Click it or Ticket... Or WORSE?

I was driving around Houston the other day and I saw a big "Click it or Ticket" banner. This one was different though, it said :

CLICK IT OR TICKET OR WORSE

I thought it was a joke at first, but then I started thinking about it and I did a search and the first thing that came up was this article from FoxHouston

www.myfoxhouston.com...

then this one:

www.theeagle.com...

I get it. Worse being a fatality or severe injury during an accident.... however in light of recent police activity I think this could be quite fitting. Worse being tazed, arrested, shot... ?

The whole seatbelt thing to me seem like a revenue generator to me. In a state that doesn't enforce a helmet law when riding a motorcycle, it really says "we don't give a # about your well being, we just want another opportunity to fine you and get some of your sweet sweet money!"

Yes I understand seatbelts save lives. I also know a few people who survived a car accident due to not wearing their seatbelt. I think it should be a choice if you are licensed to drive in this state. Its a wise idea to buckle up, but it shouldn't be punishable by law. 200$ may not be that much to some people, but to others its the difference between paying their rent or not.

As a country we cater to the lowest rung of intelligence and it bothers the piss out of me. Why should we all have to suffer for the behavior of the ignorant?

a reply to: myartisstrong

Thank God people are starting to wake up!

a reply to: myartisstrong

If traffic laws were just about "sweet, sweet money", don't you think that a lot more people would be getting tickets? I mean, every minor infraction can be enforced. People would lose their minds if that were the case. That traffic law book is a thick sumbitch!

a reply to: myartisstrong

It's for your own good, don't you know?

This is the face of totalitarianism.

a reply to: myartisstrong

__________ or ticket or we own you.

Fill in the blank Murica. This army of traitors has full contempt for you. You are an enemy combatant whether you understand it or not.

i think it is about cash.
i got popped last year for speeding and no belt. i was only going a few miles over and he let me slide on that. i guess some would argue if it was all about cash he would not have let it go.
anyway, the fine for the belt was over 200 bones.
i did not go to court for it as i paid it before the date.
when i paid it they gave me a print out with a breakdown.

the actual fine for the belt was minimal but there lots of other things added to it.
i dont remember all of them or the amount but 2 that stand out

the indigent drivers fund. dont know what that is but it was like 50 bucks.
court security was about 50 bucks too. i wonder why i had to pay for court security when i didnt go to court.

but yeah, its all about making cash imo

i still dont wear a belt. personal choice. i know if i get pinched again i will have to pay but im still not wearing one.
it does not give you any points so.........

Here is what I think:

If you want to endanger YOUR life by not wearing a seat belt, go right ahead. But don't endanger MY life when you come flying out the window straight at me or any innocent bystander.

I think it's more than reasonable to get stopped and fined than losing your life as an innocent bystander minding your own business. IMO

originally posted by: bringmecoffee
a reply to: myartisstrong

If traffic laws were just about "sweet, sweet money", don't you think that a lot more people would be getting tickets? I mean, every minor infraction can be enforced. People would lose their minds if that were the case. That traffic law book is a thick sumbitch!

have you ever been to traffic court? you can wait 6 hours for them to call your name because there are so many people there.

They heard us in like cattle. And they write tickets for everything all the time, seatbelt, tinted windows, tail light, headlight,frikin liscense plate light, not using a turn signal etc etc.

It generates massive amounts of money.

OK for years i have seen this sign/THREAT!
Pisses me off too. I mean what if you was OBEYING the posted construction speed and by some circumstance a worker tripped or ran away from some danger into your path? What if it was a genuine accident and not your fault at all?

I take this as a government threat, not a law!
I see this all the time in Michigan along with the same Threats as click it or ticket BS.

Ya know here in Michigan we had a law requiring helmets for motorcyclist. But it got repealed, want to know why? cause lobbyist and motorcyclist groups. It's still very unsafe but it passed.

Now tell me this are their Car lobbyist and car clubs/groups trying to repeal safety belts? NOPE!

It's all a scam and a THREAT! They don't care about safety, just your dollars.


I hate these threatening signs. Notice THREAT of $$$$ before THREAT of prison time? It's all about revenue for this damn Government! GRRRRR!

a reply to: greencmp
Shoot by that logic we should be able to do what ever we want.

Drive down the freeway at 100, a law against that would be totalitarian too.

Seat belt laws are for everyone, they save the tax payer medical cost for those that decided health insurance is a bad idea as well.

a reply to: proob4

Pisses me off too. I mean what if you was OBEYING the posted construction speed and by some circumstance a worker tripped or ran away from some danger into your path? What if it was a genuine accident and not your fault at all?

Then you would most likely be cleared.

Pretty simple, the obvious context of that sign is if you negligent in the process.

a reply to: blackmetalmist

Not sure of the statistics on that, but I'm pretty sure the amount of people killed by flying people is pretty low. Right down there with the amount of people killed by vending machines...

a reply to: bringmecoffee

I drive I-10 for 14 miles every morning and can usually count 10 - 20 people pulled over in that short amount of time/distance.

a reply to: blackmetalmist

i would be more inclined to agree with you about endangering others if other things were different as well.
since motorcycles were mentioned i will mention it too.

i got my motorcycle endorsement this year. in my state you do not have to take any classes. the test for the temps is 30 questions and you are allowed to get 8 wrong.
the actual test takes about 10 minutes and is super easy. you have to make a left turn. right turn. zig zag through some cones. the last thing is you have to get up to between 8-20 mph and then stop with your front tire in a marked box. it is a pretty good sized box. i never shifted out of 1st gear for the entire test.
right next to the bmv there is a tanning place that rents scooters for people to use for their test. super small and no gears.
what i am getting at is this is all you have to do to legally operate your bike in traffic. passing that test does NOT mean you can safely operate a motorcycle in traffic.
even though you are on a bike you can endanger other people.

then there are the old fogies that can barely see over the wheel and drive super slow and weave in and out of traffic. people driving too slow endangers others just as much as driving too fast.

i have always been of the opinion that once you reach a certain age, call it 60 you should have to retake your operators exam.
once you actually pass your first exam when you are 16 you never have to retest. all you have to do is pass their vision test.

i think that is dangerous too.

i do think it is about cash.

a reply to: myartisstrong

This logic applies flying outside the car and inside the car. If I am wearing my seat belt in a car and you come flying at me cause you decided you don't want to follow rules, then you're gonna cause me some major damage if not death depending on the impact.

Don't endanger others just because you felt the "law" did not apply to you.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: greencmp


Seat belt laws are for everyone, they save the tax payer medical cost for those that decided health insurance is a bad idea as well.

Right! So are helmets for Cycles. Read my post I explain that too. All the government and insurance conpanies care about is your $$$. So quit being an apologist.

originally posted by: myartisstrong
a reply to: blackmetalmist

Not sure of the statistics on that, but I'm pretty sure the amount of people killed by flying people is pretty low. Right down there with the amount of people killed by vending machines...

i dont have any stats either but i would think the amount of people killing others by flying out of the windshield and landing on them is probably the same as people that get trapped in their car by their belt after an accident

a reply to: Mugly

Perhaps it is but as I pointed out in my other post, that includes the damage that you can do to the other people inside the car with you. You bounce around and get thrown around in a car accident and if you don't have your seat belt, your gonna hurt someone in that car.

a reply to: myartisstrong

I agree 110%, in fact I started a thread on this years ago...Buckle up in your car or get a ticket, yet motorcylists don't have to wear helmets?

I think the government is overstepping their bounds when they start making laws that affect your personal choices. The seat belt law blatantly ignores the fact that motorcyclists don't have to wear helmets. Well, I think I have a better chance of surviving a 25 mph crash without wearing a seatbelt in my car as compared to someone on a motorcycle not wearing a helmet. Where is the fair application of this law?

originally posted by: myartisstrong
a reply to: bringmecoffee

I drive I-10 for 14 miles every morning and can usually count 10 - 20 people pulled over in that short amount of time/distance.

As many times over the years I have driven on I-10 in that area, my condolences. Seems as soon as it gets better, some thing comes along to make it bad again.