NH adult seat belt law, supported by NH State Police

[fatlazyless]

The NH State Police .... http://www.seacoastcurrent.com/makin...seat-belt-law/ ....... wants NH-adults to buckle up and supports a proposed NH adult seatbelt law.

For year-2021 New Hampshire seatbelt use amoung adults ranks last among the 50 states at 75.5% ........ https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api...ication/813307

From the chart, Massachusetts is second lowest US state in 2021 at 77.5%. The U.S. Virgin Islands, a US territory, is lower at 72.3%.

[TiltonBB]

I am all for mandatory seat belt use. After a while it is just a habit.

I have several friends who never wear a seat belt and when they get in my vehicle I tell them to buckle up.

Too many times when we read about fatal accidents it is because the occupants were not wearing seat belts and were ejected from the vehicle. When you get thrown out of a moving vehicle head first your head usually becomes the the object that stops your motion when it hits something.

As the trooper in the article said, everyone who is a friend or family member of the person killed in the accident is also a victim.

We also pay higher insurance rates to cover the medical issues of those un-belted accident "victims". A fatal accident or an accident with serious injuries affects a lot more people than just the person who doesn't wear a seat belt.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

I am all for mandatory seat belt use. After a while it is just a habit.

I have several friends who never wear a seat belt and when they get in my vehicle I tell them to buckle up.

Too many times when we read about fatal accidents it is because the occupants were not wearing seat belts and were ejected from the vehicle. When you get thrown out of a moving vehicle head first your head usually becomes the the object that stops your motion when it hits something.

As the trooper in the article said, everyone who is a friend or family member of the person killed in the accident is also a victim.

We also pay higher insurance rates to cover the medical issues of those un-belted accident "victims". A fatal accident or an accident with serious injuries affects a lot more people than just the person who doesn't wear a seat belt.

What happened to "live Free or Die"?

[ishoot308]

I honestly do not know anyone that doesn’t buckle up…. I would rather see the state somehow do more enforcement on texting while driving. That is something I see everyday when traveling to work that needs serious attention!

Dan

[Dick52]

Originally Posted by ishoot308

I honestly do not know anyone that doesn’t buckle up…. I would rather see the state somehow do more enforcement on texting while driving. That is something I see everyday when traveling to work that needs serious attention!

Dan

Agree in part with what you say but no reason not to enforce both versus picking on over other.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by Biggd

What happened to "live Free or Die"?

Our ''liberal'' past of do whatever you want... is going away.
I doubt the bill will pass, but it will be entered pretty much every legislative session until it does.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Biggd

What happened to "live Free or Die"?

The Feds grant money to states with mandatory seatbelt laws.

Florida exhibits a "ride" on "The Convincer". Seats are mounted on an angled, sliding, track which simulates a belted collision at only 10-MPH--just powered by gravity. Most riders buckle up afterwards--having learned their lesson--but seatbelt use is mandatory anyway.

When Italy adopted mandatory seat belts, a new accessory appeared. It was a T-shirt with a black diagonal stripe!

Here's an awkward anecdote:

A friend often rides as a passenger to yard sales. When I see a Highway Patrol car, I alert my passenger. She immediately grabs the seatbelt and holds it across her torso. When the "danger" is past, the buckle is allowed to reel back up.

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by Biggd

What happened to "live Free or Die"?

I am all for your right to die because of your own decisions. And, I think in most cases the less regulation the better. But please explain why people who wear their seat belts should pay higher insurance rates to cover for the injuries and deaths of those who don't. Please explain why it is fine for first responders to contend with additional carnage at motor vehicle accidents when the occupants of the vehicle did not wear their seat belts.

Would you be OK with higher insurance rates for people who don't wear their seat belts?

Young drivers already pay higher insurance rates because their accident risk is higher. The life insurance industry already has it figured out so that smokers pay higher premiums than non-smokers. Why not apply the same logic to unbelted drivers?

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

I am all for your right to die because of your own decisions. And, I think in most cases the less regulation the better. But please explain why people who wear their seat belts should pay higher insurance rates to cover for the injuries and deaths of those who don't. Please explain why it is fine for first responders to contend with additional carnage at motor vehicle accidents when the occupants of the vehicle did not wear their seat belts.

Would you be OK with higher insurance rates for people who don't wear their seat belts?

Young drivers already pay higher insurance rates because their accident risk is higher. The life insurance industry already has it figured out so that smokers pay higher premiums than non-smokers. Why not apply the same logic to unbelted drivers?

You could say the same thing about the motorcycle helmet law or even getting the covid vaccine.
By the way, I'm all for wearing seat belts, wearing helmets, and getting my covid vaccine but, as an adult, I'm not about being forced, by law, to do it.
Would it be fair to charge higher health insurance premiums for people that don't wear helmets or don't get the covid vaccine? Both those things effect insurance costs and are a burden on first responders.
Where do we draw the line?

[John Mercier]

Higher insurance would be a market function.
So yes, insurance could cost more... or simply be refused to cover.

The determination by the Legislature is usually along the lines of monetary value... sometimes direct, sometimes indirect.
Their desire is usually more freedom, though based on political philosophy rather than reality. But in the end the State has to pay its bills... so it has to tax for its decisions.

Seat belts are minor issue to it due to the largely indirect nature of the accounting... same with helmets. So it gets a bit harder to quantify.

The lack of Covid vaccination was/is also hard to quantify. Lockdown was the biggest economic threat, but even after the vaccine... we still lock out people that test positive from working. But the economic impact is at the business, and less directly felt in the State budget.

As we get rid of some of our past taxing systems, and have to adjust our largest to stay competitive with other jurisdictions, the budget tightens and our permissive nature falls to our actual conservative fiscal nature.

[Descant]

The talk about insurance rates and seatbelts or helmets is mostly anecdotal. I was a sales rep for 25 years for a national insurance company focusing on personal auto, homes, etc. Rate consideration was often based on, do we want more or less business in this state or county? That was based, in part on jury awards in that county. Similarly when a new company moved into Property and Casualty (e.g. Metropolitan in the 80's) they had very low rates to build business because they needed a certain level of cash flow to support basic operations, back room, claims, etc. You hear about diversifying your investment portfolio? Insurance companies do the same thing by adjusting rates from state or county to other states. The Insurance Commissions approve rates, but their job is to insure that companies have adequate reserves to pay claims. They don't really care so much about market share or geographic diversity. Insurance companies also look at juries. Juries in Hillsboro County generally don't look favorably on (fake?) Slip and fall claims, so those cases will go to court where in another jurisdiction, they might just get settled for $5000. The ambulance chasers know this and migrate to where the money is. And you think, listening to the TV commercials, that insurance companies have thousands of lawyers? In many areas, they hire local law firms. When you call one, they say "Sorry; X insurer is a client, we can't take your case as it is a conflict of interest". Insurance rates are much more com plex than how many people wear seat belts.

[fatlazyless]

In 2022, Belknap County had the highest rate of traffic deaths of any of the eleven different New Hampshire counties.

From a Jan 4, 2023, Laconia Daily Sun report: "Counties with the most motor vehicle accident fatalities in New Hampshire", it says that Belknap County had the highest death rate at 17.4 per 100k people.

"Belknap County had 11 traffic deaths that included 4 pedestrian deaths, 0 bicycle deaths, and 4 deaths involving drunk drivers."

From a Feb 18, 2023 Concord Monitor article, "Road fatalities continued surge in New Hampshire in 2022 - the year-end numbers" ..... with 141 fatalities from NH traffic deaths that included 31 motorcycle operators and one motorcycle passenger. There were 132 different fatal crashes resulting in 141 deaths.

[John Mercier]

For the Belknap County numbers...
Pedestrians don't wear seatbelts, and a driver wearing a seatbelt but still running over a pedestrian would have the same result.

Drunk driving is also not a function of seatbelts... so you would need to determine whether whom they hit would have benefit from a seatbelt.

Belknap County has a lot of tourism traffic, so when the deaths are calculated based on per resident, it tends to skew upward.

[chaseisland]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

In 2022, Belknap County had the highest rate of traffic deaths of any of the eleven different New Hampshire counties.

From a Jan 4, 2023, Laconia Daily Sun report: "Counties with the most motor vehicle accident fatalities in New Hampshire", it says that Belknap County had the highest death rate at 17.4 per 100k people.

"Belknap County had 11 traffic deaths that included 4 pedestrian deaths, 0 bicycle deaths, and 4 deaths involving drunk drivers."

From a Feb 18, 2023 Concord Monitor article, "Road fatalities continued surge in New Hampshire in 2022 - the year-end numbers" ..... with 141 fatalities from NH traffic deaths that included 31 motorcycle operators and one motorcycle passenger. There were 132 different fatal crashes resulting in 141 deaths.

Coos, Grafton, Carroll, Sullivan, Belknap, Strafford, Cheshire, Merrimack, Hillsboro, Rockingham, ...........? What's the name of #11?

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Biggd

You could say the same thing about the motorcycle helmet law or even getting the covid vaccine.
By the way, I'm all for wearing seat belts, wearing helmets, and getting my covid vaccine but, as an adult, I'm not about being forced, by law, to do it.
Would it be fair to charge higher health insurance premiums for people that don't wear helmets or don't get the covid vaccine? Both those things effect insurance costs and are a burden on first responders.
Where do we draw the line?

Absolutely--people who engage in high risk behavior should pay more for insurance. And I'm pretty sure they do--smoking and sky diving were both on the form last time I bought life insurance.

I'm sure you respect their rights as a business to charge whatever prices they'd like

[fatlazyless]

Originally Posted by chaseisland

Coos, Grafton, Carroll, Sullivan, Belknap, Strafford, Cheshire, Merrimack, Hillsboro, Rockingham, ...........? What's the name of #11?

Went back to look at my Google search on "New Hampshire Counties" and it incorrectly shows eleven NH counties with the 11th being York County, which as you must know is southern Maine.

[ishoot308]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

In 2022, Belknap County had the highest rate of traffic deaths of any of the eleven different New Hampshire counties.

From a Jan 4, 2023, Laconia Daily Sun report: "Counties with the most motor vehicle accident fatalities in New Hampshire", it says that Belknap County had the highest death rate at 17.4 per 100k people.

"Belknap County had 11 traffic deaths that included 4 pedestrian deaths, 0 bicycle deaths, and 4 deaths involving drunk drivers."

From a Feb 18, 2023 Concord Monitor article, "Road fatalities continued surge in New Hampshire in 2022 - the year-end numbers" ..... with 141 fatalities from NH traffic deaths that included 31 motorcycle operators and one motorcycle passenger. There were 132 different fatal crashes resulting in 141 deaths.

It would be nice to know how many of these deaths were caused by people not wearing seatbelts….I would be willing to bet not many….

Dan

[fatlazyless]

Originally Posted by ishoot308

It would be nice to know how many of these deaths were caused by people not wearing seatbelts….I would be willing to bet not many….

Dan

That's an excellent question. Out of the 141 New Hampshire traffic fatalities in 2022, how many were actually caused by people not wearing seat belts?

Is surprising to see that Massachusetts which has an adult seat belt law still had the second lowest usage of 77.5%, after New Hampshire with a 75.5%-usage in 2022.

When I think of driving fatalities without a seat belt, I first think of roll-overs where the driver is thrown out of the car or something but not wearing a seat belt can go beyond that with driving fatalities.

This Feb 25, 2023 ...... Making It Personal: Why New Hampshire Needs An Adult Seat Belt Law ..... http://www.seacoastcurrent.com/makin...seat-belt-law/ ...... talks about seat belts and NH driving fatalities.

[Descant]

There seem to be some flaws in how comparisons are made, and how details are categorized. Bottom line would be a comparison with other states that have mandatory seat belt laws and similar demographics. Driving conditions e.g., snow, also play a part, so comparing NH to say, Alabama, doesn't work.

I thought state employees had restrictions on political lobbying, at least in uniform. Soon enough police will be lobbying to restrict gun ownership and register all guns and require permits to buy more than 10 rounds at a time.

[fatlazyless]

Originally Posted by Descant

I thought state employees had restrictions on political lobbying, at least in uniform. Soon enough police will be lobbying to restrict gun ownership and register all guns and require permits to buy more than 10 rounds at a time.

In front of the second amendment to the U.S. Constitution is the first amendment that includes freedom of speech and freedom of the press ..... .

[ApS]

Originally Posted by ishoot308

It would be nice to know how many of these deaths were caused by people not wearing seatbelts….I would be willing to bet not many….Dan

Well, one can subtract about ⅕th attributed to motorcycles.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by Descant

There seem to be some flaws in how comparisons are made, and how details are categorized. Bottom line would be a comparison with other states that have mandatory seat belt laws and similar demographics. Driving conditions e.g., snow, also play a part, so comparing NH to say, Alabama, doesn't work.

I thought state employees had restrictions on political lobbying, at least in uniform. Soon enough police will be lobbying to restrict gun ownership and register all guns and require permits to buy more than 10 rounds at a time.

Could it be that they were the State agency most associated with having to enforce the law, so their opinion was sought?
I know that Major Acerno and Chief Gamache had to testify on issues around snowmobile and OHRV usage.

I see this issue come up now and again... as anything can be entered every season and be heard with our system of governance... but it never seems to really grab hold. The State would like the money, but isn't willing to create the hassle. I think the last time it was for like $1.5 M federal.

[Descant]

Major Acerno and Chief Gmache, like Dave Barrett and Capt. Dunleavy were always careful to testify as to facts and history, but rarely lobbied for a particular position, especially if it approached being political. I suggest that the opening of "State Police support" may not be entirely accurate, as it should be the union or the Commissioner of Safety (or deputy). At that level testimony in any particu;lar direction woulkd follow the guidance of the Governor.

[John Mercier]

On the unrefunded gas tax...
Acerno came to me to get half of it transferred from DoT to F&G, and Gamache was unhappy, until I pinned Acerno down on the reciprocity agreement with VT that only covered OHRV... but caused funding losses on the BoT-side of the equation.

I think the two were just better at looking non-political than would be guessed.

[TheProfessor]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

In front of the second amendment to the U.S. Constitution is the first amendment that includes freedom of speech and freedom of the press ..... .

New Hampshire House of Representatives.
Republican representative Karel Crawford is on record as in favor of mandatory state law for seat belt usage for all in New Hampshire.

Not sure what the state senator in Belknap/Carroll County stand.

[ApS]

Back in the 1960s, Chevron gas stations offered everyone an installed seatbelt for $5. No diagonal shoulder strap back then. (Only one color, and that was silver). Stamped on the underside was Davis Aircraft Supplies.

Meanwhile, back in Europe, debates were raging over installing a single lap belt versus a single shoulder belt. Owner manuals from this period showed how to buckle up.

My next car was subjected to high-performance track speeds, so I got a Schroth 6-point seatbelt. (German-made, with two bolts for the two shoulder belts, two more bolts for the 3-inch lap belts, and two more bolts holding the 6-way connector to the floor in front). The front floor belts were to keep the driver from sliding out from under the other belts. At a cost of nearly $300, I had to install it myself! For the driver, arranging all the belts--while wriggling to snug them all down--took some time.

This growing aspect of safety spelled the end of "LeMans-starts" in auto racing. Most often, running across the track, jumping in your race car and starting to race, meant fastening seatbelts on the LeMans straight--where leaders often exceeded 200-MPH! The Le Mans start was prohibited in 1970. (With good cause).

Once tightly cinched-in, I realized I'd been using the steering wheel as a support in hard cornering, so the added ease of steering control was vastly improved.

Since steering control is the responsibility of the driver, the driver should always be positioned behind the wheel. This isn't always possible after getting hit at highway speeds. (Or after a "shunt", as the British call it).

[fatlazyless]

Subaru seat belt chime love ..... ....; my 2014 Crosstrek has a loud and annoying seat belt chime that basically makes me click-it asap, pdq, just to get the loud chime to turn off ....... hmmm ..... .

[fatlazyless]

Hey there, here's something interesting. Did you see the March 1 editorial opinion in the Union Leader titled: Seat belt Sununu: Is he for the mandate now?

It starts with "Since when has Gov. Chris Sununu been in favor of a mandatory seat belt law for New Hampshire adults? And if he isn't, why is he allowing a state office to testify for a bill to do just that?"

Apparently, one can see this U.L. editorial without a paid subscription.

[Billy Bob]

Only state in the country without front seat adult seat belt requirement. Not something to be proud about. It has nothing to do with freedom it’s all about being dumb .

[John Mercier]

I think Descant may have hit it on the head.
We may be seeing a situation where NH is looking to more federal money to shore up the DoT.

[Billy Bob]

Originally Posted by ApS

Didn't New Hampshire enact a law to buckle up kids under the age of 18?

It appears (to me) that common-sense law would've increased adult/parent participation far more than its neighboring Bay State. (Which is at the bottom of compliance).

It is not just the dreaded Bay State it's EVERY other state in the country!
New Hampshire, get with the program, buckle up !

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Billy Bob

Only state in the country without front seat adult seat belt requirement. Not something to be proud about. It has nothing to do with freedom it’s all about being dumb .

Didn't New Hampshire enact a law to buckle-up underaged passengers?

It appears (to me) that common-sense law would've increased adult/parent participation far more than the Bay State--which is next to the bottom of compliance--and gets less icy conditions.

[John Mercier]

I think we have a slightly lower under 18 percent of our population, and slighter higher 65 and older percent of our population.

Also, I believe that MA uses it as a secondary rather than primary. Not sure if that is the same for the other New England states.

I wear my seatbelt, but travel out of State so rarely, that I'm not fully aware of how each of our surrounding States operate.

[fatlazyless]

Hey there ....... here's a twitter accident waiting to happen, tweeting while driving or something ...... https://twitter.com/bamico54/status/1631986966450393092 ..... March 4, 6:56-am tweets " Why are there so many people on I-93? Don't they know its a snowstorm right now?


And, at 9:30-am the NH State Police ....... https://twitter.com/NH_StatePolice/s...573952/photo/2 shows a state police cruiser hit by same person on Rt 93 in Thornton, NH

[camp guy]

Just for a few laughs, go to Google, type in Cowboy After OSHA, and examine the picture.

[LoveLakeLife]

Originally Posted by Billy Bob

Only state in the country without front seat adult seat belt requirement. Not something to be proud about. It has nothing to do with freedom it’s all about being dumb .

lol. Of course it’s about freedom.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Descant]

Originally Posted by Billy Bob

Only state in the country without front seat adult seat belt requirement. Not something to be proud about. It has nothing to do with freedom it’s all about being dumb .

You can't pass laws that will make people smarter. When seat belt bills come up there is usually testimony that voluntary compliance in NH is on a par with mandatory compliance in other states. NH is unique in many ways and I'm happy for that.

[fatlazyless]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

For year-2021 New Hampshire seatbelt use for adults ranks last among the 50 states at 72.4% ........ https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api...ication/813307

Hey Descant, when you say that " ... voluntary compliance in New Hampshire is on par with mandatory compliance in other states." This is simply NOT the situation.

Except for Massachusetts at 77.5%, all the 49 states with mandatory compliance have rates in the 80 and 90 percent range while New Hampshire is the lowest at 72.4%.

Just take a good look at the numbers for 2021 from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the above link. Our neighbors in Vermont are at 89.2% and Maine is at 91.8% for year-2021.

[fatlazyless]

206-162 was the vote, yesterday-March 16, in the New Hampshire House of Representatives to REJECT the mandatory seat belt law for adults.
.............

By federal law, truck drivers of big rigs, semi's, box trucks, buses, all requiring a NH commercial driver's license have been required to wear a seat belt in New Hampshire and all 50-states as it is designed to be worn for about 35-years and it is a primary offense with a fine of about $200 plus the offense stays on their driving record for 15-years which makes it difficult to get hired as a truck driver.

Do truck drivers in New Hampshire wear their seat belt correctly? What you think?

[John Mercier]

NH sometimes regulates without a good reason... but they try to avoid it.

The seatbelt/helmet issue is/has been more about the federal funds than compliance.
If we had a historical chart, I would bet that more people over time have voluntarily begun using seat belts. After a while it becomes a habit.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

NH sometimes regulates without a good reason... but they try to avoid it. The seatbelt/helmet issue is/has been more about the federal funds than compliance. If we had a historical chart, I would bet that more people over time have voluntarily begun using seat belts. After a while it becomes a habit.

The Alton shop tuning my car kindly drove me back to Wolfeboro. I spent 15 minutes in terror, as there were no seatbelts in their truck!

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Hey Descant, when you say that " ... voluntary compliance in New Hampshire is on par with mandatory compliance in other states." This is simply NOT the situation.
Except for Massachusetts at 77.5%, all the 49 states with mandatory compliance have rates in the 80 and 90 percent range while New Hampshire is the lowest at 72.4%. Just take a good look at the numbers for 2021 from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the above link. Our neighbors in Vermont are at 89.2% and Maine is at 91.8% for year-2021.

I just heard that on March 17, 2023, Massachusetts passed a new mandatory seatbelt law (yesterday). Not sure if this prompted the "primary stop" provision, as nothing has appeared at Google (yet).

Unknown what has happened to the proposal that:

"[O]riginally put forth in 2019 following a deadly New Hampshire crash — that would raise the standards for commercial driver’s licenses in Massachusetts above federal standards 'to make sure that only safe and qualified drivers are able to operate some of the largest vehicles on the road.'"

The "justice" meted-out from that crash will cause our recollections to slowly disappear.

[TiltonBB]

The Massachusetts Governor has proposed spending $28 million to implement a new law that will allow illegal immigrants to obtain a license to drive. As other states attempt to make the roads safer this is a step in the wrong direction.

In Massachusetts the Work and Family Mobility Act, passed into law by the Legislature in early June of 2022 over the veto of former Gov. Charlie Baker, will allow immigrants who cannot demonstrate their legal status to nevertheless use documentation from their home country to apply for and receive driver’s license.

It is safe to assume that the written test will be given in multiple languages to assure that the newly licensed drivers won't even be able to read a road sign.

What could possibly go wrong?

[John Mercier]

They may have been driving quite some time without a license.

The attitude toward immigration has always been a bit sketchy. Boston was at one time a city that would have ''No Irish Permitted/Need Apply'' signs everywhere; that wouldn't float today. Now I think it is more of a Boston - New York thing, but I don't live there so can't really tell.

Someone coming north for a better life is really something we have dealt with since before my birth... and to be fair... my birth would not have happened without such immigration. My family would still be in Europe and I might never have been born.

But we see the inherent pressures of differing languages and customs.
We had two customers nearly get physical a few weeks back because one was a native of NH, and the other had come north from MA for a better life.
It started as a driving incident and escalated.

[fatlazyless]

Kevin Landigan, NH Union Leader, Mar 16, 2023: http://www.finance.yahoo.com/news/ma...225500384.html ..... no subscription needed

State Rep. Daniel Veilleux, D-Amherst, said "Last year, two-thirds of those killed in crashes in New Hampshire were not wearing restraints while the national average for unbelted highway fatality victims was about 50%."

"Rep. Ted Gorski, R-Bedford, said the bill violates the state Constitution because it would amount to government intrusion."

Supposedly, New Hampshire does not receive about 5-million dollars in federal grant money that would go into the NH general fund by not having a mandatory seat belt law.

It seems to me that drivers who chose not to wear a seat belt probably have other bad driving habits like crossing the center yellow line, and tail gating.

[John Mercier]

I don't know of any article in the NH Constitution that protects us from ''government intrusion''.

[ishoot308]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

I don't know of any article in the NH Constitution that protects us from ''government intrusion''.

[Art.] 2-b. [Right of Privacy.] An individual's right to live free from governmental intrusion in private or personal information is natural, essential, and inherent.

Pretty clear don’t you think…

Dan

[John Mercier]

If we were talking about information.

His stated positions tend to give away that this is a very loosely held principle.

[Winilyme]

After all I've read in this thread I ask the following.

What is so freaking difficult about fastening your seatbelt? I mean, it doesn't hurt. It's not hard to do. It isn't inconvenient.

Law or no law, why wouldn't everyone simply fasten their seatbelt to give themselves significantly better odds of survival in an accident? I suppose one could say they are preserving their pride by 'sticking up for their rights' but the potential end result would bring nothing but heartbreak to loved ones and friends.

[The Real BigGuy]

Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[LoveLakeLife]

Originally Posted by Winilyme

After all I've read in this thread I ask the following

What is so freaking difficult about fastening your seatbelt? I mean, it doesn't hurt. It's not hard to do. It isn't inconvenient.

Law or no law, why wouldn't everyone simply fasten their seatbelt to give themselves significantly better odds of survival in an accident? I suppose one could say they are preserving their pride by 'sticking up for their rights' but the potential end result would bring nothing but heartbreak to loved ones and friends.

Free will. No justification needed. Difficulty and convenience and pain/no pain and or pridefulness are not the litmus tests. The potential consequences of decisions is a related matter for sure, but that’s for individuals to consider and not for the government to intrude in.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Cobalt 12]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

The Massachusetts Governor has proposed spending $28 million to implement a new law that will allow illegal immigrants to obtain a license to drive. As other states attempt to make the roads safer this is a step in the wrong direction.

In Massachusetts the Work and Family Mobility Act, passed into law by the Legislature in early June of 2022 over the veto of former Gov. Charlie Baker, will allow immigrants who cannot demonstrate their legal status to nevertheless use documentation from their home country to apply for and receive driver’s license.

It is safe to assume that the written test will be given in multiple languages to assure that the newly licensed drivers won't even be able to read a road sign.

What could possibly go wrong?

Not trying to divert subject, just a quick question regarding Driving License. In Mass, is all that is required to vote in any election is you have a drivers license?