Constitutionality of Seat Belt Laws
05-21-2002, 01:46 PM
#11
Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 52
Originally Posted by 13BAce' date='May 21 2002, 06:34 PM
I believe that they were trying to get a law passed that taxed "unhealthy" foods. Don't forget that they're also trying to push through laws that will make our televisions obsolete by making HDTV the standard.
Let's face it, all of these fines and/or taxes generate revenue. There are so many "emergency" laws that were passed and never repealed because the government didn't want to give up the revenue. When people control your money they can control you.
Let's face it, all of these fines and/or taxes generate revenue. There are so many "emergency" laws that were passed and never repealed because the government didn't want to give up the revenue. When people control your money they can control you.
Of course, to answer my own question, I think when it comes to some things, they control more than we know they do...i.e. pot. It is my personal opinion that the government actually makes money on some illegal substances like pot. I mean, come on...With all the technological crap and intelligence they've got going on, do you not think they could pretty much abolish this "war on drugs"? I think they don't and it will always be a "problem" because the government controlls some of the imported drugs and probably does its own fair share of growing, and turns around and sells it on the street and banks on that. Plus, soccer moms will always approve the funding of anti-drug campaigns to keep their babies "safe"...More $$ the gov't. receives.
Sorry...that was a little off topic, but somewhat pertinent to the controlling of our $$/lives....
05-21-2002, 01:57 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 7,316
Originally Posted by Renesis' date='May 21 2002, 03:46 PM
[quote name='13BAce' date='May 21 2002, 06:34 PM']I believe that they were trying to get a law passed that taxed "unhealthy" foods. Don't forget that they're also trying to push through laws that will make our televisions obsolete by making HDTV the standard.
Let's face it, all of these fines and/or taxes generate revenue. There are so many "emergency" laws that were passed and never repealed because the government didn't want to give up the revenue. When people control your money they can control you.
Let's face it, all of these fines and/or taxes generate revenue. There are so many "emergency" laws that were passed and never repealed because the government didn't want to give up the revenue. When people control your money they can control you.
Of course, to answer my own question, I think when it comes to some things, they control more than we know they do...i.e. pot. It is my personal opinion that the government actually makes money on some illegal substances like pot. I mean, come on...With all the technological crap and intelligence they've got going on, do you not think they could pretty much abolish this "war on drugs"? I think they don't and it will always be a "problem" because the government controlls some of the imported drugs and probably does its own fair share of growing, and turns around and sells it on the street and banks on that. Plus, soccer moms will always approve the funding of anti-drug campaigns to keep their babies "safe"...More $$ the gov't. receives.
Sorry...that was a little off topic, but somewhat pertinent to the controlling of our $$/lives....[/quote]
I don't know if the laws are different now, but it used to be that pot-related offenses were punished with much stiffer penalties than cocaine, etc. They've made steroids SO illegal, but they're present in just about every sport in the world. That's why the Olympics' drug testing is such a scam. One of the top bodybuilders in the world is a cop. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if Arnold Palmer is wearing testosterone patches.
05-21-2002, 08:23 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 3,097
Nope, not off the topic yet! I've been bitching about this since they started playing the radio adds for it. I feel the Gov. has no right to tell us to wear our seatbelts, untill they ban everything else in the country that is bad for us, or might harm us. I just don't get it, I can't kill myself quickly by being ejected from a car, but I can kill myself slowly with cigarettes. WTF is up with that? Same with alcohol. How many people have been killed because they were hit by someone who was ejected from a car. NONE!
As far as them jacking up the prices of cigarettes, that really pissed me off, I'm a smoker. They said it was to deture underage people from smoking. Like that is gonna work! What do you think is a bigger problem with minors, drinking or smoking cigarettes? Of course, drinking. You don't see them jacking up the price of alcohol to stop underage drinking. The government makes SO much money off of cigarettes, they will never ban them.
If they did that it would kill the cotton and timber industry, because hemp can replace both those products. And, once again, the government makes tons of $$ off of those products, so they would never replace them.
Well I think my post is long enough, I'm going to go smoke a big fat bong load, then a cigarette.
Oh yeah, I always wear my seatbelt when I'm in a car, I just don't feel right without it.
As far as them jacking up the prices of cigarettes, that really pissed me off, I'm a smoker. They said it was to deture underage people from smoking. Like that is gonna work! What do you think is a bigger problem with minors, drinking or smoking cigarettes? Of course, drinking. You don't see them jacking up the price of alcohol to stop underage drinking. The government makes SO much money off of cigarettes, they will never ban them.
...i.e. pot. I mean, if the government made that legal, they would be banking on the money from taxes and such.
Well I think my post is long enough, I'm going to go smoke a big fat bong load, then a cigarette.
Oh yeah, I always wear my seatbelt when I'm in a car, I just don't feel right without it.
05-21-2002, 08:34 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 288
ok I didn't read it all cause too many posts 
but I say they should be able to make people, because everytime someone is hurt it comes out of all car owners pockets to pay for it. if there were no injurys or crashes then insurance would be free. but the more money spent on repairs and hospital bills means higher insurance for everyone else.
a few years ago they made a law in BC that you must wear a helmet while on a normal bike. (not motor one) that is a law would be be better fit to your fight. cause if you crash you pay...
a few years ago they made a law in BC that you must wear a helmet while on a normal bike. (not motor one) that is a law would be be better fit to your fight. cause if you crash you pay...
05-21-2002, 08:38 PM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 3,097
Originally Posted by Scott 89t2' date='May 21 2002, 05:34 PM
a few years ago they made a law in BC that you must wear a helmet while on a normal bike. (not motor one) that is a law would be be better fit to your fight. cause if you crash you pay...
05-21-2002, 08:41 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 7,316
Originally Posted by ILUVMY88CABRIO' date='May 21 2002, 10:38 PM
[quote name='Scott 89t2' date='May 21 2002, 05:34 PM']a few years ago they made a law in BC that you must wear a helmet while on a normal bike. (not motor one) that is a law would be be better fit to your fight. cause if you crash you pay...
Maybe we could put a 1 rotor motor on a bike.
05-21-2002, 09:34 PM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 790
Sounds like you are getting our wonderful OREGON laws up there. First was the SEATBELTS, the HELMETS (for Motorcycles & Bicycles). I totally agree that as long as you aren't endangering anyone... the State shouldn't tell you what to do.
This is coming from the insurance companies.
Next will be helmets in the car! Or passing a law not allowing you to sue if you are injuired.
Insurance companies are huge cash cows... Sure they cryed with the rest of us on 9/11... but it wasn't for the tragedy, if was for their losses.
**** Em!
This is coming from the insurance companies.
Next will be helmets in the car! Or passing a law not allowing you to sue if you are injuired.
Insurance companies are huge cash cows... Sure they cryed with the rest of us on 9/11... but it wasn't for the tragedy, if was for their losses.
**** Em!
05-21-2002, 10:14 PM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 558
I think it is kind of humorous, that you don't have to wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle, but everyone riding a bicycle is required to have a helmet on, hmm, lets see, 10 mph + no helmet = "booboo" 110 mph + no helmet = "red Jell-O" which one makes more sense to prevent?
then again, I won't throw my leg over without my full face flat track helmet on, another habit, like the seatbelts, mmm, can't wait till I get my 4 point harnesses, I look at it as a way for my car to hug me back
then again, I won't throw my leg over without my full face flat track helmet on, another habit, like the seatbelts, mmm, can't wait till I get my 4 point harnesses, I look at it as a way for my car to hug me back
05-22-2002, 01:10 AM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 184
I drove to Tacoma(Wa.) from my home today, which is about 15 miles. In that time I saw about 30 state police cars(thats about two to the mile.) When I got to Tacoma I read the Tacoma newspaper and found out why we have the new push for seatbelts, more state police on the road and more speed traps. It seems that Chairman Locke(our governer here in washington),has just hired a new head of the state police.
The new top cop states that he is going to clean the roads of this state up(this jerk is from New Orleans of all places.) He has so many state police cars out that he is having to get the police office types(who haven't been on patrol in years!), to man cars. This probible makes them real happy and they take it out on the motoring public.
His last great idea was that he had a cop for every two miles of I-5 from the Canadian border to Oregon.(just makes you want to vote for Chairman Locke again next election!) The first thing Locke did after being elected governor was to go to China(at our expense!), we would have been better off if he would have stayed there!
On the post about pot and other drugs. If the DEA and the government stops or makes drugs legal, there would be no more DEA, many government attornys would be out of work and they would have to stop building prisons! Why a whole government growth industry would be out of work. I'm 57 years old and can remember when some of the drugs you can now be locked away for were legal. Because I work in the transportation industry, I have to pee in a bottle anytime the government says so, and what I do on my own time(not at work) is regulated by the government. When I started in the industry there was no pee test and there was no problem. Now there is a whole growth industry built around this one subject. I firmly believe in seat belts, motorcycle helmets and people shouldn't fly airplanes or pilot ships while smoking pot, but what ever happened to "Life , Liberty and the Pursuit of Happyness."
You can lay a lot of the blame on the big insurance companies for a lot of our laws. (big money given to congressmen doesn't talk, it screams.) Someday they will pass so many laws that there will be no more black and white, just different shades of gray!
The new top cop states that he is going to clean the roads of this state up(this jerk is from New Orleans of all places.) He has so many state police cars out that he is having to get the police office types(who haven't been on patrol in years!), to man cars. This probible makes them real happy and they take it out on the motoring public.
His last great idea was that he had a cop for every two miles of I-5 from the Canadian border to Oregon.(just makes you want to vote for Chairman Locke again next election!) The first thing Locke did after being elected governor was to go to China(at our expense!), we would have been better off if he would have stayed there!
On the post about pot and other drugs. If the DEA and the government stops or makes drugs legal, there would be no more DEA, many government attornys would be out of work and they would have to stop building prisons! Why a whole government growth industry would be out of work. I'm 57 years old and can remember when some of the drugs you can now be locked away for were legal. Because I work in the transportation industry, I have to pee in a bottle anytime the government says so, and what I do on my own time(not at work) is regulated by the government. When I started in the industry there was no pee test and there was no problem. Now there is a whole growth industry built around this one subject. I firmly believe in seat belts, motorcycle helmets and people shouldn't fly airplanes or pilot ships while smoking pot, but what ever happened to "Life , Liberty and the Pursuit of Happyness."
You can lay a lot of the blame on the big insurance companies for a lot of our laws. (big money given to congressmen doesn't talk, it screams.) Someday they will pass so many laws that there will be no more black and white, just different shades of gray!
05-22-2002, 08:57 AM
#20
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Originally Posted by Scott 89t2' date='May 21 2002, 05:34 PM
a few years ago they made a law in BC that you must wear a helmet while on a normal bike. (not motor one) that is a law would be be better fit to your fight. cause if you crash you pay...