# I may be booted



## unregistered65598 (Oct 4, 2010)

I posted a thread on CF Because I felt thats where it belonged.....

http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/ge...ntryside-families/456153-my-first-ticket.html

I can not believe the mindset of those that replied. Come on, somebody tell me that that this is not the way everyone thinks. I know I did wrong yet I know the mindset of the local PD here and this guy has just been out to get whoever he can since coming into town. A friend of our was arrested for six counts of child abuse by this guy because they were riding in the back of his pickup at about 15 mph in town. The sports coach at the school transports kids this way all the time. The Local PD has no porblem with it. Am I so off base here.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

If you don't like the law then either ignore it and get a ticket every so often or work to have it repealed, but please stop whining.


----------



## Cliff (Jun 30, 2007)

I went and read the other thread. Yes sorry I think you're off base in being so upset. Regardless of what anyone thinks of seat belt laws, you did break the law, as you stated. Police officers are under no obligation to "give you a break" for whatever reason. The law applies to you just like it does to everyone else. You're lucky you've gotten away with not wearing a seat belt for all this time actually. 

I agree with everything Alice said in the other thread. Not attacking you at all, just being honest.

ETA - you did nothing in that thread that should have you worried about being booted, you're just whining a lil


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> If you don't like the law then either ignore it and get a ticket every so often or work to have it repealed, but please stop whining.



your kidding right....they never...ever take a law back once passed.


seat belt law is pure bs....right along with tons of others.


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

why isnt charlie wrangle in jail then....and Timothy Geithner they owed huge amount in taxes.been us we would been jailed like capone.

people have a screwed up understanding of what a crminal is.


----------



## beachcomber (Dec 2, 2008)

seams to me they cant pull you over for not wearing seat belt, was that the only violation?


----------



## Callieslamb (Feb 27, 2007)

Eh...I'll give you some sympathy. It's no fun to get a ticket. No one likes it, even if you know you're wrong. Nothing's fair about small town ticketing since they only have guys out every other day or so and might even borrow an officer from a neighboring town for a shift or two. I'm proud to report that in our town, one policeman gave his own mother a ticket, so we are all fairness and loveydovey. I had some bad habits when we moved here. I came from a very large city where things like speeding didn't get a body any attention at all. They had bank robbers, murders, assaults, etc to tend to. I thought speed limits were a suggestion. Made it really tough with the move. Oh well. Tomorrow's a new day and I'm sure it will be better.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Merk - I put this on the other thread also.

You're ticket is illegal according to the State of Colorado seat belt law, unless he stopped you for something else.

Colorado Safety Laws - Cell Phone, Seat Belt, Car Seat, Child Safety Laws in CO at DMV.org: The DMV Made Simple

Seat Belt Law

Seat belts are mandatory for the driver and all front seat passengers.

Exceptions to this rule follow:

Operating a vehicle manufactured before 1968&#8213;the year seat belts became federally required.

Passengers with a physical or psychological disability are exempt from wearing a seat belt. A medical statement explaining the disability and the reason why a seat belt is inappropriate must accompany the passenger.

*Not buckling up is considered a secondary violation. You can only be cited if you've been stopped for another reason, such as speeding or zooming through a stop sign.*


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I looked it up as ALA seat belt law is a secondary law also. They cannot stop you just for that, it has to be with some other stopping event.


----------



## unregistered65598 (Oct 4, 2010)

Wow I guess if thats the way the majority feel. then I may be in the wrong place. I guess I feel that those who are entrusted to protect us, not those that feel they have authority over us are just that. I am appalled by the number of people who are willing to just except it for what it is rather then using judgment on each circumstance. I guess what I feel everyone is missing is not the fact that I broke the law (made very clear by myself and others) But the fact that this is a small town with different exceptions. Our PD is not gun sling gun hoe we are law guys. they are real life people living in this small town. We had a hit and run just this week at our store, truck vs. light pole and between the cops and the store they worked it out. Guy did a stupid thing, he is gonna pay for it and get it fixed, it's all good. Without getting into to much detail, he had no license, no permission to drive the truck, yet the local police and our store worked it out. no need to go all out on the guy.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Take the law and challenge the ticket. 

Someone has to do it as apparently he does not know the law.


----------



## unregistered65598 (Oct 4, 2010)

AngieM2 said:


> Take the law and challenge the ticket.
> 
> Someone has to do it as apparently he does not know the law.


Thank you Angie, I wasn't even thinking of fighting it as I have stated before....I was in the wrong, but I will check into this. I do feel I will take a break from this forum. Seems most are to compliant with what the laws are rather then what is good for all mankind. Maybe my kids should be taken into the wonderful protective society because they know what is best for them in any situation that comes around, the law says so. I am fed up with the so called law telling us what we can or can not do. I know common sense and that is what i feel the world should start looking at, not those who feel they know what is best for the rest of us. With that I will take my break.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Drop by long enough to let us know how disputing the ticket goes.


----------



## Pink_Carnation (Apr 21, 2006)

I try to be compliant with the laws....but I certainly don't agree with a lot of them. I'm sorry you got a ticket. I hope that you get out of it and more importantly I hope the highway patrol guy moves onto another area quickly. On the flip side if we had more officers that were nit-picky on total enforcement of all laws more people would see how ridiculous some of them are.....no containers that hold less than 3oz cause some people use them for jello shots and possession of burglary tools including bolt cutters are 2 I can think of right off the bat.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

No - the majority do not feel this way. If someone says that the newest, latest fad for government to protect you from yourself is valid then I would ask what does it mean when their laws are too intrusive? I watched the Indy 500 in something like 1986 when Patrick Bednard went into the inside retaining wall at 180 and got out of his car and walked to the ambulance, at that point I gave seat belts more respect. I and my children wear them religiously, should that be my decision or should that decision fall to the governing powers? 

Fight this ticket if it was the primary reason that you were stopped. If it was secondary, you may only appeal to attempt to scrape this "bad law" off of the books. Who are you beholden to?


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Pink slid in above my post, but I validate her premise in that when is an infraction an infraction? I mean, I understand the premise of laws but let me ask you this, in a rural area if you are coming up to a stop sign and you can view the traffic for a mile in each direction on the road that you are about to cross and you slow to a "stop" [not a stop really] and continue on, what if there were a cop that saw that and tried to ticket you? The premise was to insure that both you and other vehicles that were using the other road to navigate safely. By slowing and then proceeding whilst evaluating the traffic flow from one mile one way and one mile the other way, you have fulfilled the premise of the law but by not stopping fully you have violated the "law" - what says you? Traffic laws are governed by an administrative court, you signed the back of your drivers license - it says there that you will fully comply with all traffic laws. Is this what you will bow to or have you operated in a reasonable fashion?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

My first thought on this is why didn't he let you off with just a warning, since there was no accident and it was a first ticket? BUT, I also believe that certain laws are there for a reason. I don't agree with the nanny state. I also don't like wearing a seatbelt. BUT, it is the law of the land.


----------



## Zilli (Apr 1, 2012)

AngieM2 said:


> I looked it up as ALA seat belt law is a secondary law also. They cannot stop you just for that, it has to be with some other stopping event.


In my state (Washington), you can be stopped for not wearing a seat belt.

I've been stopped three times, twice by the same cop in the same tiny town (although not on the same day). One of those times, I was just crossing the road from the Chevron station to the feed store. 

I've been lucky, though, and got off with verbal warnings each time.

However, I decided that three times is the charm and that I'd better obey the law and now I am obsessive about being buckled up - and I don't even take any chances on short trips in that little town anymore.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

> Without getting into to much detail, he had no license, no permission to drive the truck, yet the local police and our store worked it out. no need to go all out on the guy.


Sorry, but in my opinion he should have gotten more out of it. The police in your town aren't doing their jobs. The little slaps on the wrist is the whole problem with lawbreakers. Just like a little kid he got away with something wrong. He received no punishment, so he just does it again. Kind of like the people that get picked up drinking & driving 10 times. It could have just as easily been another car or a kid on a bike instead of a pole. 

I commented on the other thread about the drunk at my house in the middle of the night. Sure, we could have pulled his car out & drove him home. Instead I called the cops because he had no business driving as drunk as he was. If people aren't held accountable for what they do, then they learn nothing from it.


----------



## Cliff (Jun 30, 2007)

Lol you don't like some people's answers so you're leaving? Since when did a group of people this size agree on anything? 

Listen, you live in a large society. By necessity there are laws. And as is the nature of government, over time it overreaches itself and turns into a nanny. I understand if you want to rail against that. But that's sort of a different issue to you getting a ticket for breaking the law. Work to change it if you wish but the law is the law until it's changed. 
Nobody owes you a break for anything. It does sound like your local cops haven't really been doing their job. Their job is to enforce the law, not interpret it. It's what we hire them for. Can't fault someone for doing their job.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

I was driving home from Iowa after dropping my son off to college.
Southbound 85 in a 70.
Iowa State boy tagged me while he was headed Northbound.
Flip flopped.
Rode RIGHT UP on my butt (I didn't see him....was not paying attention).
Clocked me AGAIN at 84.
Hit his lights.
I look up, tap my brakes, look at speedometer?
82.
Crap, busted.
When he asked me if I knew why he pulled me over, I said:
Yes sir, speeding.
He said 
How fast were you going?
I said "this is the part where I am honest?"
He said "yes ma'am"
I said "82".
He told me how he tagged me going Nbound then again on my tail......
I said "well your 84-85 was probably more right than my 82, because I tapped my brakes.

He came back, with a ticket.......75 in a 70.
82.00 fine.
He asked "what's the rush".
I said "just dropped my boy off at college, and I feel like I am going to puke. I simply was not paying attention."
He said "please slow down ma'am, I understand".
WELL OF COURSE HE DOES, he was only (maybe) 26-27 himself!!

I told him to be safe, and pulled away.

I earned that ticket. I know the law. I broke it.
He's doing his job. 

(I haven't had a speeding ticket in 30 years, but I have been ticketed twice for seat belt violations 10+12 years ago. Once for not having it on. Once for not wearing my seat belt correctly.......that one fried my backside, but the law states that it is to be worn a certain way or you are in violation. And I was.)

That State Trooper was doing his job.


----------



## mpillow (Jan 24, 2003)

In maine the seatbelt ticket is $62 last time I knew someone that got pinched....

But yes I agree some laws are stupid and some folks are not good at handling "power". Its unfortunate and I hope you pursue this further.


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

Merks,

*I'm glad someone finally said it.*

When I first joined HT, I was under the impression that "families" subforum was where the nicest, cleanest, most polite people would be. :umno:

Over the years, I have learned that it is my least favorite section to read, and I almost NEVER go there, unless something interesting pops up when I use the NEW posts feature.

I have never seen more hypocritical, judgemental, and arrogant spirited comments as I have there. :croc: I would rather read GC, (which is rare for me as well).

I think the reason is that one has the _expectation_ of friendly comments in the families section. That's a mistake. NOTHING wrong with friendly disagreement in a family setting. But I have found it doesn't come across that way often.

I love our S&EP section. When you post a question or opinion here and it's not received with <hugs>, you're not disappointed... because you didn't come here with that type of mindset.

Anyway, that's my opinions. 

..... I would like to add that thanks to Angie, :bow: this section runs very well, even with disagreements and such. This does not mean that Melissa is any less a mod. She is fantastic and very kind. The above opinion is just what I've settled into that keeps me the most content. It's a matter of preference.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

Either fight the ticket if you did nothing else wrong or work to get the law in your town overturned. 3rd option is to pay the ticket. 

I don't always agree with the "law", but I realize that as long as something IS the law, then I have to obey or attempt to get the law overturned. However, if I get caught disobeying the law, then I have to pay up. In this case unless you were stopped for something else, then you didn't break the law and if you feel you are in the clear, then fight the ticket.

Otherwise, you will have to pay the fine and have the charge on your record (which may make your insurance costs go up) depending on whether or not it adds points to your driving record and whether your insurance company is diligent about checking.


----------



## Rocktown Gal (Feb 19, 2008)

Both in Va and Co the seat belt law is secondary...unless under 16. Actually it is secondary in 18 states

I would fight the ticket.


----------



## Rocktown Gal (Feb 19, 2008)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> I was driving home from Iowa after dropping my son off to college.
> Southbound 85 in a 70.
> Iowa State boy tagged me while he was headed Northbound.
> Flip flopped.
> ...


This is how the troopers trap you. You should have kept your mouth shut...admit to nothing.


----------



## ksfarmer (Apr 28, 2007)

beachcomber said:


> seams to me they cant pull you over for not wearing seat belt, was that the only violation?


I don't know the law in Colorado, but in Kansas, they recently changed the seat belt law, you can now be pulled over for that reason alone....... The state is pushing for local law enforcement to enforce the seat belt law, due to pressure from the feds. Has to do with federal highway funds.


----------



## unregistered41671 (Dec 29, 2009)

You can be pulled over in GA and ticketed for not wearing a seat belt.


----------



## bourbonred (Feb 27, 2008)

Yes, I believe we are living in nanny-states, but when a policeman lowers your ticket and not anothers, then justice is being violated. I, too, have benefited from being let off when my mind was elsewhere. But honestly, the policeman or state trooper that dropped laura's ticket from 82 to 75 mph was not a judge. His role is not to dispense justice, but to uphold the law and he did not. The law, as crummy as some are, should be upheld equally to all. When you "work out" the disturbances, such as was listed by the original poster, and don't follow the law equally for everyone, then of course, it's not going to feel fair when someone brings the law down appropriately on you. Are laws hard and fast rules, or guidelines to consider? If they are only guidelines to consider, then when someone steals from you, don't get upset that they violated the law. After all, it was only a guideline and the rule didn't have to be followed.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Rocktown Gal said:


> This is how the troopers trap you. You should have kept your mouth shut...admit to nothing.


I wasn't gonna lie. That's just me.


----------



## Awnry Abe (Mar 21, 2012)

I was sympathetic to your rant/whine. I think our traffic laws are arbitrary and capriciously derived. I say, if its paved and public, drive on it and do so safely.

That said, even thought I agree with your angle of the dangle with regard to "feature creep" in law, I have these 2 comments: 

1) I always wear a seat belt. I think it is silly not to.
2) Don't get bent out of shape just because a bunch of people say harsh things. If I avoided every crowd that disagreed with me on every subject I hold near and dear, I would find myself all alone.


----------



## Rocktown Gal (Feb 19, 2008)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> I wasn't gonna lie. That's just me.


If you're not talking...you're not lying.


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

Ok, let me get this straight. You didn't like that your rant wasn't well received in another HT sub-forum so you came here to rant/whine about it some more? Seriously? What the heck does this have to do with S&P?


----------



## Sanza (Sep 8, 2008)

Seatbelts have been known to save a lot more lives rather then causing deaths by using them. Unless you have a medical reason and a drs. note then you are not specifically above the law. Pay the fine!

My kids are 37 and 35 years old, and they were born way before any laws came into effect with seatbelts and child car seats. I had a car seat for them when they were small, and then made sure they were strapped in with a seatbelt when they were older. It was for my own peace of mind and their safety, not because it was a law.


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

Wow Texas does not make it easy to find its rules for adults.
There was a big deal about seat belt tickets carrying a $300 or so fine. 
All I can find are $25-$50 fines unless you are the driver and it is a minor.
I did find this list of states with primary seat belt laws (Primary is where that alone is a pull over offense)


> State that have primary seat belt laws include:
> 
> Alabama
> Alaska
> ...


States with secondary seat belt laws (Not a pull over offense)


> Arizona
> Colorado
> Idaho
> Kansas
> ...


Here is where I found it. 

Personally I think such nanny laws are unconstitutional.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Alabama just recently made it a 1st level offense then, because until recently I know it was not.


----------



## Ardie/WI (May 10, 2002)

Wags said:


> Ok, let me get this straight. You didn't like that your rant wasn't well received in another HT sub-forum so you came here to rant/whine about it some more? Seriously? What the heck does this have to do with S&P?


I wondered about that myself. And, I thought, if nothing else, it is in poor taste.


----------



## silverseeds (Apr 28, 2012)

I think seat belt laws are crazy. I once heard it was actually insurance companies that pushed for it, because they save money. 

Im not even saying you shouldnt wear on, or obey laws, just that we shouldnt be making laws over such things. By the same token we make seatbelts a law, motorcycles and bicycles, helmets or not should be outlawed 100%!! or perhaps we should all drive 10mph, the casualties would drop to nearly zero! Its a slippery slope to say the least.


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

Wags said:


> Ok, let me get this straight. You didn't like that your rant wasn't well received in another HT sub-forum so you came here to rant/whine about it some more? Seriously? What the heck does this have to do with S&P?


Police reactions, laws, changes to them, etc. are frequently discussed here and in Current Events.
What does your post have to do with answering the OP's question?




Ardie/WI said:


> I wondered about that myself. And, I thought, if nothing else, it is in poor taste.


I think it's poor taste to post this when you could easily have moved on if you weren't interested in this thread.


I posted quite a while back about someone in my family getting a seatbelt ticket. I was looking for help with the information provided in post 35 of this thread. (thank you MJsLady). All anybody could do was post useless yaks of "seatbelts should be worn for safety," "break the law, pay the price..," blah blah blah which had nothing to do with my posted question. So I guess I know how this OP feels.

They are pointing out that it's aggravating to be treated one way by local law enforcement and another by troopers. Yep, that's aggravating. They stated CLEARLY they knew what was against the law and what is not. No need to tell them what they already know.

Rocktown Gal and Angie posted some valuable info about the law.  And some others offered valid thoughts as well, without mamby pambyin' but also without being jerks.

But some have posted stuff like "Pay the fine!" HEY! GUESS WHAT! The OP never said anything in this thread or the other one to indicate not paying, or that they thought they shouldn't have to pay. What they said was they didnt' get a break. If anyone here says they break the law with a seatbelt or speeding violation, and LEO lets them go, I wanna know that you insist that LEO give you a ticket. NOT!

There are several others that are so off base from the OP that I won't comment on them all.

After my first post in this thread, a member PM'd me in appreciation. This person only reads and never posts on HT anymore because of exactly this type of thing. It's disappointing to see that some spillover has occurred in our S&EP section. Oh well....


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Thanks for saying that partndn.

I glanced through this thread from work and left the posts you answered. Your answer was right on.

And I'm sorry that the PM'er does not post any more. I try to keep the snarky down, but sometimes people visit and don't contribute anything, but love to make snarky comments. I'll have to watch better.

IN this case I'm leaving them, since they are quoted in your post and shows people for their outlook.

I hope no one else cares to do that after this post.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Wags said:


> Ok, let me get this straight. You didn't like that your rant wasn't well received in another HT sub-forum so you came here to rant/whine about it some more? Seriously? What the heck does this have to do with S&P?


We are discussing laws and the ones that administrate them. That is why it's still here.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Ardie/WI said:


> I wondered about that myself. And, I thought, if nothing else, it is in poor taste.


Actually, this is in poor taste. You've contributed nothing to the subject of the conversation. 

Please refrain from coming here to make snippy hit and run comments. It would be greatly appreciated.

If you care to contribute to the conversation and outlook of S&EP of discussing laws and adminstration of them, please do. In this case, it is a valid concern, apparently the Highway Patrol fellow does not know that he issued an illegal ticket according to the laws, posted online, of Colorado.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

It's not certain that the only reason he pulled the OP over was because of no seat belt. They said the officer saw them without their seatbelt & gave them a ticket. How can the OP know what the officer saw? Perhaps he had another reason for pulling the OP over. It wasn't stated. I would think an officer would know the law on ticketing for seatbelt violations. 

I do agree that there are some very stupid laws. However, in this forum we talk of prepping & being prepared for different things. How would this country be if everyone picks & chooses what laws they want to follow? Laws are in place & if someone doesn't like it, they should do what they can to get it changed. Not just decide that they are above the law. America is a screwed up mess enough the way it is without allowing people to pick & choose what laws they want to follow.


----------



## Awnry Abe (Mar 21, 2012)

Wendy said:


> It's not certain that the only reason he pulled the OP over was because of no seat belt. They said the officer saw them without their seatbelt & gave them a ticket. How can the OP know what the officer saw? Perhaps he had another reason for pulling the OP over. It wasn't stated. I would think an officer would know the law on ticketing for seatbelt violations.
> 
> I do agree that there are some very stupid laws. However, in this forum we talk of prepping & being prepared for different things. How would this country be if everyone picks & chooses what laws they want to follow? Laws are in place & if someone doesn't like it, they should do what they can to get it changed. Not just decide that they are above the law. America is a screwed up mess enough the way it is without allowing people to pick & choose what laws they want to follow.


I understood OP to say that the officer drove past, saw her without a seatbelt, pulled a U-ey, pulled her over, then gave her a ticket. The OPs post in CF may have made it clearer. 

I do pick and choose the laws I want to follow, I admit that. I sit on my own supreme court bench and declare certain laws to be wrong. Some I declare wrong, but still comply with due to financial penalty. Making such statements probably makes you think I am some kind of anarchist, and in the case of traffic law, would make you think I drive like I own the roads. But the reality is that by most measures, I am a peaceful, law-abiding citizen. Of the traffic laws, I happen to think stop signs, traffic lights, and speed limits in the absense of traffic are nonsense. Seatbelt law is just another nanny law. Anyone can rightly argue that neglecting to wear a seatbelt costs society financially as a whole. Very true. But they would need to keep applying their logic to every area of life. Make it illegal to eat twinkies, anyone? 

I am putting words in OPs mouth, but I think what really got Merks dander up in the original CF post was the complicant attitude towards enactment of laws and an inconsistent enforcement of those laws. OP was just pointing out to her fellow frogs that the edge of the pot is starting to simmer. Do we ever stop and wonder why these things get passed? That is why I think this thread belongs here.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

We as citizens do not do anything to stop these types of laws from being passed. If we were, as a group, were so inclined to provide input to our State/Local/Federal lawmakers, perhaps we could prevent some of the useless laws from being passed. 

However, what I would consider a "useless" law, someone else may feel that the law is absolutely essential. How does one determine what is "useless"? A good example is: laws that prohibit smoking in public places. Now suppose as a smoker, your favorite thing is to light up right after a meal..and suppose the person at the next table, hates the smell..so a law is passed prohibiting smoking in a public place. Now is the law "useless" to the smoker or absolutely essential to the person who hates the smell? Would banning perfume be as big an issue? There are plenty of people allergic to perfume..see that slippery slope coming?

So I suppose if legally one is required to do something, then legally one should or face the consequences. However, as Angie took the effort to look up the law regarding seat belt use, if the ticket being discussed was given illegally in that there were no other crimes committed, then the ticket could be fought as it should not have been given. The OP does not state whether she/he was breaking any other laws or whether another ticket was given. Yes, the officer can use discretion in whether or not to ticket or to give a warning and yes, the particular officer, does appear on the surface to have exceeded his authority, but will the OP do anything to fight the ticket? If not, then that may be a green light to this particular officer to continue to exceed his authority by ticketing other people for not wearing seat belts regardless of whether any other crime was committed. 

I see a lot of what I consider "useless" laws..in particular laws that govern prostitution..but I bet that there are folks here that would demand such laws if a brothel opened up in their neighborhood.


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

So this discussion is really about when is it "ok" to consciously choose to violate existing laws? 

Some people think they are a law unto themselves and that they can do whatever they please because they "know better". I have a feeling that in a SHTF scenario these will be the outlaws that make up their own rules as they go, because that is what they have always done. A break down in normal society will just cancel whatever small restraint they showed because they were worried about consequences for their actions.

Laws don't just appear out of thin air. CITIZENS lobby their representatives to have these laws passed. A few years ago I worked as an assistant to a lady that worked tirelessly to get tougher traffic safety laws passed, (DUII, Safety Belts, School Zones etc...) in this state. If you don't agree with a particular law, you have the same right as the CITIZENS who worked to get the law in place. You can gather support and lobby your representative to get a law repealed. And yes, laws do get changed and/or repealed if there is enough support.


----------



## nostawmama (Dec 29, 2011)

Wags said:


> Some people think they are a law unto themselves and that they can do whatever they please because they "know better". I have a feeling that in a SHTF scenario these will be the outlaws that make up their own rules as they go, because that is what they have always done. A break down in normal society will just cancel whatever small restraint they showed because they were worried about consequences for their actions.


I think this is true. 

The people that show independent brain activity, that "know better" will be a group that survives because they trust themselves to know what is best for them. These people may live by a higher law (not necessarily religious) or moral code.

The ones that completely lack moral codes, break any law without discrimination, are also going to be a group of people that survive because they are willing to plunder and take beyond what is necessary, they will bully, kill and be feared.

The ones in the middle that need somebody to tell them what is right and wrong, what is a smart decision or not. These are the people that will perish. The ones that lack moral code will slaughter them and the other will not be willing to risk themselves and their survival to hold hands with these folks.

I also know which group I will be in.


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

:hijacked:


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Wags said:


> So this discussion is really about when is it "ok" to consciously choose to violate existing laws?
> 
> Some people think they are a law unto themselves and that they can do whatever they please because they "know better". I have a feeling that in a SHTF scenario these will be the outlaws that make up their own rules as they go, because that is what they have always done. A break down in normal society will just cancel whatever small restraint they showed because they were worried about consequences for their actions.
> 
> Laws don't just appear out of thin air. CITIZENS lobby their representatives to have these laws passed. A few years ago I worked as an assistant to a lady that worked tirelessly to get tougher traffic safety laws passed, (DUII, Safety Belts, School Zones etc...) in this state. If you don't agree with a particular law, you have the same right as the CITIZENS who worked to get the law in place. You can gather support and lobby your representative to get a law repealed. And yes, laws do get changed and/or repealed if there is enough support.


Ah, so you're one of the ones that caused the law in your area.

But you still have not grasped - the HP guy did not do it correctly in pulling her over and giving her a ticket - whether she was or was not wearing the seat belt.... read the law as it is stated for her area. And no where did she mention getting a ticket or warning for any other issue - without the first, there should not have been the secondary law used to write a primary ticket. I think she can go before a judge and question this.

And I use to argue with an ex-spy about seat belts being good for you or not, when they first were being put into cars. 
I'm not sure that they are good in all cases, especially now that there are air bags all over cars.

I know that my Uncle use to carry that instrument that could cut a seat belt webbing and break a window, incase it got jammed in a fire or car going into a lake. Another is where someone had the front passenger seat with his seat belt on - the accident happened and he was the one that died as he was launched out from under the seat belt out where the car had been opened by the crash. (I do not know if the others had on belts or not).

As I've said, I wear a seat belt all the time. I did it before it was a law - just cause I got totally use to them when learning to fly, and got use to the feel of it.

But to tear down a person here, cause she was not wearing a seat belt as was customary in her town, is just so - really unexpected here. 
Note, no seat belt was the custom in that town area. She was doing just what was learned to be expected there. 

Also, in the other thread in Families someone is listing a whole bunch of other laws that should not be broken - make sure all of you that are adamantly advocating that she got her just consequences - make sure you're not breaking any of those laws. 

But the biggest one, why in the name of Sam Hill, is this being a big issue when we have ILLEGAL aliens being allowed to stay and encouraged to use our nation to get ahead, why are we not obeying those laws and sending them back? Now that's a law that needs to be followed and people get all "follow the law" on that one.


----------



## Barnhouse (Feb 24, 2012)

silverseeds said:


> I think seat belt laws are crazy. I once heard it *was actually insurance companies that pushed for it, because they save money.*
> 
> Im not even saying you shouldnt wear on, or obey laws,* just that we shouldnt be making laws over such things.* By the same token we make seatbelts a law, motorcycles and bicycles, helmets or not should be outlawed 100%!! or perhaps we should all drive 10mph, the casualties would drop to nearly zero! Its a slippery slope to say the least.


Oh you are so right!!!

I think seat belts are fantastic. But making it a LAW is what stinks.
Bottom line, it's not an issue over YOUR safety. It's all about who's making money on it. I resent that.

Even if there was NO LAW concerning seat belts, I would still use them because they do protect. I am just fed up with people telling me what to do, claiming they are "concerned" about me. No, you're concerned about my wallet.

We have people running motorcycles more powerful than they'll ever need, weaving in and out of traffic, no helmet, but a kid on a tricycle better be obeying the LAW and have one on or they'll be trouble mister. 

Give me a break


----------



## Barnhouse (Feb 24, 2012)

> AngieM2
> But you still have not grasped - *the HP guy did not do it correctly in pulling her over and giving her a ticket - whether she was or was not wearing the seat belt.... read the law as it is stated for her area.* And no where did she mention getting a ticket or warning for any other issue - without the first, there should not have been the secondary law used to write a primary ticket. I think she can go before a judge and question this.


Exactly right, so in other words, this cop broke the law in order to give her a ticket.
What other rules does he bend in order to make his reports look good?
Just wondering.


----------



## Barnhouse (Feb 24, 2012)

> Cliff
> Work to change it if you wish but the law is the law until it's changed.


Not true. As we found out on the original thread, there are TONS of laws that were never changed, they just stopped being enforced.

Like I said before, it's not good enough to punish someone because the "broke the law".
Laws are put in place for a REASON. Unless the REASON is applied when the infraction occurs, there cannot be justice.

For example-
Ticketing someone for parking in a handicap spot in an abandoned parking lot where there is no business going on is unjust. 

I always thought laws were put in place to IMPROVE people's lives.
What in the world happened to good old common sense?


----------



## Rocktown Gal (Feb 19, 2008)

Barnhouse said:


> What in the world happened to good old common sense?


It's gone plumb crazy


----------



## Zilli (Apr 1, 2012)

Barnhouse said:


> For example-
> Ticketing someone for parking in a handicap spot in an abandoned parking lot where there is no business going on is unjust.


Well, that's not fair.

What if someone who really needs that spot shows up five minutes after you, or any other able bodied person, parks there?

Just because the parking lot looks "abandoned" at the very moment you pull in doesn't mean that it will remain so.

I never park in the handicapped spots. Ever. And I don't begrudge people who really need those spots to have access to them, even if it means I have to walk a little further (I need the exercise anyway).

However, I do get really, really angry when I see people park in those spots when they obviously aren't disabled. It is one of my pet peeves.


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

I read the other thread too. If the trooper was a normal human being and Merks was well mannered, the trooper should have given him a warning ticket.

If the trooper is a dink then a ticket was a certainty.

What I get from the OP is that he somehow thinks he is entitled to get off because he had a perfect driving record. If this attitude was relayed to the cop by whatever means then a ticket would follow.

The folks on here are not a bunch of yes men. Dissagreement is good. It makes you re-evaluate your position and attitude and maybe change it. If Merks is unable to deal with a dissenting opinion then I wish him a good life.


----------



## Barnhouse (Feb 24, 2012)

Zilli said:


> Well, that's not fair.
> 
> What if someone who really needs that spot shows up five minutes after you, or any other able bodied person, parks there?
> 
> ...


Apparently you did not read what I wrote. I said an abandoned parking lot where there* is no business.*

But this is partially my fault because I know the example I'm thinking of and posted it on another thread, but not here.

Short summary- manager of a business goes to that business at 4 * in the morning*to drop off a report that someone else will pick up later that day.

The business is* closed,* the parking lot is *abandoned*, so he parks in one of twelve empty handicapped spots just cause it's the closest to the door.

When he comes back he finds a ticket on the windshield - fine for parking in a handicapped spot. Now does this make any sense whatsoever?

Hey, it's the law. 
How ridiculous.


----------



## Zilli (Apr 1, 2012)

I realize there are some "grey" areas regarding some of this stuff.

However, if it were me, I would still not park in the handicapped spot and would walk the extra twenty feet or so.

No big deal to avoid getting a ticket.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Rocktown Gal said:


> If you're not talking...you're not lying.


True.
I could have stonewalled, and he could have written the ticket for what it was on his gun. 85 in a 70.

If I had 1.00 for every time I broke a law, I could pay the entire Iowa State Police force's annual salaries AND pensions. Speeding, rolling stop, u turn, etc......
If I had a dollar for every time I was "warned" and not ticketed?
I could take 2 or 3 Iowa State Police officers out to a mighty good steak dinner with a really nice bottle of red to go along with.

Vegas says "I was due".
I rolled the dice when I chose to exceed the posted speed limit.
This time.....I lost.

My 2 tickets for a seatbelt infraction?
Once, I didn't have it on....and THAT is why he pulled me over.
The second time, I had it on, but tucked under my armpit. SHE pulled me over for that reason and wrote me a ticket for not wearing it properly.
Both were 25.00 fines.
BOTH went on my record, and BOTH raised my insurance rates for 2 years.

If you don't have your registration signed, they can write you a ticket for 100.00.
If you don't have your CURRENT ins. card with you, they can write you a ticket for 100.00.
If you licenses is expired, even by 1 hour, they can impound your car AND write you a 100.00 ticket.
If I flip a FIRE SAFE cigarette out the window in the pouring rain, they can write me a 100.00 ticket or more...it's breaking 2 laws. (Littering and throwing a lit cigarette out the window. Two different laws.)

Do I think all of there are insane?
Yes.
BUT I KNOW they are the law.
So when *I chose* to ignore them, I accept the consequences of my choice.


----------



## Barnhouse (Feb 24, 2012)

Zilli said:


> I realize there are some "grey" areas regarding some of this stuff.
> 
> However, if it were me, I would still not park in the handicapped spot and would walk the extra twenty feet or so.
> 
> No big deal to avoid getting a ticket.


At 4 in the morning, I would be more concerned with getting in and out as soon as possible.

So instead of considering this man's safety, the cop penalized him even though he caused no harm or inconvenience to anyone.

That's not justice, that's harassment.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

> But to tear down a person here, cause she was not wearing a seat belt as was customary in her town, is just so - really unexpected here.
> Note, no seat belt was the custom in that town area. She was doing just what was learned to be expected there.


I don't feel people were tearing her down for not wearing her seatbelt. I see it more as tearing her down because she feels she is above the law & shouldn't have gotten a ticket. Just because everyone else is doing something wrong doesn't mean you should. That is something I teach my kids all the time. Don't follow the crowd. If it's wrong, it's wrong. Just because everyone in that particular town doesn't wear their seatbelt, doesn't mean it is no longer a law they should follow. It just means the people in that area think they are above the law.


----------



## Zilli (Apr 1, 2012)

Barnhouse said:


> At 4 in the morning, I would be more concerned with getting in and out as soon as possible.
> 
> So instead of considering this man's safety, the cop penalized him even though he caused no harm or inconvenience to anyone.
> 
> That's not justice, that's harassment.


If safety is an issue, and having to walk an extra ten or twenty feet means the difference between life and death, maybe that man should find a better time of day to take care of his business.

Anyway, like I said, I won't park in handicapped spots - most importantly because I will not make it difficult for someone else when my able-bodied self can walk (even though I am disabled, it hasn't affected my ability to get around), and secondly, because I don't want to get a ticket.

You, however, can park wherever you want. Just be prepared to pay the ticket if you park where you're not supposed to.


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

AngieM2 said:


> But you still have not grasped - the HP guy did not do it correctly in pulling her over and giving her a ticket - whether she was or was not wearing the seat belt.... read the law as it is stated for her area. And no where did she mention getting a ticket or warning for any other issue - without the first, there should not have been the secondary law used to write a primary ticket. I think she can go before a judge and question this.



Oh I've grasped it just fine - We only have the word of the OP that the officer ONLY pulled her over for not wearing a safety belt. We don't actually know that is the case do we? 

Even in states where safety belt laws are secondary, the officer can write just for safety belt violations and does not have to issue a citation for anything else. For all we know the OP may have been pulled over for a violation that had a more costly fine and the Officer was cutting her a break by only writing her a safety belt ticket. In states with a points system a safety belt violation is often not counted as a moving violation so it doesn't give you points or affect your insurance like a moving violation would.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Obviously wags - you are trying to paint her in the worse light possible.


----------



## Barnhouse (Feb 24, 2012)

Zilli said:


> If safety is an issue, and having to walk an extra ten of twenty feet means the difference between life and death, maybe that man should find a better time of day to take care of his business.
> 
> Anyway, like I said, I won't park in handicapped spots - most importantly because I will not make it difficult for someone else when my able-bodied self can walk (even though I am disabled, it hasn't affected my ability to get around), and secondly, because I don't want to get a ticket.
> 
> You, however, can park wherever you want. Just be prepared to pay the ticket if you park where you're not supposed to.


Even if there is no reason at all for anybody, (much less *TWELVE*) handicapped people to be there all at the same time?!??

No sorry, I don't want to live in a mindless society where brainpower is reduced to somebody in govenment doing all the thinking for you, no questions asked. You can keep that aaaalllll to yourself.


----------



## Zilli (Apr 1, 2012)

Barnhouse said:


> Even if there is no reason at all for anybody, (much less *TWELVE*) handicapped people to be there all at the same time?!??


LOL

I've never even been somewhere where there are twelve handicapped spots in one place. Four, maybe, perhaps as many as six, but _twelve_? :shrug:

I think you're just making up silly scenarios to make some kind of anti-government point. :lookout:


----------



## Cliff (Jun 30, 2007)

Barnhouse said:


> Even if there is no reason at all for anybody, (much less *TWELVE*) handicapped people to be there all at the same time?!??
> 
> No sorry, I don't want to live in a mindless society where brainpower is reduced to somebody in govenment doing all the thinking for you, no questions asked. You can keep that aaaalllll to yourself.


Then please share with us where you propose to live  Is there anyplace left these days that govt hasn't overrun everything?


----------



## silverseeds (Apr 28, 2012)

Cliff said:


> Then please share with us where you propose to live  Is there anyplace left these days that govt hasn't overrun everything?


Maybe we could build a floating island community out in international waters... :happy2:


----------



## Zilli (Apr 1, 2012)

silverseeds said:


> Maybe we could build a floating island community out in international waters... :happy2:


Yes.....but then the government would be needed to protect it from those roving pirates from government-less Somalia. :hair


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

CrownRanch said:


> I do pick and choose the laws I want to follow, I admit that. I sit on my own supreme court bench and declare certain laws to be wrong. Some I declare wrong, but still comply with due to financial penalty. Making such statements probably makes you think I am some kind of anarchist, and in the case of traffic law, would make you think I drive like I own the roads. But the reality is that by most measures, I am a peaceful, law-abiding citizen. Of the traffic laws, I happen to think stop signs, traffic lights, and speed limits in the absense of traffic are nonsense. Seatbelt law is just another nanny law. Anyone can rightly argue that neglecting to wear a seatbelt costs society financially as a whole. Very true. But they would need to keep applying their logic to every area of life. Make it illegal to eat twinkies, anyone?
> 
> .


This^


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

nostawmama said:


> I think this is true.
> 
> The people that show independent brain activity, that "know better" will be a group that survives because they trust themselves to know what is best for them. These people may live by a higher law (not necessarily religious) or moral code.
> 
> ...


And this^


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

AngieM2 said:


> Obviously wags - you are trying to paint her in the worse light possible.


And I could say the same about how you are trying to paint the officer. You are basing your bashing on facts not in evidence.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Wags 
I am going on the information given and the internet posted law of the land.

You are going on supposition and what if.


Why are you determined to try to make it more than it is? Do you love the government and the laws that much?
Are there laws in your areas that are not enforced much? Maybe like no one says anything about going over the speed limit by 5 mph.

I'm not trying to make the police guy bad, but I am trying to point out the laws of her land, and they were incorrectly applied according to the information given. Which is ALL we have to go on. 

Why are you determined to try to make it more than that?


----------



## Cliff (Jun 30, 2007)

I find this whole thing to be a ridiculously big deal over basically nothing. 

Societies have rules and laws. Yeah I'd rather be living on a deserted island somewhere without someone telling me what to do. But I don't. When I was younger I considered myself above some of the ridiculous laws we have. When I grew up a little I figured out that because of the penalties involved for ignoring them that it was best to shut up and comply. Now if there was a law forcing me to do something I really didn't believe in I would not just comply. But laws are a price we pay for living in a peaceful society. Yes govt is out of bounds, acting like a nanny, I agree with all that. But that isn't the real issue here.

The op was not mad because the officer made an illegal stop. She didn't even know it might have been illegal till someone here told her. She was having a full on temper tantrum that the officer did not "give her a break." C'mon, really? She'd broken the law many times before and gotten away with it. Hey, you take chances, sometimes you get burned. Take it like a grown up and move on with your life. Honestly her rant sounded like something that would come out of a spoiled teenager instead of the 40 something year old person she stated she is. I think that's what bothered people.


----------

