Seatbelt Law in Trucks shot down (exemptions, safety, license) - Atlanta - Georgia (GA) - Page 2 - City-Data Forum

DeaconJ · 03-24-2009, 03:30 PM

Can we have some kind of credible link to this story, please?

There are exceptions listed for the current Georgia Seatbelt Law below, but none of the exceptions are simply "trucks". I drive a Dodge Ram truck, and I have always been under the impression that I'm required to wear my seatbelt while the truck is in operation. Georgia's Seat Belt Law

Quote:

Ga. L. 2000, pg. 763, Code 40-8-76.1, item B

Each occupant of the front seat of a passenger vehicle shall, while such passenger vehicle is being operated on a public road, street or highway of this state, be restrained by a seat safety belt approved under the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208.

It isn't meant to be an invasive law, but a protective one. Maybe some people don't need to be required to wear a seatbelt, but many DO need to be required because otherwise they wouldn't and would be in danger of worse injuries or death in case of an accident. It's a proven fact that wearing a seatbelt decreases the chance of serious injuries in many situations.

neil0311 · 03-24-2009, 05:05 PM

I can understand the sentiment of those who claim they oppose seat belt and helmet laws due to the argument about freedom. Atlantagreg30127's argument aside, and I do agree with the substance of his rationale, I can see the point of those who don't want to be "told to wear their seatbelt" or a motorcycle helmet.

What I can't understand are the people who actually don't wear a seatbelt or don't wear a helmet. I can get the philosophical argument as a libertarian, but as an intelligent person I cannot understand the actions. I'm a pilot and fly aircraft, and I'm required to fasten my belt or harness because IT KEEPS ME SAFE. When you're driving and get into a crash, your seatbelt can mean the difference between death and minor injury. When you're riding a motorcycle you have almost no protection, and while a helmet isn't much, it's more than your noggin bumpin around on the hard pavement.

The real shame here is that the government even has to remind people to do the logical and sane thing.

spanko75 · 03-24-2009, 05:08 PM

I find this hard to believe!

xavier132487 · 03-24-2009, 07:08 PM

I was told this by a neighbor, and looked it up on the internet a looooong time ago. It was true then, IDK about now. If you drive a pick-up, you're not required to wear a seat belt.

PKCorey · 03-25-2009, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeaconJ

Can we have some kind of credible link to this story, please?

.

I'm I credible enough?

House committee rejects seat belt changes | ajc.com (http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2009/03/24/truck_seat_belt.html - broken link)

vsmoove · 03-25-2009, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PKCorey

I'm I credible enough?

House committee rejects seat belt changes | ajc.com (http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2009/03/24/truck_seat_belt.html - broken link)

Only in the South... just incredible.

wxjay · 03-25-2009, 03:54 PM

It's so funny - I saw a State Rep. talking about this on the news last night. His rationale is that he doesn't want government dictating one more part of people's lives. However, the state is LOSING FEDERAL MONEY for road projects because of not having this law.

Furthermore, if I were the reporter, I would have asked him, "So when can we expect you to have a bill repealing the no alcohol sales on Sunday law? Or a bill approving gay marriage in this state?" You see - for those people with the talking points of "We want less government", it often becomes "We want less government when it suits what we want. Otherwise, we like to make sure we tell people what to do."

I personally believe that throwing away money and being the ONLY STATE in this country without a seat belt law for trucks is beyond ridiculous.

vsmoove · 03-25-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wxjay

It's so funny - I saw a State Rep. talking about this on the news last night. His rationale is that he doesn't want government dictating one more part of people's lives. However, the state is LOSING FEDERAL MONEY for road projects because of not having this law.

Furthermore, if I were the reporter, I would have asked him, "So when can we expect you to have a bill repealing the no alcohol sales on Sunday law? Or a bill approving gay marriage in this state?" You see - for those people with the talking points of "We want less government", it often becomes "We want less government when it suits what we want. Otherwise, we like to make sure we tell people what to do."

I personally believe that throwing away money and being the ONLY STATE in this country without a seat belt law for trucks is beyond ridiculous.

Another follow-up question -- When are you going to repeal the seat belt law for ALL vehicles? What makes trucks so special? I'm at a loss of words for the logic behind this. This is why the Republican Party is shrinking... there is no coherence to their current governing philosophy.

cityrover · 03-25-2009, 07:58 PM

They stuck it to us with the 200$ fine surcharge, which WILL backfire.

I dont wear a seatbelt, truck or no truck. You can't legislate how i live my life. Simple.

cityrover · 03-25-2009, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atlantagreg30127

Let me ask you this, though...

Do you realize that when people don't wear a seat belt and get hurt in an accident, and like A LOT of people these days that person doesn't have insurance to cover their medical bills, that people like you and I pay for it? Likewise when someone doesn't wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle. We all pay for their injuries one way or the other with higher insurance costs for all, to cover them.

I think seat belts should be required for ANY moving 4 or more wheeled vehicle - even a golf cart. Helmets should be required for all 2-wheeled vehicles as well, period. No exceptions.

You eating sugary foods raises my insurance premiums. As such you need to be banned from consuming sugar.

and so forth. I am sure we can all find something with which we are happy and something that we dont like and try to screw it for the other person because "WE" feel its the right way.

How about legislation to station a gestapo in every home and ensure your kids don't watch more than 2 minutes of TV a day? Do you agree to that? I think it is a fabulous law and it should be adopted asap in order to prevent the pollution of children's minds with mindless TV junk. Matter of fact i dont care if you agree with it. I agree with it and as such it must be good for you.

Funny how laws work...

It always amazes me the ease with which some people are willing to try (key word) legislate the freedoms of others away.