Well it looks like another state is going down the path of flat out lying to its citizens and going back on their word about "never making seat belt usage a primary offense".  As in several other states when they first pass a mandatory seat belt usage law they introduce it as a "secondary offense" meaning an officer can't pull you over for that reason alone.  They state that they will never make it a primary offense.  Since the sheep see little harm in a law the police can't really get you for they let it pass.  Then with in a couple years the legislators decide that they could make more money by making it a primary offense and the officers realize it gives them another tool to go on fishing expeditions, they go back on their word, and stick it to the citizens.  Making seat belt usage a primary offense has nothing to do with savings lives.  Seat belt usage has been increasing every year and the last stat that I saw was somewhere in the mid 70% percent range.

Despite my opposition to making it a primary offense I always wear my seatbelt and make anyone riding with me wear their seat belt.  I've seen too many accidents and had too many family members in accidents who walked away because they had seat belts on to not wear one.  But I am strongly opposed to making it a primary offense because if someone doesn't want to wear it that should be their choice and because it gives the police another "tool" to harass drivers.  The other month there were some posts here about officers using night vision to spy into peoples cars to see if they were wearing seatbelts and those who weren't were given tickets.  That type of tactic is clearly designed for one purpose...increasing revenue.

So if you are in Kentucky and don't want seat belt usage to become a primary offense you need to contact your state legislators ASAP as it sounds like this has a lot of support.

revenue generation disguised as "saving the people from themselves"

Impossible.    They promised they'd never do that.

Quoted: Well it looks like another state is going down the path of flat out lying to its citizens and going back on their word about "never making seat belt usage a primary offense".  As in several other states when they first pass a mandatory seat belt usage law they introduce it as a "secondary offense" meaning an officer can't pull you over for that reason alone.  They state that they will never make it a primary offense.  Since the sheep see little harm in a law the police can't really get you for they let it pass.  Then with in a couple years the legislators decide that they could make more money by making it a primary offense and the officers realize it gives them another tool to go on fishing expeditions, they go back on their word, and stick it to the citizens.  Making seat belt usage a primary offense has nothing to do with savings lives.  Seat belt usage has been increasing every year and the last stat that I saw was somewhere in the mid 70% percent range. Despite my opposition to making it a primary offense I always wear my seatbelt and make anyone riding with me wear their seat belt.  I've seen too many accidents and had too many family members in accidents who walked away because they had seat belts on to not wear one.  But I am strongly opposed to making it a primary offense because if someone doesn't want to wear it that should be their choice and because it gives the police another "tool" to harass drivers.  The other month there were some posts here about officers using night vision to spy into peoples cars to see if they were wearing seatbelts and those who weren't were given tickets.  That type of tactic is clearly designed for one purpose...increasing revenue. So if you are in Kentucky and don't want seat belt usage to become a primary offense you need to contact your state legislators ASAP as it sounds like this has a lot of support.

If they would give us a 75 MPH pseed limit on the interstates in exchange, I would go for it.

Quoted: If they would give us ...

That's where you made your first mistake.

They promised the same thing here in Maryland

Last year the state police were using borrowed .mil night vision to observe the seatbelt status of people driving up 355 in Rockville MD.

Our Governor put a stop to that police action ASAP

"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against . . . We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

Quoted: If they would give us a 75 MPH pseed limit on the interstates in exchange, I would go for it.

I did find a news article that said they might raise the speed limit to 70mph to get more supporters.  That would make it a little bit better and 75mph would make it a lot better.

The lesson that everyone here needs to be reminded of is getting our agenda in place in small steps.  A lot of the "no compromise" people here want to wait until they get the perfect law before the support it.  But here is one more example why that doesn't work, if the legislators had tried to force a primary offense seat belt law they would have had lots of opposition and would still be fighting to get a seat belt law passed today.  But they "compromised" and got a "weak and ineffective" law passed only to come back a couple years later to add the teeth.  Gun owners need to do the same thing.  Work to pass every pro-gun law you can even if it seems "weak and ineffective"  then come back and add the teeth to it.

Quoted: revenue generation disguised as "saving the people from themselves"

How dare you insult the fine revenue collectors dedicated police officers of this site!!!!!

They will be the first to tell you that not wearing your seat belt is the reason young people get cancer, old people die alone, and kittens fall into drainage sewers. That's right, pal, we ALL pay for it when you make the decision to take care of your body as you see fit.

You bastard.

Quoted: Quoted: revenue generation disguised as "saving the people from themselves" How dare you insult the fine revenue collectors dedicated police officers of this site!!!!! They will be the first to tell you that not wearing your seat belt is the reason young people get cancer, old people die alone, and kittens fall into drainage sewers. That's right, pal, we ALL pay for it when you make the decision to take care of your body as you see fit. You bastard.

We DO all pay for it when some dumbass doesn't buckle up, in increased auto and medical insurance premiums.  That said, I'm all for letting people not wear seatbelts/motorcycle helmets as long as EMS gets to ignore their dumb asses and/or recycle the organs.

Welcome to the fucking club.  

Quoted: We DO all pay for it when some dumbass doesn't buckle up, in increased auto and medical insurance premiums.  That said, I'm all for letting people not wear seatbelts/motorcycle helmets as long as EMS gets to ignore their dumb asses and/or recycle the organs.

That's an EXTREMELY dangerous socialist viewpoint that could be used to curtail almost any liberty.  Gun bans, my pilot's license revoked, outlaw rock climbing, make eating greasy foods illegal.....I can go on and on.

Where do you draw the line?  Arguably, banning me from eating Big Macs would save more "community dollars" than a seatbelt law, so what are you waiting for?  Do tell, which birth defects justify an enforced abortion because it would just cost too much money, not to mention the other burdens on "society"?

I cannot fucking believe such a viewpoint would be expressed on this board - do you not see how gun owners are unfairly persecuted?  Are you not aware of all the bullshit restrictions we deal with because of beliefs that have NOTHING to do with reality, and have NO facts to back them up?

Even if such practices were acceptable, are you so naive to think that government should be trusted with the judgment of what constitutes a "good" or "bad" activity or inanimate object?

Incredible.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: revenue generation disguised as "saving the people from themselves" How dare you insult the fine revenue collectors dedicated police officers of this site!!!!! They will be the first to tell you that not wearing your seat belt is the reason young people get cancer, old people die alone, and kittens fall into drainage sewers. That's right, pal, we ALL pay for it when you make the decision to take care of your body as you see fit. You bastard. I wasn't aware we had Police Officers who pass laws.

I wasn't aware I said they did. Nope, reading through my post, I see I did no such thing.

However, it's interesting to note that police officers do ENFORCE the laws that idiots at the state capitals pass, and when those laws are unjust, shitty, petty or unreasonable, they often defend enforcement of those laws with "It's the law", "It's my duty", or worse use the same tired and lefty justification for why we should comply with these shitty laws. Many of the police officers on this site have done exactly that. And, it's those LEO's that I am ridiculing.

I considered becoming a police officer - very seriously, but what made me go another route was the beginnings of these very types of laws, and knowing that I would be asked to hand out exhorbitant tickets to people for violations that I consider complete money-making chickenshit. I would not sleep at night, knowing I was fleecing people, and worse telling them by violation that the state knows better than they how to take care of themselves.

Some officers, even here on ARFcom, have no problem whatsoever with this duty. They disgust me.

[/soapbox]