has now increased to $100.
When it was first determined that you could not drive without a seat belt and that you could be immorally fined for not wearing a seat belt, despite there being no reason in a free country for that action, it would cost you $25. That fine in NC is now $100 -- and yes, it's still a primary offense here, so you can be pulled over for doing nothing else wrong.
Why? Cash. The state now gets over $13 MILLION from seat belt fines.
I know the debate was over years and years ago, but it's still very wrong. There is no reason why I should not be able to drive without a seat belt. It harms no one else. The only reason, and now it's openly given as a reason for increasing the fine, is to increase revenue to the government.
How I wish there were a representative republic somewhere on this planet where I could live in freedom.
1
The law itself does not bother me nearly as much as the fact that the Federal Government is passing State laws. You see the Federal Government told the States that if they did not pass seat belt laws they would lose Federal transportation money. Eventually every State in the Union passed laws mandating seat belts. It is unconstitutional for the Federal government to tell State governments what laws to pass however they use funding as a way to try to get around this.
This includes one of your pet peeves, Ogre, education. Every school district in the country follows federal guidelines against constitutional mandate (education is a State power) for fear of losing federal funding.
Posted by: Mindflame at December 21, 2005 05:16 PM (kJZEb)
2
It all started when the NC Schools put 'Heather Has Two Mommies' and 'Daddy's New Roomate' on the bookshelves.
Posted by: patd95 at December 21, 2005 08:26 PM (zv3bS)
3
And you can't even buy a damn lottery ticket there either!
Posted by: Chelsea fc at December 21, 2005 08:39 PM (mfxz4)
4
it all started with federal income tax. bastages got greedy.
i hate 'em all. Especially my two spendthrifts posing as conservatives from PA - "buy my friends" spectre and "medacaid is great" santorum.
creeps.
(*)>
Posted by: birdwoman at December 22, 2005 01:04 AM (Sc2Wh)
5
Oh yes, you're dead on mindflame, and that's one of the biggest things I hate. The Republicans here in North Carolina in the Senate called it what it was a few years ago -- blatant extortion.
However, since they were Republicans, they were roundly ignored and the Democrats glady submitted to the extortion. It's so wrong (the extortion) that it truly is worthy of rebellion, if you ask me.
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 03:04 AM (dPyQ0)
6
It's a blatant infringement on ones' personal freedom when ANY govt; federal, state, city or even tiny hamlet enforces any kind of law that "protects" a citizen against his/her will, when the individual in question is not endangering anybody else. In DC, they have signs in the back seats of taxis that tell passengers they can be fined for not wearing a seat belt. That is a kind of micromanagement that should not occur in a free country.
Though, having had a motorcycle accident in Puerto Rico years ago that would've literally rendered me faceless had it not been for a visored helmet I was wearing, they wouldn't need to threaten me with a fine to make me wear one of those. :-)
Posted by: Seth at December 22, 2005 02:52 PM (1oHTa)
7
And those who don't want to protect themselves most certainly should not be required to!
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 04:04 PM (s2+Ck)
8
Surely you jest. Our fine, upstanding Legislature Critters wouldn't do something like this, would they?
Posted by: William Teach at December 22, 2005 11:04 PM (AkiXU)
9
I'm sorry, did you say "fine" and "upstanding" in the same sentence as "Legislature?"
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 11:06 PM (s2+Ck)
10
I'm sure the lottery will pay for it all. Sounds like Kerry.
Posted by: William Teach at December 23, 2005 02:31 AM (AkiXU)
11
It's for the children.
Send me your blank check now.
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 04:02 AM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
