can anyone help me with what this means (seatbelt law) (Charlotte: inspection, floor)

[addiepeas]

It is from G.S. 20-135.2.a
"Evidence of failure to wear a seat belt shall not be admissible in any criminal or civil trial, action, or proceeding except in an action based on a violation of this section or as justification for the stop of a vehicle or detention of a vehicle operator and passengers. "[/SIZE]
Is this saying that they cannot stop me solely based on seat belt ticket? Or just that they cannot charge you for more if you are getting carged for a criminal offence..or ?

[GCharlotte]

Originally Posted by addiepeas

It is from G.S. 20-135.2.a
"Evidence of failure to wear a seat belt shall not be admissible in any criminal or civil trial, action, or proceeding except in an action based on a violation of this section or as justification for the stop of a vehicle or detention of a vehicle operator and passengers. "[/SIZE]
Is this saying that they cannot stop me solely based on seat belt ticket? Or just that they cannot charge you for more if you are getting carged for a criminal offence..or ?

No. It means they can't use evidence as to whether you were wearing a seat belt in any other civil or criminal action. They can still charge you separate.

[Asheville Native]

If you wear your seatbelt it becomes a non-issue.

[Glenn Clawyer]

I own and operate a vehicle repair/N.C. State Inspection facility. Over the past 35 years of operating vehicles on North Carolina Hwys, I have never received a uniformed traffic citation and have done so on well in excess of a million vehicles. Some of these vehicles had defective seat belts,strap,harnesses ect, as well as not being able to move the seats forward or rearward. Also all of these vehicles are not owned by myself and have different transmissions (manual,auto,floor and column shift). In addition to driving these variety of vehicles they also have drive-ability issues,steering,ball joints,wheel bearings the list goes on and on.Should the State not provide a provision for people in my occupation to be exempt from the seat-belt Law???

Thank You, Glenn

[rfburns]

The legislature *could* easily add a provision that says mechanics test driving a customer's vehicle are exempt from seat belts, but why should they? Provide the justification to a state legislator and see what happens. If anything, I would think someone driving an unfamiliar car with unknown driveability issues would be at a greater risk for getting into a crash, and therefore would benefit more from wearing a seat belt than the average person.

[spankys bbq]

Aren't seatbelt a item on the safety checklist? No belt, no pass?

[BC1960]

Originally Posted by spankys bbq

Aren't seatbelt a item on the safety checklist? No belt, no pass?

No.

[Francois]

Originally Posted by GCharlotte

No. It means they can't use evidence as to whether you were wearing a seat belt in any other civil or criminal action. They can still charge you separate.

I am guessing it might come into play in the kind of scenario where Driver A's car is hit by Driver B who is at fault, and A is not wearing a seat belt and suffers permanent spinal damages; B tries to claim that he should not have to pay for all of A's medical bills because A should have been wearing a seat belt, and if he were, his injuries would have been much slighter. A contributory negligence kind of thing.