[vladdy328]

I know that driving without a seatbelt is stupid, especially in the state of Washington, not only will it result in a $150 dollar fine and be put on your driving record but it can also result in injury or death. Therefore I always wear my seatbelt. Last week though I was pulling out of a parallel park on a very busy street in downtown Everett, I was not wearing my seatbelt so I could have a wider range of view in order to prevent my car from getting plowed into on a street where the speed limit is 35. As I pulled out of the parking spot I see a cop directly in front of me staring right at me. My car was still halfway in the parking spot and he pulled me over for not wearing my seatbelt. Isn't that just plain ridiculous? I'm sure most people dont wear the belt while pulling out of a parallel park. He aproached my car and asked me if I knew what I did wrong. I replied I know I wasnt wearing my belt and explained why I failed to do so. I thought he would understand but he followed to say that it was his job to give me a ticket. The cop was a complete asshole and wrote me a ticket for failure to wear the belt I normally would not take this to court but since it was so naive of the bastard to do that I am going to fight it pleading that it was unreasonable traffic enforcement. He could have been doing more important things than watching me pull out of this spot. Anyways what do you guys think? I know that not wearing a belt is hard to fight and the law clearly states that not wearing your belt while operating a vehicle will result in a fine but, there is an extent to where the law becomes arbitrary. Therefore what are my chances of actually being able to win this in court. Any ideas or thoughts would help.

[gberger1]

My 2cents is this, and it may be worthless but it is after all my 2cents. When the officer gave you the ticket you were not wearing the seatbelt correct? Regardless of how you feel about it, the fact is you weren't, or you would not have received it. I assume that since your driving a BMW (if stereotyping bothers you, stop reading now), I am not assuming that your wealthy, that your a snob, just saying that BMW's are higher end vehicles and if you drive it, you can afford to drive it, that being said. I estimate that taking the ticket to court will be 2-3 hrs out of your day, I iwill assume that you probably make more money than 150.00 at your place of work in that 2-3 hrs, so is it really worth going to court for 150.00 bucks, just to speak your mind and probably walk away with the ticket anyhow? I agree the cop was more than likely a jerk, I have been ticketed for 5mph over the speed limit, for driving through a yellow light etc....in the end more often than not I walked out still paying the fine, especially in this economy, when the cities need money. Again Just my thoughts.

[vladdy328]

Good point, I just dont want it to go on my record which is my biggest concern right now. Also if I broke the law I would pay for the fine because there would be no use fighting it, but in this scenario its completely the opposite.

[wrickem]

Originally Posted by vladdy328

. Last week though I was pulling out of a parallel park on a very busy street in downtown Everett, I was not wearing my seatbelt so I could have a wider range of view in order to prevent my car from getting plowed into on a street where the speed limit is 35.

I'm sorry, the cop didn't buy that excuse and neither do I. Our cars don't have seatbelts like the old '60's cars where they pretty much lashed you to the seat. There's no reason that your range of view would be impaired because your seatbelt was on.

But I do thing the cop was a dick since you were still partly in your parking space . Good luck

[vladdy328]

Originally Posted by wrickem

I'm sorry, the cop didn't buy that excuse and neither do I. Our cars don't have seatbelts like the old '60's cars where they pretty much lashed you to the seat. There's no reason that your range of view would be impaired because your seatbelt was on.

But I do thing the cop was a dick since you were still partly in your parking space . Good luck

I was actually driving my work car, a chevy express utility van. If you have ever driven one of those you would understand why I had no visibility. It has no windows in the back so I had to roll down the drivers side window and stick my head out just so I can see what I am doing.

[wrickem]

Originally Posted by vladdy328

I was actually driving my work car, a chevy express utility van. If you have ever driven one of those you would understand why I had no visibility. It has no windows in the back so I had to roll down the drivers side window and stick my head out just so I can see what I am doing.

I have driven them, understand the visibility problem. Sometimes I have to drive an HHR panel van which I refer to as "the tube", you can only see directly in front of you and a VERY little out the back window as it's got the company name on it. I still don't buy your excuse though, not having your seatbelt on isn't going to make it any easier to move around to see.

But, I am not saying I hope the judge doesn't buy it , I hope he lets you off, the cop was a dick.

[gberger1]

Regardless of what you were driving, or why you werent wearing it, the fact is, and the judge will tell you this, you Were operating a motor vehicle without a seatbelt, because of that fact you will not get out of the ticket. You may get it reduced, but the judge will not dismiss it. He will more than likely point out to you that since you are aware of the vehicle's limited visibility, why was i parked in an area that had limited visibility, I know I know, it may have been the only place to park, but, the judge will suggest other alternatives to you so that you may operate the vehicle in accordance with the law, and be safe at the same time. As I said previously, I wouldnt think the 150.00 is worth the time off work, nor will the 75.00 which the ticket will more than likely end up being, since your primary concern is keeping it off your record, I dont see that happening. You may however be able to defer this ticket. In this case, the ticket goes on "hold" for a year, and if during that year you remain infraction free the ticket goes away, if however you do not, you get both, at once.

[Professor///M]

Originally Posted by vladdy328

I know that driving without a seatbelt is stupid, especially in the state of Washington, not only will it result in a $150 dollar fine and be put on your driving record but it can also result in injury or death. Therefore I always wear my seatbelt. Last week though I was pulling out of a parallel park on a very busy street in downtown Everett, I was not wearing my seatbelt so I could have a wider range of view in order to prevent my car from getting plowed into on a street where the speed limit is 35. As I pulled out of the parking spot I see a cop directly in front of me staring right at me. My car was still halfway in the parking spot and he pulled me over for not wearing my seatbelt. Isn't that just plain ridiculous? I'm sure most people dont wear the belt while pulling out of a parallel park. He aproached my car and asked me if I knew what I did wrong. I replied I know I wasnt wearing my belt and explained why I failed to do so. I thought he would understand but he followed to say that it was his job to give me a ticket. The cop was a complete asshole and wrote me a ticket for failure to wear the belt I normally would not take this to court but since it was so naive of the bastard to do that I am going to fight it pleading that it was unreasonable traffic enforcement. He could have been doing more important things than watching me pull out of this spot. Anyways what do you guys think? I know that not wearing a belt is hard to fight and the law clearly states that not wearing your belt while operating a vehicle will result in a fine but, there is an extent to where the law becomes arbitrary. Therefore what are my chances of actually being able to win this in court. Any ideas or thoughts would help.

Boldfaced is where you went wrong. Incriminated yourself directly to the cop. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200. Best answer is, I don't know you tell me...


ALTHOUGH... In MANY jurisdictions I believe (don't quote me) that you must be pulled over for another violation, that they cannot pull you over for not having your seatbelt off alone. Either that or I'm mistaken with things like not using your blinker, or illegal mods (tints, amber deletes, etc).

Double check your local law to see if they can pull you over for the seatbelt alone... otherwise unfortunately you're out of luck. Sorry!

[Phil Su]

Technically, it will be on your "record," but it shouldn't affect your insurance:

RCW 46.61.688(5) states: 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.

[vladdy328]

Originally Posted by PAMidge

Boldfaced is where you went wrong. Incriminated yourself directly to the cop. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200. Best answer is, I don't know you tell me...


ALTHOUGH... In MANY jurisdictions I believe (don't quote me) that you must be pulled over for another violation, that they cannot pull you over for not having your seatbelt off alone. Either that or I'm mistaken with things like not using your blinker, or illegal mods (tints, amber deletes, etc).

Double check your local law to see if they can pull you over for the seatbelt alone... otherwise unfortunately you're out of luck. Sorry!

I did the research, apparently it is a primary offense so I can be pulled over solely for not wearing the belt. Looks like I am out of look

[vladdy328]

Originally Posted by Phil Su

Technically, it will be on your "record," but it shouldn't affect your insurance:

RCW 46.61.688(5) states: 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.

Well thats good news, at least it wont affect my insurance

[wrickem]

But you weren't even out of your space! I think that accounts for something.

[Phil Su]

Originally Posted by vladdy328

Well thats good news, at least it wont affect my insurance

Yeah. That's what my colleagues and I do when we can't get tickets dismissed for our clients. What we do is try to change speeding violations to a seat belt violations as to avoid insurance consequences. Just a friendly FYI, Judge Odell is not the kind of judge to weigh the totality of circumstances and dismiss the case. Mitigation might be a good idea. I wouldn't waste a deferral on a seat belt violation if I were you.

[vladdy328]

Originally Posted by Phil Su

Yeah. That's what my colleagues and I do when we can't get tickets dismissed for our clients. What we do is try to change speeding violations to a seat belt violations as to avoid insurance consequences. Just a friendly FYI, Judge Odell is not the kind of judge to weigh the totality of circumstances and dismiss the case. Mitigation might be a good idea. I wouldn't waste a deferral on a seat belt violation if I were you.

I have court in Everett, do you know the judge there?

[vladdy328]

Originally Posted by wrickem

But you weren't even out of your space! I think that accounts for something.

Exactly what I'm saying. It's plain stupid! I should have the choice of wearing my seatbelt. Ever since seatbelt laws came into effect in WA state it has annoyed me. First, the state spends extraordainary amounts of money putting commercials on local televisions channels telling us all to buckle up or else we’ll die. Second, why should I get pulled over just because I am not wearing my seatbelt? It is fundamentally against liberty in every form and fashion.

The purpose of government according to the classic liberals of the nineteenth century was to keep individual A from interfering with the rights of individual B. If A causes harm to B, then government must step in. Laws are created to keep A from harming B, and everyone can get on with their life peacefully. The seatbelt laws do not fit in to that equation. They are to keep A from interfering with his own rights. What justification is there to keep me from harming myself? None that I can see.

Hurting myself only hurts myself. If I wreck my car, fly out of the windshield, hit a tree and die it is my fault. I most likely wouldn’t have worn a seatbelt anyway regardless of the law, so you’re only penalizing people who don’t get in wrecks and don’t wear their seatbelts. Sometimes wearing a seatbelt could be beneficial. What if you flew out of the car’s windshield into the ditch nearby, but your car caught on fire and blew up? What if it was crushed in where you would have been trapped? Wearing a seatbelt should be a personal decision and not a societal\governmental one.

Nanny government doesn’t help people at all, it only brings them to dependence on other people and weakens society as a whole.

[Phil Su]

Originally Posted by vladdy328

Hurting myself only hurts myself. If I wreck my car, fly out of the windshield, hit a tree and die it is my fault. I most likely wouldn’t have worn a seatbelt anyway regardless of the law, so you’re only penalizing people who don’t get in wrecks and don’t wear their seatbelts. Sometimes wearing a seatbelt could be beneficial. What if you flew out of the car’s windshield into the ditch nearby, but your car caught on fire and blew up? What if it was crushed in where you would have been trapped? Wearing a seatbelt should be a personal decision

That's where you are wrong, my friend. Remember, we live in a society where people are very suit happy. Now, when you don't wear a seat belt and hurt yourself, who is paying for the medical bills? What if you were to hurt someone. Who will pay for that? You? Up to what amount? If you were to need long term care, who would pay for it? Think about this. Given the fact that you are rocking a BMW, I'm sure you are insured. If you get hurt, the insurance company is obligated to pay your bills. If you can't pay for it, it comes out of the taxpayers. It's all about dollars and cents, dude, especially for the insurance company. The insurance company is a very strong lobbyist. They have money and influence like you can't believe. They are the ones responsible for enacting all the stupid ass traffic laws. Case on point: No insurance versus speeding through a school zone. If you were to speed through a school zone (which imho is more dangerous than driving without liability insurance), you get a healthy $275 fine. Driving without liability insurance: $550? Where the hell is the logic in that? Only an insurance company will lobby for that dumb ass law, but I can see why. If I were the insurance co., I wouldn't want to have to pay for my insured when an uninsured at fault party (who couldn't pay) should pay.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's irresponsible to drive without liability insurance, but to fine someone $550 for no insurance? That makes no logical sense. Sorry about the rant and jacking the thread.

[seej333]

Yeah the best you could hope for would be a reduced ticket, but not likely from what you're saying.

Also it should be $124 not $150

[vladdy328]

Originally Posted by Phil Su

That's where you are wrong, my friend. Remember, we live in a society where people are very suit happy. Now, when you don't wear a seat belt and hurt yourself, who is paying for the medical bills? What if you were to hurt someone. Who will pay for that? You? Up to what amount? If you were to need long term care, who would pay for it? Think about this. Given the fact that you are rocking a BMW, I'm sure you are insured. If you get hurt, the insurance company is obligated to pay your bills. If you can't pay for it, it comes out of the taxpayers. It's all about dollars and cents, dude, especially for the insurance company. The insurance company is a very strong lobbyist. They have money and influence like you can't believe. They are the ones responsible for enacting all the stupid ass traffic laws. Case on point: No insurance versus speeding through a school zone. If you were to speed through a school zone (which imho is more dangerous than driving without liability insurance), you get a healthy $275 fine. Driving without liability insurance: $550? Where the hell is the logic in that? Only an insurance company will lobby for that dumb ass law, but I can see why. If I were the insurance co., I wouldn't want to have to pay for my insured when an uninsured at fault party (who couldn't pay) should pay.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's irresponsible to drive without liability insurance, but to fine someone $550 for no insurance? That makes no logical sense. Sorry about the rant and jacking the thread.

i still believe that Its solely the drivers choice to click it. Why does the law have to interfere with a persons choice? The US government is taking things too far, especially after stumbling upon an article the other day which read that 42% of police officers do not wear a seatbelt while driving. In reality they are the ones driving at high speeds, if they were to get into an accident who is left paying for their hospitality? The taxpayer. If you get caught not wearing your seatbelt, you have to pay a fine BUT, 40 million american kids ride to school everyday without one or even the option to wear one. Is this law just a money machine? If that bus were to crash the taxpayers would be obligated to pay for every single one of those kids. I don't believe it should be mandated by law. Your argument merely points out a flaw in our health care system. It does not address the fact that that the law is unconstitutional and is simply a cog in the goverment's money making machine. Despite statistics proving that seatbelts save the lives of those who use them, it still should be their choice, and their choice alone. The seatbelt law IS another prime example of the goverment telling it's civilian population how to live their life. One out of every eight deaths in America is caused by an illness directly related to overweight and obesity. By your standards it would be perfectly fine for the goverment to issue an ultimatum to stop consuming Mc Donalds or be fined for it!

[gberger1]

Originally Posted by vladdy328

i still believe that Its solely the drivers choice to click it. Why does the law have to interfere with a persons choice? The US government is taking things too far, especially after stumbling upon an article the other day which read that 42% of police officers do not wear a seatbelt while driving. In reality they are the ones driving at high speeds, if they were to get into an accident who is left paying for their hospitality? The taxpayer. If you get caught not wearing your seatbelt, you have to pay a fine BUT, 40 million american kids ride to school everyday without one or even the option to wear one. Is this law just a money machine? If that bus were to crash the taxpayers would be obligated to pay for every single one of those kids. I don't believe it should be mandated by law. Your argument merely points out a flaw in our health care system. It does not address the fact that that the law is unconstitutional and is simply a cog in the goverment's money making machine. Despite statistics proving that seatbelts save the lives of those who use them, it still should be their choice, and their choice alone. The seatbelt law IS another prime example of the goverment telling it's civilian population how to live their life. One out of every eight deaths in America is caused by an illness directly related to overweight and obesity. By your standards it would be perfectly fine for the goverment to issue an ultimatum to stop consuming Mc Donalds or be fined for it!

Come on now, dont bring Logic into this conversation!! I mean, a taxi driver, who sole purpose is to drive people around DOES NOT have to wear a seatbelt,,if all seatbelts are taken in a truck you can still throw people in the bed...W/O a seatbelt,,,School Busses children not wearing them. How about the officer driving down the road using a laptop...but if you answer your phone, ticket for you, but wait he is doing his job, wait I can take work calls on my phone, and I have been to a DOD defensive driving course, and I am a licensed racer, but I get a ticket anyhow (I havent) however I can eat a cheesburger, sip a coke and have my fricken labradoodle in my lap while weighing in at 350 WEARING my Geo Metro....ok rant over I feel better,,,,wooo saaa

[Professor///M]

Originally Posted by vladdy328

I did the research, apparently it is a primary offense so I can be pulled over solely for not wearing the belt. Looks like I am out of look

Uggh. that sucks. worth a shot.


It's just a shame that you were clearly just pulling out of the spot.

[Phil Su]

Don't get me wrong, Vladdy. I am not saying you don't have the right to choose whether you want to wear your seatbelt or not. I was merely stepping into the government's shoes in showing you that even if you think you are hurting just yourself, the financial burden is distributed amongst everyone. That is the reason why and how the government is enacting these laws. Think about it, why else would Motorcycles not need insurance even though the chances of getting hurt is higher on a motorcycle? It's all about dollars and cents. I agree that the government oversteps when they enact stupid ass laws that show no logic, yields no deterrent effect and were not supported by any viable statistics. I understand your frustration and I sympathize with your position, that's why I am a defense attorney and probable will be until I die. I can go on forever about how effed up our legal system is, but that won't change a damn thing. People as individuals are smart and logical, but as collectives, we are a bunch of dumbasses. Anyone and everyone can make a public policy argument, but unless you are standing on the other side of the barrel, you will never realize how oppressive our government is.

To answer your question: If you were pulled over by a Everett Cop, then you will be going to the court on Wetmore Ave. The judge there is usually Odell. He is not very good at weighing the facts of the case and siding with citizens when it comes to close/factual judgment calls. (i.e. I was still in my parking space and have not proceeded to drive out yet.) He is pretty good at reducing the fine though. Like I said before, it won't go on your insurance record, so think of this as another excise tax for being in Everett.

[vladdy328]

Originally Posted by Phil Su

Don't get me wrong, Vladdy. I am not saying you don't have the right to choose whether you want to wear your seatbelt or not. I was merely stepping into the government's shoes in showing you that even if you think you are hurting just yourself, the financial burden is distributed amongst everyone. That is the reason why and how the government is enacting these laws. Think about it, why else would Motorcycles not need insurance even though the chances of getting hurt is higher on a motorcycle? It's all about dollars and cents. I agree that the government oversteps when they enact stupid ass laws that show no logic, yields no deterrent effect and were not supported by any viable statistics. I understand your frustration and I sympathize with your position, that's why I am a defense attorney and probable will be until I die. I can go on forever about how effed up our legal system is, but that won't change a damn thing. People as individuals are smart and logical, but as collectives, we are a bunch of dumbasses. Anyone and everyone can make a public policy argument, but unless you are standing on the other side of the barrel, you will never realize how oppressive our government is.

To answer your question: If you were pulled over by a Everett Cop, then you will be going to the court on Wetmore Ave. The judge there is usually Odell. He is not very good at weighing the facts of the case and siding with citizens when it comes to close/factual judgment calls. (i.e. I was still in my parking space and have not proceeded to drive out yet.) He is pretty good at reducing the fine though. Like I said before, it won't go on your insurance record, so think of this as another excise tax for being in Everett.

Thanks Phil, I actually had court today. Wetmore ave it was, and Odell was the judge (complete asshole by the why). He literally gave me no time to talk and didnt even consider what I had to say. I paid the full fee, I guess I learned my lesson.