krazzycowgirl

For those that live in or travel through Washington state in your Classic Cars beware that The WSP, are Pulling people over & giving them tickets for lack of seatbelts. Even though they have Lap belts. Now I dont know if the Washington state Seatbelt laws have changed But I know that several people driving around in Classic (or pre Shoulder belt Requirements) have been ticketed for not having Proper restraints in their cars.

One was a friend of mine who happens to be a cop in the local area & He got pulled over pulling his 69 Camaro out of the Cop shop he works at.

So Just be aware that this is going on.

B-RAD2

I really don't think they can do that.....

krazzycowgirl

They can pull you over if they dont think you are wearing your seatbelt But if you are wearing a lap belt they are suppose to let you go. As I said UNLESS the law has changed.

The cop that was just pulled over is a friend of mine & lives in Tacoma & the WSP officer didnt even believe him being a cop even after he pulled out his badge to show him.

One of my Coworkers got pulled over because the cop though she was putting on her seatbelt while driving down the road. He gave her a ticket for not having a seatbelt on while driving. Then sat there & agrued with her on if the Van came stock with shoulder belts. & its a 78 Van only about 600 were optioned with shoulder Restraints.

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

The law states that you are required to use the factory installed seatbelt/restraints. In a 1960's GM (for example) there will only be a lap belt in the vast majority of the vehicles, and they cannot force you to install a non factory shoulder restraint nor will they cite you for it. And on the off chance someone is cited for it, it "should" be thrown out in court given that the vehicle was not originally equipped with shoulder belts to begin with.

In the case of "only XXX were built with this option" it will be up to the owner/ticket receiver to prove that the vehicle in question was not originally equipped with factory shoulder restraints.

My guess is there will be numerous court battles (mostly just lawyers & lawmakers) arguing the validity/constitutionality/correct way to properly enforce this new law for quite some time.

krazzycowgirl

I know William is going to fight not only the Ticket But also the WSP over it so it should be in the news come this summer or when ever he gets his hearing.

The other gal ( my coworker) She doesnt want to fight it & is just going to pay it.

LSxChevelle

iTrader: (4)

Freakin dicks! The law still is that if the car did not come equipped w/ seat belts or with shoulder belts they are not required.

NWDragRacer

New law? I don see any new laws recently passed.

The law states...

"RCW 46.61.688

Safety belts, use required — Penalties — Exemptions.




</B>(1) For the purposes of this section, the term "motor vehicle" includes:

(a) "Buses," meaning motor vehicles with motive power, except trailers, designed to carry more than ten passengers;

(b) "Multipurpose passenger vehicles," meaning motor vehicles with motive power, except trailers, designed to carry ten persons or less that are constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation;

(c) "Neighborhood electric vehicle," meaning a self-propelled, electrically powered four-wheeled motor vehicle whose speed attainable in one mile is more than twenty miles per hour and not more than twenty-five miles per hour and conforms to federal regulations under Title 49 C.F.R. Part 571.500;

(d) "Passenger cars," meaning motor vehicles with motive power, except multipurpose passenger vehicles, motorcycles, or trailers, designed for carrying ten passengers or less; and

(e) "Trucks," meaning motor vehicles with motive power, except trailers, designed primarily for the transportation of property.

(2) This section only applies to motor vehicles that meet the manual seat belt safety standards as set forth in federal motor vehicle safety standard 208 and to neighborhood electric vehicles. This section does not apply to a vehicle occupant for whom no safety belt is available when all designated seating positions as required by federal motor vehicle safety standard 208 are occupied.

(3) Every person sixteen years of age or older operating or riding in a motor vehicle shall wear the safety belt assembly in a properly adjusted and securely fastened manner.

(4) No person may operate a motor vehicle unless all child passengers under the age of sixteen years are either: (a) Wearing a safety belt assembly or (b) are securely fastened into an approved child restraint device.

(5) A person violating this section shall be issued a notice of traffic infraction under chapter 46.63 RCW. A finding that a person has committed a traffic infraction under this section shall be contained in the driver's abstract but shall not be available to insurance companies or employers.

(6) Failure to comply with the requirements of this section does not constitute negligence, nor may failure to wear a safety belt assembly be admissible as evidence of negligence in any civil action.

(7) This section does not apply to an operator or passenger who possesses written verification from a licensed physician that the operator or passenger is unable to wear a safety belt for physical or medical reasons.

(8) The state patrol may adopt rules exempting operators or occupants of farm vehicles, construction equipment, and vehicles that are required to make frequent stops from the requirement of wearing safety belts.

...



Notes:

Effective date -- 2003 c 353: See note following RCW 46.04.320.

"

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

Sorry, I am fairly heavily medicated and presumed that if it was making this kind of "news" that it might be new....please forgive my egregious misuse of the word "new". Not too mention the original poster stated she was not sure if this was a new law or not so I just used the terminology, it won't happen again.

krazzycowgirl

Rott It will not kill you to use my name lol Or my online name lol

I wasnt sure if there had been a new seatbelt law passed either. So I am taking this information to Karen & hoping they will fight her ticket.

Thanks Don

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

Just quicker to type it the other way plus less typos in my present condition

howierd42

I would fight the ticket all day long in court. No offence intended to any ex- or current police reading this thread but the traffic cops are only drones doing what they are told by their superiors, told by the legislature, etc, ad nosium up the chain. If the ticket sticks it is money in the coffer. If it does not they really don't care because they were just doing what they were told.

That said, I think the cop who writes a ticket to someone just because he can't see a shoulder restraint in a pre- '70s car is too dumb to even ware a badge. But I KNEW this issue would come up when I saw the commercials on tv where a guy driving a 69 Camaro is given a ticket for no seatbelt when everyone on the planet should know that that car did not come with anything more than a lap belt.

CHarris

iTrader: (5)

Subase Bangor used to require you to have a seatbelt even if your car didn't come with them. I had to pull two lap belts out of a wrecking yard to get my old 56 stickered for base access. What a PIA. They were that way with horns too. So I'd pull a junkyard horn and hook up a toggle switch.

krazzycowgirl

Well To be honest with you there Howierd The Camaros were optioned with the shoulder belts from the start but not many were made with them until I do believe it because safety issues & they started requiring them in the Fbodies in the front seats in 1980

Amorget

My dad's 68 Firebird has optional shoulder belts, but he normally leaves them attached to the roof and just wears the lap belt.

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

My '68 Camaro had "optional" shoulder belts as well. :shrug:

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

So everyone in the world is fully aware of any and all options of cars that are 30+ years old? Interesting assumption Howard.

howierd42

Ok, I stand corrected. It was an OPTION, not standard equipment and, therefore, not REQUIRED to be installed in the cars.

And yes, Darrin, cops (not pointing any fingers, just cops in general) should know the laws they are paid to enforce. That means knowing that they are likely not going to see a shoulder belt on a pre-'70s automobile. Why? see the rcw above AND the link it contains.

Edit: By the way, my roommate's '68 Camaro does not have shoulder belts.

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

In a perfect world Howard, I wold agree, but as time goes on and there are less and less "older" cars on the road and newer (younger) cops out there, it is nearly impossible to know which ones did or did not come with them, which ones had them as an option, etc. I was lucky, I was into cars so I know most of what I needed to know....but the CALI law clearly states (when I was working) what years are affected (as in what years they were mandatory vs optional) HOWEVER IF the car has them, option or otherwise, the occupants are required to use them.........all that being said, if the car in question was not equipped with them (factory or otherwise) then he/she should be able to beat the ticket. Of course that is presuming they occupants were wearing the lap belts at the time of the stop........don't recall if the original poster said one way or the other and don't care enough to go back & look.

krazzycowgirl

Yes They were Wearing their Lap Belts at the time they were stopped

vetred

These are VERY dificult times we are living in. If the truth be known we bought and paid with for it as a society every damn time each of us DOES NOT VOTE! Im sorry but in case anyone hasn't noticied the last few years every major election has been dicided by the narowest of margines! so to all those people who always say It does'nt matter wake up we need your help the fact is a lot of laws are currently being made up sort of "as needed" and these traffic cops have simply been reduced to cashiers!! They are handing out tickets in Belveue to bus drivers for not having the shoulder "HARNESS" on, and there IS an excemption for comertial drivers who make "frequent stops" sounds like B.S. to me Right now you CAN drive down belevue way NAKED, with your car on FIRE swinging a CHAINSAW out the window and if you are'nt do'ing 5 over NO ONE will say a damn thing its all about what THEY call "creative revenuing"