Seat Belt Exemptions

[92ThoStro]

I wear my seat belt, but I think its ridiulous that I am required to. It's no one elses business if I want to put my face through the windshield. You always here is for your safety, and it is, but my safety is not anyone elses concern. Just another tax.

Well as long as you mop up your bloody mess when you are done dying.

 

[CountryBoy19]

You weren't on the farm. As far as I know that farm truck exemption on the roads was done away with a few years ago. That's why my truck has the cheaper car plates on it, there's no advantage.

Just playing devil's advocate here.

What is the definition of "on the farm"? I can assume from your response that "on the farm" means "not on the road". But if it's "not on the road" then it doesn't fall under the perview of the seat-belt law anyways. So we either have "on the farm" that doesn't need a written exemption because it's private property not a public roadway, or we have "on the roadway" with does fall under the seat-belt law of which there is an exemption written into it. So why write the exemption anyways if there is no way it can ever apply to any possible scenario? Obviously that exemption was written for a reason, so what is the reason? I think the critical thing here is the definition of "on the farm" and I think it's very ambiguous but the only possible definition that leaves the exemption valid is to have "on the farm" mean "on a public roadway near the farm" or "on a public roadway travelling between farms" or "on a public roadway traveling from farm to a place where farm business will be conducted"

Just to give a small example of a "similar" scenario. Technically, according to the law in IN to have a semi with farm plates on it you do not need a CDL to drive it. But in order to drive that semi on the roadway you have to be on farm related business that has no other commercial purpose. That means you cannot do any type of hired business with farm plates. You cannot haul the neighbors corn for him whether paid or unpaid. You must be hauling commodities that YOU own and you must be traveling from the farm to a place where you will conduct farm business. For the purposes of farm plates on the semi and the CDL exemption hauling farm commodities that you own to the local elevator is considered "operating on the farm". But the instant you vary from that either by destination or purpose of business or ownership of the commodities you're hauling, you are no longer exempt from the CDL requirements and must have commercial plates on the semi.

If "on the farm" is defined for the seat-belt law the same way as it is for the CDL licensing and plating requirements for farm semi's, then trucks with farm plates, on farm business are exempt from the seat-belt law.

 

[bwframe]

What is the fine for a seat belt violation? Are points added to your license?

 

[THard6]

What is the fine for a seat belt violation? Are points added to your license?

$25 and..
Indiana BMV Point System - Guide to IN BMV Points & Suspensions at DMV.org: The DMV Made Simple

 

[Whosyer]

Countryboy19 pretty much nailed it, as to my thought process. ( be it right or wrong) If my vehicle never leaves " the farm", I would not need a seat belt anyway. Obviously, there was some reason to put an exemption in the IC. I can't see where driving on private property would be it. Seems like "a farm truck being used on the farm", was meant to read " a farm truck being used for the farm". Maybe the intent was to keep city folks from spending the extra money on farm plates, so they could be exempt while in their truck.

 

[reesez]

So please explain the 14 exemptions. Or why motorcycles are allowed on the road at all.

I feel this a very good argument. Right now you do not have to wear a helmet in Indiana. Motorcycles also do not have seat belts. So please tell me why is it law for a car/truck?

Or school busses ?

I agree. I can count the injuries I sustained on a school bus as a child on two hands. I can count the injuries sustained in accidents alone in a car/truck in the past 25 years on one.

There are a couple of problems with this. First, in the event of a collision, the only reason the .gov entities are responsible for clean-up is one of efficiency. Second, it is the collision that needs cleaned-up. And the collision is an occurrence than happens independent of the wearing of a seatbelt. So, there is still clean-up required even if all parties were wearing a seat belt.

Third, there is no moral or legal obligation for the .gov entity to be responsible for medical treatment/first aid care in the event of a collision on the roadways. It has become a societal standard, but aside from that, can you offer a reason why it needs to be that way? Furthermore, can you offer a reason why the taxpayers needs to be responsible for footing the bill? Debtors used to be responsible for paying for their keep (which I found incredibly ironic). Why shouldn't citizens be responsible for their usage of emergency response services?

And on the issue that driving is a privilege, what makes it so?

Can I get an AMEN.

It is funny most of us want the government to stay out of our rights, but we are okay with a seatbelt law. It is MY choice to wear it. Cool, great, thanks auto companies for making me safer. MY choice to use it. Driving is as much a privilege as owning a firearm. If cars were around back when the founders signed the Constitution, don't you think that would have been a right? To freely travel any way you wanted, when, how, and where? We can all agree our rights are not given to us by the Constitution, but are inalienable. So the right to free travel should be widely understood as one. I do not wear a seatbelt. It is my money and my choice. Maybe if I was skinnier I would. Probably not though. There is no need to make me wear it, with the exception to children under 18. Auto insurance is a no brainer, and that is probably where the law came from, lobbyists who saw not having a seatbelt law as a liability. And there are cases where if a someone was not wearing their seatbelt and it was proven such in an accident investigation, the insurance company denied the claim. That is how I feel about it. You can flame as much as you want, I still will feel this way.

 

[infiremedic07]

One point here.....the vast number of people that I have had to risk my life driving lights and sirens from a wreck to get to a trauma center have been non belted. Everyone expects us to come and save them when the wreck occurs but fail to understand how dangerous it is to drive emergently. Going to the wreck you have two sets of eyes watching traffic. Going to the trauma center you have just the driver. So your not wearing seatbelts puts lives in danger. Or we could just pass a law that says seatbelts are your choice, don't wear one and you don't get a fast ride to the hospital to save your life.
Also patients who survive massive head trauma usually far exceed what insurances will cover and then it becomes Medicaid/disability deal. And no-one will allow us to just stop Caring for people when the insurance runs out.
As for helmet laws, I don't get why we don't have them for all the same reasons.
Sorry I know that was more than one point.

 

[ashby koss]

farm truck being used on a farm

That thar is the sticker that no one notices. Most police will let it slide, especially in more rural areas. BUT there is always that 1 guy that tears apart the laws word by word to go "by the book"...

 

[Whosyer]

Even if we had helmet laws, the risk of injury on a motorcycle , is greater than that of someone in a car. ( even if the person in the car is not wearing a belt ) So, anyone who rides a motorcycle should have the " no fast ride to hospital" waiver too ? I saw a semi drive through the side of a motorhome once. I wonder how the exempted folks in the living area turned out? Or the exempted person in the bunk of the semi ?

 

[steve666]

I wear my seat belt, but I think its ridiulous that I am required to. It's no one elses business if I want to put my face through the windshield. You always here is for your safety, and it is, but my safety is not anyone elses concern. Just another tax.

I have worn my seat belt since long before they came along and made it a law, however it certainly frosts my flakes that they make it mandatory as a matter of "public safety". If they were concerned about public safety they would do something about the idiots on their phones while driving, they are a danger to others, not just themselves.

 

[Brandon]

Guess I should paint my truck yellow, and put 65 kids in the back.

Good luck. lol

Or school busses ?

Do some research please. School buses are among the safest way to transport students. Also if a bus is on fire and the kids are buckled, the driver would only have 2 minutes to get all of those kids out of the bus. So now your seat belt just caused your kid to die from inhaling smoke. Or the kid next to yours will use it as a weapon to beat your kid with.

I agree. I can count the injuries I sustained on a school bus as a child on two hands.

I'm sorry you were injured on a bus, but please look at the total number of students that ride a bus daily across America and do not get injured. Seat belts on a school bus is a bad idea.

 

[88GT]

Do some research please. School buses are among the safest way to transport students. Also if a bus is on fire and the kids are buckled, the driver would only have 2 minutes to get all of those kids out of the bus. So now your seat belt just caused your kid to die from inhaling smoke. Or the kid next to yours will use it as a weapon to beat your kid with.




I'm sorry you were injured on a bus, but please look at the total number of students that ride a bus daily across America and do not get injured. Seat belts on a school bus is a bad idea.

Relative to the total number of driver-hours for passenger cars and truck, I bet it's not much different.

 

[CountryBoy19]

That thar is the sticker that no one notices. Most police will let it slide, especially in more rural areas. BUT there is always that 1 guy that tears apart the laws word by word to go "by the book"...

But what is the definition of "on a farm"?

Certainly it doesn't literally mean "on a farm" otherwise the exemption wouldn't even be necessary because "on a farm" implies "off the public roadway" in which case the seat-belt law doesn't apply anyways. While it may be remotely possible the exemption was put there as a dead, "feel-good" measure, I doubt it. There was certainly a reason for having it there... and the only way that exemption can possibly be applied is if there are cases of where "on a farm" can also coincide with cases of "on a public roadway".

 

[reesez]

I'm sorry you were injured on a bus, but please look at the total number of students that ride a bus daily across America and do not get injured. Seat belts on a school bus is a bad idea.

I believe it is personal opinion. And I respect that. Just know 17,000 are injured every year although less than 500 deaths. That is 26 million students on 480,000 buses. Out of 300 million vehicles, 2.9 million people "injured"(no doubt there is some insurance fraud there) and 41,000 deaths. Just saying.

I believe out of 300 million people or so in the US, less than 3 million are injured in wrecks? 26 million students and 17,000 injured? HMMMMM

 

[BE Mike]

All the safety features, especially those mandated by the government, should be options, i.e. safety glass, air bags, padded dashes, automatic braking systems, fire resistant interiors, bumpers, etc.

 

[Brandon]

I believe out of 300 million people or so in the US, less than 3 million are injured in wrecks? 26 million students and 17,000 injured? HMMMMM

Do you have a link for these numbers?


http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811396.pdf

I will not drive a school bus that requires 50+ students to wear a seat belt and have just myself as the only adult on board.

 

[88GT]

Do you have a link for these numbers?


http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811396.pdf

I will not drive a school bus that requires 50+ students to wear a seat belt and have just myself as the only adult on board.

I think you need to elaborate on this. We have been bombarded with PSAs telling us that seat belts make us safer. If the science and the logic behind it is sound, then what makes school buses different?

 

[reesez]

Do you have a link for these numbers?


http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811396.pdf

I will not drive a school bus that requires 50+ students to wear a seat belt and have just myself as the only adult on board.

I would have to relook it up, but yes. They were studies done and I used that tool called Google.

I think you need to elaborate on this. We have been bombarded with PSAs telling us that seat belts make us safer. If the science and the logic behind it is sound, then what makes school buses different?

Yes I would love to know what makes a school bus so different.

 

[reesez]

School bus injuries higher than thought - Health - Children's health | NBC News
SCHOOL BUS FATALITIES AND INJURIES
Related Statistics
http://www.mcaleerlaw.com/CM/TruckingandCommercialVehicleAccidents/School-Bus-Crash-Statistics.asp
Motor Vehicle Accidents and Fatalities - The 2012 Statistical Abstract - U.S. Census Bureau
How Many Driving Accidents Occur Each Year? | USA Coverage
Happy reading.

 

[reesez]

Double post, oops.