College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

New seat belt law affects USF

Published: Monday, June 29, 2009

Updated: Monday, June 29, 2009 10:06

Seat belt

ORACLE ILLUSTRATION/MIKE WILSON

If every state enforced seat belt violations as a primary-offense, it would save about 1,000 lives each year, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

University Police (UP) will be able to pull over drivers for not wearing their seat belt — without having to observe any other violation — starting Tuesday.

The Dori Slosberg and Katie Marchetti Safety Belt Law, signed by Gov. Charlie Crist on May 6, allows seat belt violations to be primary offenses.

Prior to the bill, the law allowed officers to cite drivers only if the motorists had been stopped for another violation, such as speeding.

According to the bill, the provision will be a non-moving violation and violators will be subject to a $30 fine. With additional fees and court costs, the total for breaking the law could be anywhere from $68.50 to $89.50.

“We are concerned about keeping our public safe,” said UP spokeswoman Meg Ross. “This is another tool to help keep our students safe.”

The new law was named after the daughter of Florida Representative Irv Slosberg and a Durant High School student, whose families have pushed for stricter seat belt legislation since the deaths of their children in automobile accidents.

Edward Mierzejewski, who directs the USF Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR), said that before legislators passed the law, Florida had not conformed to federal government encouragement to have a primary seat belt law.

Because of this, the state had given up millions of dollars in federal highway money, he said.

According to the U.S.  Department of Transportation, the seat belt law makes Florida eligible to receive a $35.5-million grant from a federal safety belt incentive program.

Mierzejewski said the law was not passed previously because lawmakers and rural leaders thought the tougher seat belt policy was an intrusion of government.

Daniel Bergin, a senior electrical engineering major, said he agrees that the ruling is an infringement of government.

He said the seat belt law infringes on personal rights and is an example of the state using its power to control people’s lives.

“I think if someone wants to look out for their own safety, they will put on a seat belt,” Bergin said. “They don’t need someone to breathe down their back and tell them to do it or they’re going to get a fine. I see how it has some safety applications, but I don’t think the police need to be getting into personal safety matters.”

However, Mierzejewski said he wonders how people can argue against having a seat belt law. He said he picks up a newspaper every day and sees how the people who survive car accidents are the ones who are wearing their seat belts.

“I can’t imagine getting into a car and not putting my seat belt on,” Mierzejewski said. “It just blows me away that it takes a law to get people to do that.”

Anna-Maria Deloucas, a junior psychology major, said her parents encouraged her to wear a seat belt so often that she puts it on unconsciously every time she gets in a car.

“At this point, I feel uncomfortable not wearing it,” she said.

Additional statute changes include exemptions for vehicles not required to be equipped with seat belts and deletion of the exemption for pickup truck passengers.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, if every state with a secondary seat belt law upgraded to primary-level enforcement, states could save about 1,000 lives and more than $4 billion each year.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

11 comments

Joel
Sat Jul 11 2009 16:06
Freedom, Hmmmm....... yet I hear no one complaining about Obama taking over private businesses and soon telling you what kind of car your going to be allowed to have.
Your name
Sat Jul 11 2009 11:12
Another wonderful example of the government saving me from myself. It is a personal decision that does not affect the safety or rights of others. Accordingly, the government has no right to dictate that decision.

I wont argue whether or not it is smart to wear a seat belt, its irrelevant. The decision has no bearing on the safety or rights of others. This is something you should be concerned about folks.

For the folks who argue the finances of this, huh? Maybe we should deny overweight people 911 services when they have a heart attack - clearly they have made irresponsible health decisions. Can't have my tax dollars supporting that. Hell, driving in and of itself is very dangerous. We really shouldn't treat any drivers - they can make the more responsible decision to walk.

Jon Kingsbury
Thu Jul 9 2009 14:12
I was on a roadtrip form oklahoma to minnesota and as I was passing through iowa i got kind of lost. I ended up on a road that i had no clue where it would make me end up. I ende up getting pulled over for not wearing my seatbelt and the fine was 150$ In order to fight this i would of had to drive from minnesota back to iowa a month later. Wearing your seatbelt is a good idea all the time. But the principal of freedom is way more important than protecting the people who choose not to wear one.

Those who give up freedom for temporary saety desrve neither safety nor freedom. - Benjamin Franklin

Your name
Wed Jul 8 2009 18:41
Shepard,
Who do you think pays the hospital bills for the people who don't have insurance? TAXPAYERS. And not everyone had car insurance, yes they do get their licenses suspended if they are caught without it but, not everyone without insurance gets caught.... So in the long run, the seatbelt law will save us all money - more money to offset hospital costs or less people in the hospitals to create bills? Look at the bigger picture, is it so bad to put your seat belt on? Your still sitting in the seat either way.. and im sure your family or friends would rather you not become a permanent piece of I-75
Your name
Tue Jul 7 2009 09:44
clearly, you have missed the point.
Your name
Fri Jul 3 2009 15:51
Well that's a nice little quote about liberty - but how about this.
If you don't like to wear your seat belt then walk or bike ride. Seriously if you CHOOSE to drive a car, then a condition of that is to wear a seat belt. Obviously seat belts save lives and you are stupid to not wear one.
shepard
Wed Jul 1 2009 13:51
Too all people who think they have the right to tell me what to do in my own car:

So someone who rides a motorcycle with a helmet is somehow more responsible than someone who rides in a car without a seatbelt. Or, should we outlaw motorcycles too? Good idea, also fatty foods, and smoking, and fireworks, and video games, and violent movies, and pornography, political satire, and free thought...

OR we could all try minding our own business and not telling people how to live their lives.

If you get in a crash you have to PAY your own medical bills, thats why we have insurance.

"Florida's minimum coverage is $10,000 personal injury protection (PIP) and $10,000 property damage liability (PDL) as long as you have a valid Florida tag"

If you don't have insurance its ILLEGAL for you to drive.

This law serves no purpose except another invasion of privacy, another occurrence of the government in their infinite wisdom dictating your decisions for you. And the worst part of all is, we have forgotten that we are supposed to be upset about it. We no longer have even the desire to pursue freedom, we are so content to be protected from ourselves.

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
-Samuel Adams

julio
Wed Jul 1 2009 10:19
who cares if you wear a seat belt or not. it is a good idea to wear a seat belt but it should be a choice. this is just a way to get money from drivers.
James
Tue Jun 30 2009 20:51
The fine is $101.00
Your name
Mon Jun 29 2009 22:49
to all the people who think wearing a seat belt is their choice:

well maybe then when you get in an accident and die, the police should just call your family to scrape you off the highway because no police officer/paramedic/firefighter etc should waste their time and tax payer's money because you were too stupid to wear a seat belt.

Same goes for motorcyclist who don't want to wear helmets. It's like they don't want LEOs to get invovled in their choices yet when they get in an accident they need the police to come save them.
I really think you should sign something on your driver's license that says you CHOOSE not to wear a seatbelt/helmet and your family can come pick up your body.
Police should only help those that take reasonable precautions when driving.

Your name
Mon Jun 29 2009 17:58
Seat Belts are a quick and easy way to possibly save your life. This in combination of not speeding, obeying traffic rules and not drinking and driving keep the roads safe for all.

There's no excuse BUCKLE UP







log out