure would be a hassle for farmers, who use pick-up trucks for agricultural work.
“If you are driving a vehicle and going from field to field….this would require that every time you get into your vehicle you have to buckle a seat belt,” said Sen. John Bulloch (R-Ochlocknee), a pecan farmer, who opposed the bill.
Thomas said that Georgia and Indiana are the only two states that allow the seat-belt exemption for adults in pickups. If Georgia gets rid of the exception, the state likely would be eligible for a one-time allocation of $20.7 million in federal funds.
Several groups have expressed their support of SB 86 this year, including the American Automobile Association, Ford Motor Company and the Georgia Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Freshman Sen. Jack Murphy (R-Cumming) said that as a conservative and a person who values personal freedom, he had concerns about the bill. But he spoke in favor of it, saying that Georgia either has a seat belt law, or it does not.
“We need to send the right message to our young folks that whatever we’re required to do, they’re required to do,” Murphy said. Minors are required to wear seat-belts in pick-up trucks under current law.
SB 86 now heads to the House for approval, where it likely will face a tougher battle. Last year, a similar seat belt measure passed a House committee but did not make it to the floor for a vote. At the time, House Speaker Glenn Richardson (R-Hiram) said he was not a fan of mandating seat-belt use in pick-up trucks.
So far this year, Richardson has not voiced opposition to getting rid of the seat-belt exemption for pick-up trucks, but he has not come out in support of such measures either.
Would you like to share your opinion on this proposed legislation with capitol reporter Sonji Jacobs? If so, please e-mail her at sjacobs@ajc.com.
Permalink | Comments (80) | Categories: Public safety
Services »
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Common Sense
March 1, 2007 3:29 PM | Link to this
There should not be mandatory seatbelt laws for adults. Period. The only reason for these laws is for revenue. If it were about safety there wouldn’t be a fine, there would be points taken off license and that would be it. Instead it’s about bringing in revenue. It is just another inch being taken by the government. My personal safety is just that. Mine. Unless they are responsible for my medical bills or my insurance they should have no say in whether I wear a seatbelt or helmet for that matter.
By ed
March 1, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this
I thought the republicans were for less government and less taxes. What personal freedoms will be sold next?
By Edward T Beazley
March 1, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this
Seat belts should be a matter of personal choice,all we need is more laws, telling us what to do and when to do it.
By You are not an island
March 1, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this
Your personal safety is yours, until your stupidity starts driving up my car and health insurance rates. As long as I am paying health insurance, car insurance, and taxes to fund hospitals, your personal safety is partly mine. So put on the seatbelt and helmet and shut up. Think before you blog. Quit living in the libertarian fantasy world.
By Darwin
March 1, 2007 3:51 PM | Link to this
All laws that force people to use seatbelts or avoid risky behavior do is leave people in the gene pool that otherwise would have removed themselves by now!
By Jonny
March 1, 2007 3:51 PM | Link to this
I remember when the seatbelt law was first passed. Georgians were promised by the scoundrels that we would never be pulled over for a simple seatbelt violation. We would only be cited if there were other violations. Then the scoundrels changed seatbelt non-use to a pullover violation in and of itself. I don’t support this bill at all simply because of the lies the scoundrels have told on this issue down the line from day one. We should expect and receive honesty from our elected officials. And when we don’t, we should remember the lies and throw the scoundrels out of office. This is politics for the soccer moms, no matter how many lies are told. Sad.
By No Island
March 1, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this
Your personal safety is yours, until I start paying higher car and health insurance rates for your stupidity. As long as I continue to pay for health insurance, car insurance, and taxes to fund hospitals, then your personal safety is partly mine. So put on the seatbelt or helmet and shut up. Think before you blog and quit living in the libertarian fantasy world.
By Common Sense? (NOT)
March 1, 2007 3:59 PM | Link to this
Somebody wake me up…what year is this? 1955?
Fines help to pay for things like the salary of the GDOT workers who have to hose the blood off the road after you are ejected from your vehicle or do a face-plant off your harley.
The cost of an accident is a whole lot more than the medical bills or insurance.
What about me being late for work while they hose your blood off the road?
What about the load of schoolkids who puke all over the inside of the schoolbus after seeing your decapitated corpse in the road?
The more people who get hurt or killed means higher taxes and higher insurance rates for EVERYBODY.
You may not care about your own personal safety, but somebody else might.
By J.R.
March 1, 2007 4:01 PM | Link to this
There’s a time to vote for my senator and a time not to.If the senator wants to pimp out my personal freedom for federal dollars, so be it, i will campaign against him henceforth.
By h_charles
March 1, 2007 4:10 PM | Link to this
What is this, the stone age? Mandatory seatbelts save thousands of lives each year. This shouldn’t be a discussion — seatbelts should have been mandatory YEARS AGO!
By Opinionated
March 1, 2007 4:30 PM | Link to this
If seat belts are required for safety reasons then everyone, not just car drivers, should have to them. If one group has to wear them then all groups should. You are no safer in a truck than in a car.
By BUSHWACKER
March 1, 2007 4:48 PM | Link to this
Its all about revenue, to say its about safety is b.s. If I am in an accident violent enough to throw me out of the drivers seat I’ve already lost control of the vehicle so having a seat belt on is not going to prevent me from hitting another person.
So the person who can get hurt if I do not wear a seatbelt is me, yes that;s stupid but I should decide if I am going to wear a seat belt. It should be the same for cars as well, adults can decide if they want to wear one, minors I have no problem with a law making them wear one. I am 48 years old, I never wear a seat belt but some how I’m still alive.Maybe if everyone was as good driver as me cars would not need seat belts. You can’t stupid proof the world!
By BUSHWACKER
March 1, 2007 4:49 PM | Link to this
Opinionated you are wrong…you are much safer in a truck than a YUGO!!!
By BUSHWACKER
March 1, 2007 4:55 PM | Link to this
ITS JUST LIKE THE HOV LANES … THEY DO NOT HELP TRAFFIC..THEY ARE THERE SO THE GOVT CAN COLLECT REVENUES FROM THE ONE PASSNGER CARS WHO DRIVE IN THAT LANE…THATS’ IT.. REMEMBER A WHILE BACK THE THOUGHT ABOUT LETTING US PAY A FEE TO DRIVE IN THE HOV LANES ALONE..WHAT ABOUT THE TRAFFIC??..SEE ITS ALL ABOUT REVENUE…AND LIKE I SAID,IF EVERYONE KNEW HOW TO DRIVE CARS WOULD NOT NEED SEAT BELTS..LETS JUST GET THE IDIOTS OFF THE ROAD!!!
By Mr HAHA
March 1, 2007 4:56 PM | Link to this
Common Sense
Actually, the Gov. IS responsible for your medical bills. I know, I know, not really, BUT for a lot of people that don’t have insurance, the Gov. ends up w/ the medical bills after an accident, and that costs MONEY. I don’t like the seat belt laws, I think people should have enough common sense to wear them to begin with. And I do agree that the Gov. is doing it for all the wrong reasons. I get tired of them meddling in personal choices. It would seem that they’d focus of REAL problems, like Illegal immigration. Did I say ‘Illegal’?? That would take care of most of the ‘unpaid medical bills’ in itself.
By jcassens
March 1, 2007 4:57 PM | Link to this
Bushwacker - it’s not the collision outside your vehicle that kills you, it’s the collision inside when your head contacts the windshield or the top of the steering wheel (I know; my sister’s forehead was crushed that way). Airbags are most effective when used in conjuction with a seatbelt, and don’t keep you in the vehicle like a seatbelt does.
Of course, there’s a simple solution. If you are injured or killed in an accident and you’re not wearing a seatbelt, it’s contributory negligence and the insurance company doesn’t pay. How’s that for economic incentive?
By Metalman
March 1, 2007 5:02 PM | Link to this
They should add to the adult/truck exemption instead of eliminating it. When the paramedics show up and see you weren’t buckled in they MUST treat you LAST if there are multiple injured parties or LEAVE if you are by yourself. Extend personal freedoms to do-it-yourself medical attention. Let’s not have the government taking away your rights by transporting you to a government subsidized trauma center.
By BUSHWACKER
March 1, 2007 5:05 PM | Link to this
jcassens I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE INS COMPANY NOT PAYING IF THE WRECK WAS MY FAULT…..AGAIN, IF I SMASH MY HEAD, ITS MY HEAD and if I’m dead
By Opinionated
March 1, 2007 5:05 PM | Link to this
just because you are “safer” (a relative term) in a truck doesn’t mean that you can’t be thrown from one or tossed around when in an accident.
all i’m saying is that if people in cars are required to wear them then all people should be required to wear them no matter the type of vehicle. the converse is also true, if people in trucks aren’t required to wear them then everyone (except children) shouldn’t be required to wear them.
By BUSHWACKER
March 1, 2007 5:09 PM | Link to this
jcassens I have no problem with the INS co not paying if its my fault…but if I smash my head, well its my head!!! and if I’m dead I’m pretty sure I won’t care if the Ins pays.. why doesn’t anyone want to talk about the idiots on the road that cause the wrecks??? I have have been driving for 32 years and have never been in an accident!!!
I do not wear a seatbelt because Iam such a good driver I noty only do not cause accidents, I also see them coming and avoid accidents!!!
GET THE MRONS OFF THE ROAD, MAKE IT HARDER TO GET A LICENSE!! IT’S A PRIVILEGE, NOT A RIGHT!!!
By BUSHWACKER
March 1, 2007 5:10 PM | Link to this
MY PARNETS WERE IN AN ACCIDENT RECENTLY, DAD NO SEAT BELT..NO INJURIES..MOM’S INJURIES WERE CAUSED BY THE SEATBELT!!
By Stuff it
March 1, 2007 5:17 PM | Link to this
All of you who agree with this crap are retarded. How about all the people that die WEARING their seatbelts? Huh? What about all the injured people in accidents that were wearing seatbelts on both sides of the table. What about those people that get burned alive because their belt jams or they panic. So how about shutting the f*** up. We all know, at least all of us intelligent folk, that seatbelts DON’T stop accidents, YOU STILL GET F*** UP. The simple fact that you would side with this bill and others like it means that you are a stupid commie b*******. You will never tell me what to do in this country.
By Farmowner
March 2, 2007 8:12 AM | Link to this
come spend a day working on a farm, remember not all folks are battling city traffic. we are moving field hands from farm to farm, sometimes there are not enough seatbelts to go around.
By Harry
March 2, 2007 8:29 AM | Link to this
I have no opposition to wearing seat belts in my pick up truck, I always have for my own safety. I never understood with the popularity of SUV (pickup trucks with a top and seats) why pick ups were still exempt. I understand the agricultural stance of it. But realize farmers and related services don’t make up the bulk of people who own pick up trucks. The safety record of wearing seatbelts have been proven no matter what vehicle you drive. Its going to pass and we have bigger fish to fry! Seems our energies could be better spent on more important issues that face our state. Health care, job creation and reducing crime and drug use/abuse to just name a few. Not to mention IRAQ.
By chipdip
March 2, 2007 8:31 AM | Link to this
i’ll still ride around without a seatbelt on drinking a cold beer!!!!!!!!!
By Joe
March 2, 2007 8:43 AM | Link to this
I love all these legislators and their special interest votes.
I’ve got a friend who bought a pickup simply because she didn’t have to wear a seat belt in it. That’s pathetic. She doesn’t do farm work. In fact, she doesn’t work at all.
Make an exemption for farmers if necessary and let’s have a blanket law for seat belts. What people don’t realize is that if you or I hit someone in a pickup truck and they get badly injured in the accident, we’re liable for it - even if their injury would have been prevented had they been wearing a seat belt.
By True Common Sense
March 2, 2007 8:47 AM | Link to this
The seat belt laws are necessary to protect everyone, including the stupid people like “Common Sense” who would rather die in a car wreck defending their personal liberties than take care of themselves (& possibly protect their dependents in the process). That’s what laws are for: people who are too stupid to figure out what’s right for themselves!
By Truth
March 2, 2007 8:50 AM | Link to this
The real reason there is an exemption? It’s not about farmers. It’s because the late Senator Murphy didn’t like wearing his seatbelt in his pickup truck. That’s all. Personally, I think it should be left up to the population to make personal choices for them selves. Hey, if we can weed out a few of the dolts who don’t see the benefit of wearing a seatbelt, the world might be a better place. Right?
By Chuck
March 2, 2007 8:52 AM | Link to this
Farmowner: If you are transporting that many field hands around maybe you need to buy you an old school bus. To the pecan farmer senator: If you are in the field you do not have to wear a seat belt. To all you other selfish personal freedom idiots: Do not forget about your family that has to deal with identifying your mangled body and suffering through the death of a parent, friend, or child. This also applies to those on motorcycles who drive at excessive speeds and cut in and out of traffic like they are on a race track. Seat belts help. Wear them.
By Chuck
March 2, 2007 8:58 AM | Link to this
I forgot something. Dear Stuff it, People with your attitude and those who use language like yours are hardly cosidered “intelligent”
By Fred
March 2, 2007 9:03 AM | Link to this
I can;t imagine why pick up trucks were excluded when the Georgia Seat Belt law was implemented. I bet it had something to do with Tom Murphy. He held our state back on so many issues. I am glad he is gone.
By mesue
March 2, 2007 9:03 AM | Link to this
Wow there are some real Stupid People out there. I didn’t agree with SB86 at all until I read these blogs. Perfect drivers, perfect people, perfect example of why this law could pass. Oh by the way, I’ve been driving for 40 plus years, my wife has been driving for 36 years and neither of us have ever had an accident or ticket. We are not good drivers, we are just defensive drivers that has been really, really LUCKY!
I do believe our tax dollars could be used for more important things like Illegal people from south of the border. After all they are here having children, getting medical treatments, using our roads without insurance, all this and our lawmakers are protecting them more and more. Go to just about any hospital emergency room or any county health center and see for your selves.
Anyone that doesn’t believe this………”Here’s yur Sign”!
By Exador
March 2, 2007 9:07 AM | Link to this
To all you nanny-state, “your safety is my problem” types: Wearing a helmet while riding in a car would also save lives. Why aren’t you advocating THAT too?
By beege
March 2, 2007 9:09 AM | Link to this
It should be the adults decision whether to use a seatbelt or not. Sometimes it would be best to not have a seatbelt on. I know a guy that his truck was in an accident & caught on fire. His seat & seat belt were jammed, it was by a miracle he had a small pocketknife & cut the seatbelt off or he could’ve burned to death so who could we blame for that? I’m sure the govt wouldn’t care.
By out of towner
March 2, 2007 9:29 AM | Link to this
Considering Atlanta area roadways are infested with road ragers, including cops, who think area roads are their personal raceways, then seatbelts should be a required necessity just to get survive driving around Atlanta. Otherwise, this is what we voters get for electing politcians who think they now have the right to snoop into the privacy of their voters lives.
By Steve
March 2, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this
Are you serious? Seatbelts shouldn’t be worn by law for ALL motorists? An adult decision? WHAT?
So you’re saying that adults aren’t role models for children. You’re also saying that… hey, it’s my life and I’m allowed to risk my life when I drive (which isn’t a right by the way). So then, if I hit you and you get killed, I have to live with it and potentially get charged with manslaughter. It’s called selfish, my ignorant friend.
By jabster
March 2, 2007 9:35 AM | Link to this
Hey No Island and all of you other goo-goo nanny staters:
Let’s get this out of the way—not wearing your seat belt is stupid. Nothing I say below will refute that.
We’ll quit living in our “libertarian fantasy world” when you quit trying to make us live in your authoritarian nightmare. Maybe I need to send my proctologist over to your house with a microscope to look for every single and possible way your lifestyle just might impact mine in some remote way. Then I’ll get my state legislator to make you an outlaw 40 ways to Sunday. How about them apples?
At the rate things are going, in the future, everybody will spend a Warholian 15 minutes in JAIL.
By dean
March 2, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this
No seat belt use in pickups!!! period!!! Kill the legislation Seat belt use is and has always been an option or choice of the individual driver If a driver obeys the traffic laws there is no need for selt belts It starts with education and common sense (of which there is very little of these days) Find something more important to spend our tax money on, or can you?
By Scott Case
March 2, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this
I think there should be a law against grown men and women watching American Idol. The Iron Maiden would be the punishment. Come to think of it force them to listen to Iron Maiden while they are being punished.
By Jack
March 2, 2007 9:41 AM | Link to this
So let me get this right Driving is a privelege Driving without a seatbelt is a God-given right?
If Driving is a privelege, that the government has a right to grant you, or not grant you, doesn’t it follow that the government can also tell you how you can drive?
If driving without a seatbelt is a right, then why do I need to even get a license? Why should I have to follow speed limits? Why shouldn’t I be able to drive with no headlights and bald tires.
The truth is that no matter how much of a personal choice you think it is, you will affect society as a whole when you are injured for driving without a seatbelt.
By Scott Case
March 2, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this
Also, dancing should be outlawed for all people, just like in Footloose, Square dancing and breakdancing would be the exceptions. Oh and gay men are allowed to dance, but only with each other.
By Paul A.
March 2, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this
OK … Seatbelts in pickup trucks and booze on sundays. Is this all the Georgia legislature can come up with? Neither of these bills ever seems to pass yet they keep coming up every year. I have an idea, how about eliminating the ad valorum tax on motor vehicles? Now there’s a useful result from a useless group of politicians. Wanna bet it’ll never happen? Here’s another concept… When GA400 was built between 285 and I85 our “trustworty” state politicians promised that as soon as it paid for itself the toll would be eliminated… yeah right… Are you still paying 50 cents on GA400? I am. Send all these dishonest bums back where they came from.
By Scott Case
March 2, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this
How about an IQ test for people before they start downloading future white and black trash of Georgia. Also, legalizing tomatoes would be on my agenda. Can we do something about grown ups wearing sweat pants in public.
By Opinionated
March 2, 2007 9:54 AM | Link to this
Everyone keeps forgetting that driving is a privilege not a right! So, I say: Amen, Jack!!!
By georgia farmer
March 2, 2007 9:57 AM | Link to this
I do not have a problem with it being required to wear seat belts in all types of vehicles, however I do have a question. I know it has been a long time since I have had to ride in a school bus, but when I did they did not have seat belts in them. I think if we are going to have a blanket seat belt law that makes it a requirement to wear one while on Georgia roads, we should make sure that our kids are safe while on the road and not in our personal care.
By Annabel Alderman
March 2, 2007 9:59 AM | Link to this
As one of Georgia’s little people, my pleadings in opposition to mandatory seatbelt usage goes unheard. Georgia legislators are now being offered $20 million to impose more socialism upon their constituents. Will they cave? Don’t make me laugh …
By falconfan
March 2, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this
Why is it that evrytime this comes up people start screaming about personal rights? If you drive in Atlanta AT ALL it doesn’t take a genius to see that a seatbelt will, more times than not, assist in saving your life in an accident. Period. With the number of people driving while talking on cell phones, reading, watching movies, eating, and any number of other distracting practices I believe it’s the least you can do to help protect yourself. Should it be a law, maybe not. However more people SEEM to wear seatbelts because it is the law. There are really more important issues at hand with the most important being ILLIGAL IMMIGRATION! For crying out loud, what has to happen before our “government” does something? How can it be right to allow people to live and work here illigally and not pay taxes or SPEAK ENGLISH?!?!? Unless I really got lost, this IS America. We are Americans. We shouldn’t be catering to criminals…..and that’s just what illigals are.
By Sweat
March 2, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this
WAY TO GO DR THOMAS (R-DALTON)!
By jabster
March 2, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this
Why do we keep saying that “driving is a privilege, not a right”? Would someone please tell me how a right differs from a privilege (no circular definitions please).
I have the right to life, liberty, and property, but it seems like the government can take those from me as easily as they can revoke my driver’s license. I could mention many other rights, such as religion, speech, etc. So what’s the difference?
By jeff
March 2, 2007 10:32 AM | Link to this
I KNOW THIS LAW IS ONLY FOR MONEY!!! I DO NOT CARE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER ABOUT THE SEATBELT LAW, BUT I KNOW THAT IT IS NOT FOR SAFETY, ONLY MONEY, BECAUSE IF SAFETY WAS THE QUESTION THEN WHY DO THEY ALLOW MILLIONS OF SCHOOL KIDS TO RIDE ON A DAILEY BASIS IN THOSE BIG YELLOW TIN CANS WITHOUT SEATBELTS EVEN INSTALLED?? THE BUS DRIVERS HAVE A BELT BUT NOT OUR MOST PRECIOUS RESOURCE!! SO NO, IT IS NOT ABOUT SAFETY..
By Scott Case
March 2, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this
This debate is awesome, fun and thought provoking. Next we can debate about a flag, then beer on Sunday, then Harry Potter(the devil’s work), and follow it up with my anti dancing law proposal(see above).
By Scott Case
March 2, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this
I’m about to pass out from not caring so much
By Ryan
March 2, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this
What exactly is being done about the poor motorists?……they’re just being told to wear seat-belts? I own a pickup, and wear my seatbelt every time I drive. I have been aware of this exemption and still wear it. I am more concerned with the dumb motorists out there and nothing being done about it. You know, there is a difference between a yield and a merge.
By Bob Elliott
March 2, 2007 10:36 AM | Link to this
Our elected politicians hype up trivial matters like seat bealts to attract attention to themselves, while disguising the fact that they do NOTHING about high state and local taxes, excessive property taxes, too much sales tax, and political corruption and payoffs from the industries and lobbying groups that support them. It is time to get the politicians out of the ordinary lives of American citizens. We do not need any seat belt laws!
By Scott Case
March 2, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this
I forgot about dog fighting. Another debate we can have. I’ll start. Dog fighting and the gambling that happens at these fights is great family fun and a great way to let off steam after a hard day at the office. Way better than the heavyweight division right now. Also every time a pitbull dies stripper gets hooked on meth. Oh wait meth is no longer a problem now that sudafed is behind the counter. Thanks Georgia Assembly.
By Bobby
March 2, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this
If they require seatbelts for everyone, WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE SCHOOL BUSES? Why are they so concerned about everyone’s safety except our children? Make the law for everyone including the State.
By jabster
March 2, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this
Hey FalconFan—
We can disagree on the little stuff, but you make an excellent point. Why does the government worry more about a 20 year old getting a beer than Iran and the Norks getting nukes? Why does the government worry more about people wearing their seat belt than illegal immigrants driving without a driver’s license to begin with? Subscribe to scangwinnett.com and check out the people arrested for not having a driver’s license, then do the math.
By bryan
March 2, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this
Let me get this straight. You people are worried about personal freedom yet want to regulate whether or not I can buy alcohol on Sunday???
By Spiritraveller
March 2, 2007 11:18 AM | Link to this
The Federal government should not be paying our state to regulate which dangers a competent adult is allowed to assume.
It is usually stupid to ride without a seatbelt. But when it doesn’t directly harm anyone else, it’s none of governments business.
On the other hand, if the state is going to have stupid laws, there’s no reason for pick-up trucks to be treated differently from other vehicles.
By Cruzin
March 2, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this
Boy its going to be tough having to buckle up, and then unbuckle every time you move from pecan field to pecan field. With this stupid logic, I can see why the nation laughs at Georgia.
By Peter
March 2, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this
Tom Murphy is gone. Repeal the Tom Murphy Law and make seats belts mandatory for everyone.
By Judi
March 2, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this
Just because you are a “safe” or “defensive” driver, you are not exempt. My son (14 yrs. old) was killed in an auto wreck - a 51 year old “safe” driver caused the accident. He did nothing wrong!!! You too could be next!
By Jessika Blanton
March 2, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
All lives are important! The “freedom” to not wear a seat belt can take away someone’s freedom. I drive a truck and always wear a seat belt. If an accident occurs, it’s not going to discriminate me flying thru the windshield! To not have this mandatory law is NUTS!!
By Opinionated
March 2, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
In response to jabster’s comment at 10:05: The difference between a ‘privilege’ and a ‘right’ is that a right is inherent, while a privilege is granted. In other words, a ‘privilege’ is granted while a ‘right’ is an entitlement.
By Jessika Blanton
March 2, 2007 12:57 PM | Link to this
All lives are important! The “freedom” to not wear a seat belt can take away someone’s freedom. I drive a truck and always wear a seat belt. If an accident occurs, it’s not going to discriminate me flying thru the windshield! To not have this mandatory law is NUTS!!
By Jessika Blanton
March 2, 2007 12:58 PM | Link to this
All lives are important! The “freedom” to not wear a seat belt can take away someone’s freedom. I drive a truck and always wear a seat belt. If an accident occurs, it’s not going to discriminate me flying thru the windshield! To not have this mandatory law is NUTS!!
By Jessika Blanton
March 2, 2007 12:59 PM | Link to this
All lives are important!The “freedom” to not wear a seat belt can take away someone’s freedom. I drive a truck and always wear a seat belt. If an accident occurs, it’s not going to discriminate me flying thru the windshield! To not have this mandatory law is NUTS!!
By Dawg Fan
March 2, 2007 12:59 PM | Link to this
You are right, there should be no seat belt laws. Any of you spouting this crap about your higher insurance rate should ask yourself if your insurance rate has ever gone down. You are not protecting yourself against claims but you are protecting the insurance company. There are many insurance agents in the state govt that constantly come up with new ways to get your money. Talk to the people at the local tag office and see who came up with the computer system to make sure everyone has car insurance. They will tell you the insurance companies did and they had no say in the matter. Wake up people!
By Opinionated
March 2, 2007 1:00 PM | Link to this
Such as the government granting us the privilege to drive when we prove by the tests (road test and written test) we have take AND pass that say we understand the rules and the laws of the road. That privilege can then be revoked when we break the law such as excessive speeding, etc. The right to drive is not protected under the constitution such as speech, bearing arms, etc.
By Kyle
March 2, 2007 1:15 PM | Link to this
I don’t believe the people who are saying that adults should not have to wear seat belts. Look at every other state in the nation. Seat belt laws!! You don’t here people in those states complaining about the loss of a “personal freedom”. Sure there always stories about people who are hurt by seat belts, but that is no reason to complain about the laws. This is outrageous that people actually are getting up in arms and opposing the laws. Look at the rest of the country. This is 2007 people
By jesse wall
March 2, 2007 1:26 PM | Link to this
I’m in favor of a seat belt law for trucks. They help prevent accidents and injury and I speak from experience.
In 1995 I was driving a pickup without the seat belt when two children riding a go cart came toward the road. When I hit the brakes the truck went into a sideways skid and it threw me out from under the steering wheel. Not being able to steer I hit a power pole, tataling my truck and breaking my leg.
I have worn a seatbelt ever since.
Jesse E Wall
By Bullwinkle
March 2, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this
The difference between right and/or privilege. Ex. A blind person has the right to free speech, religion, etc. But should a blind person be allowed (have the right to drive a motor vehicle on public roadways? That’s why driving is a privilege, it’s not intended for everyone.
By Pigskinmutt
March 2, 2007 2:00 PM | Link to this
I wear my seat belt because I choose to. I don’t need lawmakers to make decisions for me, in fact those do gooder have little respect from me thinking they have to pass a law for every little ill they think society has. If someone forgets to put it on the police can fine them. (collect more taxes for the politicians)
By Opinionated
March 2, 2007 2:09 PM | Link to this
Good example, Bullwinkle.
By seatbelt safety
March 2, 2007 2:15 PM | Link to this
I agree with h_charles. Seat belts prevents accidents, Seat belts should always be mandatory for all drivers and passenger. When someone gets in an accident (off course w/ no seat belts) gets disabled (God forbid), he/she gets on welfare, there goes our tax dollars, our tax dollar could be saved……………..
By An American
March 2, 2007 2:32 PM | Link to this
Hey falconfan: You wrote “How can it be right to allow people to live and work here illigally and not pay taxes or SPEAK ENGLISH?!?!?” How about a law requiring legal Americans to SPELL correctly? It’s spelled i-l-l-E-g-a-l-l-y. You spelled it wrong twice!!!
Boy, some of my fellow Americans sure are an embarrassment.
By Opinionated
March 2, 2007 3:03 PM | Link to this
seatbelt safety: Seat belts DO NOT prevent accidents. Seat belts attempt to prevent injury to occupants in a vehicle when said vehicle is in an accident.
Only people who are behind the wheel can prevent accidents. When these people behind the wheel slow down, stop tailgating, stop whipping in and out of traffic, and start paying attention to what is going on around them is when accidents are prevented.
By jabster
March 2, 2007 4:07 PM | Link to this
And if people slow down all the way to zero, we won’t have ANY accidents—oh, I mean crashes since “accidents” isn’t P.C.
Driving, like every other aspect of life, entails risk. Are we going to turn the “privilege doctrine” into a blank check and let the government regulate everything as far as we will let them get away with it?
BTW, my daughter just crashed her pants…gotta go.
By Opinionated
March 2, 2007 4:37 PM | Link to this
Oh come on, jabster. If everyone stopped acting like it is their “right” to get behind the wheel and use some frickin’ common sense (such as slowing down - there is absolutely no need to go 80 in a 55 mph zone) then we wouldn’t have near the problems we do and there wouldn’t be a need for seat belt laws!
I’m not advocating that we have a seat belt law. However, I think that if we are going to have one, then everyone should be held to the same standard. There shouldn’t be a select group of people that are exempt especially if they are on the same streets as everyone else. If they are truly using the pickup for their farm, then they need to keep it on their farm and off the streets and interstates.
By Kara
March 12, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this
Why not allow an exclusion for farmers/farm workers in rural areas? I live adjacent to “the sticks”, and it’s pretty obvious who’s working on a farm and who’s not. An exclusion such as this shouldn’t create any sort of confusion for law enforcement. It seems like a win/win compromise for everyone.