Robusto
Well-Known Fanatic
Even Mr Haney (Green Acres) wore a seat belt.
http://www.imcdb.org/i234345.jpg
Sheriffs taking a stand
- Thread starter shootingbuff
- Start date
http://www.imcdb.org/i234345.jpg
I drive that old truck intentionally every time the chance affords so I don't have to. Call me crazy but its a personal liberty thing, mandating I have to do something to keep myself safe is antithetical to liberty. I also keep a copy of the law in the dash with the insurance for all the fine people who want to fine me for my own good for not wearing the seatbelt.
poopgiggle
B Class Nobody
You willingly make it more likely that you'll be seriously injured in a car crash because Personal Liberty?
threegungeezer
Well-Known Fanatic
And requiring someone else to pay for the additional care that you will require when involved in an accident. Where is their liberty?
andrsnsm
Well-Known Fanatic
jeffsoward
Founding Member
I don't believe there is any info regarding driving in the bill of rights. Driving is a privilege on public roads. If someone wants to drive without a seatbelt, they can pull back and forth in their driveway to their hearts delight, but this sounds like another issue of bucking authority just to say you did.
I don't always wear my safety belt, but I'm ready to pay the fine, or consequences, of my actions without hiding behind a grandfather clause.
ease up on the rhetoric and enjoy life, liberty and safety.
LOL!!!!! this bugged you for over an hour before you came back & said something.
First of all like everyone else I pay for my auto insurance. So I am the one bearing the costs if something happens to me. Secondly if you hit me and you are at fault then you should pay. Lastly Have any of you read the seatbelt law ? I am not required to wear a seatbelt in that vehicle because of the year model a 1967 Chevrolet pickup (they are exempted) , amazing how the law works. I am in full compliance not wearing a seatbelt in the vehicle while driving.
The last I will say on the matter is this. If an individual chooses to wear a seatbelt because they want to and are concerned for their safety , then that is fine you voluntarily made the choice. Being mandated to do the same thing is violating your rights. When I drive a newer vehicle I do wear one but when I drive my old truck I am exempt is that hard concept for people to grasp ?
For everyone's education here is the law. Amazing how I am being called stupid for obeying the law .
By law in Oklahoma back seat passenger's DO NOT have to wear a seat belt. Nor do people driving trucks, tractor-trucks, recreational vehicles and motor cycles. If your vehicle was made before 1967 you do not have to wear one either. Or if your van, pickup , or SUV was made before 1971.
Also drivers of farm tagged vehicles are not required to use seat belts.
You can also get exemptions for medical conditions such as physical disabilities ....
Don't take my word for it , here it is directly from the the Oklahoma Highway Office.
http://ok.gov/ohso/documents/Safety%20Belt%20Law%20NFO.pdf
The last I will say on the matter is this. If an individual chooses to wear a seatbelt because they want to and are concerned for their safety , then that is fine you voluntarily made the choice. Being mandated to do the same thing is violating your rights. When I drive a newer vehicle I do wear one but when I drive my old truck I am exempt is that hard concept for people to grasp ?
For everyone's education here is the law. Amazing how I am being called stupid for obeying the law .
By law in Oklahoma back seat passenger's DO NOT have to wear a seat belt. Nor do people driving trucks, tractor-trucks, recreational vehicles and motor cycles. If your vehicle was made before 1967 you do not have to wear one either. Or if your van, pickup , or SUV was made before 1971.
Also drivers of farm tagged vehicles are not required to use seat belts.
You can also get exemptions for medical conditions such as physical disabilities ....
Don't take my word for it , here it is directly from the the Oklahoma Highway Office.
http://ok.gov/ohso/documents/Safety%20Belt%20Law%20NFO.pdf
Spiff
Semi-Pro
Easy killer, you're gonna pop an o-ring.
andrsnsm
Well-Known Fanatic
Not calling anybody stupid but I do think it is stupid to put you and/or your family at risk of physical, emotional, and financial harm because of something as simple as wearing a seat belt. Even though the law allows it in this case, that does not make it the right thing to do.
Sam Anderson
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sam Anderson
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
poopgiggle
B Class Nobody
dennishoddy
Moderator
Wearing seat belts, or helmets on Motorcycles are not going to guarantee your safety.
The stats do improve your chances though.
The stats do improve your chances though.
Why do you go to the range? Why do you train? It is to be prepared, or is it because you are looking for a confrontation? The logic is the same. This guy obviously was prepared for the contact. With OC becoming the law of the land later this year, contacts with police will happen. When it does, do you want to be prepared, assume it won't happen to you, or just go with the flow and trust that they have your best interest in mind?
Again, I stand behind my statement of "I doubt it"
Generally, any "he said-he said" conversation will lean in favor of the LE. Having a camera, or a digital recorder is the same as having a BUG. Police have dash cams, do you think they are looking for a confrontation, or want to be protected if they encounter one?
shootingbuff
Well-Known Fanatic
Now that's funny. I don't care who you are. Though wrong, but sooo funny.[
So its not acceptable to record a contact with the police for your own protection, but its ok for the police to record that same contact so they have a record of what went on ? Interesting perspective.
shootingbuff
Well-Known Fanatic
Maube I read the msgs to fast but it seems that it is not said a citizen shouldn't cover their backside, just perception of some leans towards a forced encounter.
Could be wrong.
I would try and educate without being a pecker - that is how I viewed the video.
AFA no seat belt: Man that is those folks option. Don't care as long as it does not distract from folks needing medical attention - especially kids. If so, then it would irk me; or harm someone from your body flying around inside or out of the vehicle. In other words as long as it is your choice and no one else gets hurt - I care less. Start taking treatment from others especially kids or harming others then your choice was wrong though it is your choice.
Now how about the good vs bad sheriffs becasue if I have to read a lame thread I would rather it be 1911 vs Glock, 9x19 vs 45ACP, or IDPA vs USPSA :girlwacko: :roulette:
Could be wrong.
I would try and educate without being a pecker - that is how I viewed the video.
AFA no seat belt: Man that is those folks option. Don't care as long as it does not distract from folks needing medical attention - especially kids. If so, then it would irk me; or harm someone from your body flying around inside or out of the vehicle. In other words as long as it is your choice and no one else gets hurt - I care less. Start taking treatment from others especially kids or harming others then your choice was wrong though it is your choice.
Now how about the good vs bad sheriffs becasue if I have to read a lame thread I would rather it be 1911 vs Glock, 9x19 vs 45ACP, or IDPA vs USPSA :girlwacko: :roulette:
dennishoddy
Moderator
As I understand it, some states have laws against the public videoing a Law Enforcement interaction.
I'm not sure about Oklahoma.
