Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Lodians face fines for not wearing seat belts

Police: Man attempts to steal beer from liquor store, gets shot

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 12:00 am | Updated: 5:44 am, Wed May 30, 2012.

Motorists who refuse to wear their seat belts — beware. The 2012 "Click It or Ticket" seat belt enforcement mobilization began last week to help save lives by cracking down on those who do not buckle up.

A press release by the Lodi Police Department states that it has joined with other state and local law enforcement officers to enforce seat belt laws and, hopefully, save lives.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

You must login to view the full content on this page.

Thank you for reading 20 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 20 free articles, or you can purchase a subscription at this time and continue to enjoy valuable local news and information. If you need help, please contact our office at 209-369-2761. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

More about

More about

More about

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

6 comments:

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 6:29 am on Thu, May 31, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    I think I'd trade a seat belt in order to avoid this one. Mr. Baumbach especially would be in for at least 15 years:

    "Thailand's lèse-majesté laws incriminate anyone who "defames, insults or threatens the king, the queen, the heir to the throne or the Regent," with those found guilty facing jail sentences of 3-15 years, and sometimes longer. Defaming the King is often deemed a threat to the country's national security."

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:46 pm on Wed, May 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Kevin stated…I think a possible (and would need debate before passing) option is in situations like seatbelts and wearing helmets for motorcyclists a decision by the individual to not follow a guideline would result in insurance non-responsibility. So a driver injured while not wearing a seatbelt would not be covered by insurance and OWES the taxpayer for any medical/repair bill they are not able to cover themselves.

    Interesting possibility Kevin. I like it… Also, if a person wears a seatbelt as mandated suffers an injury or death as a result of wearing a seatbelt ( if it could be proven) should equally not be covered by insurance. If the person has a 1,000,000 life policy and dies because he wore a seat belt, the insurance company will not pay but the tax payer will be responsible. All medical claims would also be the responsibility of the tax payer in that situation. My suggestion would hold if your suggestion is viable.
    Interesting possibility.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 4:34 pm on Wed, May 30, 2012.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1972

    I think a possible (and would need debate before passing) option is in situations like seatbelts and wearing helmets for motorcyclists a decision by the individual to not follow a guideline would result in insurance non-responsibility. So a driver injured while not wearing a seatbelt would not be covered by insurance and OWE the taxpayer for any medical/repair bill they are not able to cover themselves.

    Also any injury that would have been avoided by wearing a seatbelt/helmet would be a non-culpable injury and a driver (who did not violate a law themself) would not be legally liable.

    Personally I always have the seatbelt on and helmet securely in place. In case of accident I want everything I can in my favor.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:05 pm on Wed, May 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    I did not introduce a third party. You did.
    In addition, I do not ascribe to libertarian perspectives. I want the freedom to take responsibility for myself and be responsible for the consequence of my behavior. That is my perspective alone.

    I simply was making comment that If I wanted to engage in risky behavior or even think for myself to define what I consider risky behavior...that I should have the freedom to do it. When I am in Asia, I have that opportunity. When I am in USA, I do not.

    You also assumed that wearing a seat-belt will result in better outcomes in an accident... in many situations that is not true. Again, I should be able to decide. Such examples are:
    Side impact crashes, immersions in water where the victims cannot undo their belts in panic then drown, rollovers where people are crushed but might have been thrown free had they not worn seat-belts, cases of internal body damages caused by seat-belts in crashes that might have been avoided.

    I am not making commentary on the consequence of breaking laws. I am stating the law shouldn't exist to protect me if I do not want the protection. I enjoy that freedom of choice, you do not.

     
  • Henry J Kaiser posted at 2:33 pm on Wed, May 30, 2012.

    HenryJ Posts: 1

    Your Libertarian point of view does not past muster because your individual freedom must not be at the expense to third parties.

    Suppose I violate a D.M.V. Statute and collide with your car full of occupants. You have decided beforehand that you and your passengers shouldn't be belted in. This collision causes a door to pop open and a rear passenger is thrown clear and is fatally injured. At the same instant, another rear passenger is forcibly thrown forward and crushes to death the front passenger. The driver and one rear passenger are hospitalized with survivable injuries. D.A.s are eager these days to convert what used to be mere accidents into crimes. I could very well be charged with manslaughter and later face an enhanced civil lawsuit for the injured and wrongful deaths.

    But, on the other hand, if you and your passengers had followed the Government's dictates, that same accident very well might have been mitigated to an infraction citation and four seatbelt-bruised people with minimal injury claims.

    Don't forget that mitigation works in your favor, too. If you cause your own accident, you are a lot better off if your passengers are protected by seat belts, as you could face criminal action for serious or fatal injuries to unprotected passengers in an otherwise minor crash.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:58 am on Wed, May 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    I returned from Thailand and immediately noticed the stark contrast of freedoms. for example, I was not required to use a seat belt for 3 months while there. I had the freedom to choose to wear helmets on motorcycles and seatbelts on public transportation

    I had the freedom to take risk or take precaution and practice safety.

    Why have we evolved as a country where the government and authorities make decisions for us. Nanny state in motion. Freedom to decide for one's life is all but gone in USA... sad.

     
Readers Choice Awards 2014

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists