February 23, 2008:
Hi.
I read your legislative Updates. I live in South Carolina. I am
affiliated with ABATE. We have 1300 members. I was in Columbia, SC, when
the legislature passed the primary seat belt law. Eight paid lobbyist
organizations bought the votes of our senators and house members including my
senator, Gerald Malloy, and my representative, Rep. Jay Lucas. Our state is run
by a bunch of sell out politicians. The SC primary law contains
restrictions including a requirement that an officer who writes a citation for violation
of the seat belt law must obtain a form from SC DOT and fill out the form
and send it to SC DOT. Officers are obviously not complying with the law
by completing and sending this form. Also officers are stopping people
without probable cause and giving citations for violating the seat belt law.
An example is the case against Harold Camblin of Florence, SC. Mr. Camblin
entered onto highway 151 near a traffic light. His speed was about 10 MPH in
a new car. A police officer for Darlington, SC, stopped Mr.Camblin and gave
him a seat belt citation. The officer said to Mr.Camblin " I would let you
off for some other violation but not for your violation of the seat belt
law. I have been told to write plenty of seat belt tickets because it is easy
income," These offenses should be dealt with by the state Attorney
General. Right now the safety nannies in SC are trying to pass a tough helmet law.
I have a medical exemption for me not to wear a seat belt. I keep this
exemption with me when I drive. For I do not believe that I should lie down
and surrender to government tyranny. With Best Regards, William D.
Huneycutt.
February
24, 2008:
Hi, Steve. Ol' Huneycutt here, responding to your letter. In 2006 Governor
Sanford refused to sign the primary bill. South Carolina's system is like
the system in Hawaii. Sanford refused to sign the bill as a symbolic gesture.
"Republicans" in his own party informed Sanford that they had more than
enough votes to override a veto so he did not veto the bill.. Sanford held a
news conference in which he said among other things,"Our people have a
constitutional right to take a risk." Our governor and lieutenant governor are
libertarian Republicans. I have great respect for them. Also Senator Glenn F
McConnell and 3 or 4 other Senators in our state support personal freedom. The
rest of our Republican Senators in SC blindly support Boy Bush whom I
consider to be a liar, a crook, and a nincompoop. I support Dr. Ron Paul.
Someone said to me, "You are throwing away your vote." I replied, "I did
not
throw away my conscience." Keep up the good work. Cheers! William
Huneycutt.
Message from Susan Pruvli, December 29, 2007:
I
just came across your website and wanted to let you know that you are
doing a terrific job. You have gathered an amazing amount of
information, especially on the seat belt issue. If you ever issue a
newsletter or other updates, I would be interested in receiving them. A
gentleman by the name of Nedd Kareiva was doing something similar a few
years back but, for some reason, abandoned his project. If I see any
articles that might be of interest to you, I would be happy to send them
along. I support your position 100%. I have been in two minor car
accidents over the years, both of which I walked away from with almost
no injuries when not wearing a seat belt. The first one was on black
ice when I hit a snowbank and guardrail. I had a sore head for two days
but no other injuries. In the second one, someone hit me from the side.
I was pushed away from the impact and was totally unharmed. My brother
was in an accident about 30 years ago where two teenagers would have
been killed if they had been wearing seatbelts (the police officer even
confirmed this).
It is time to get rid of unconstitutional laws, and I hope your group is
successful in doing this, perhaps in one jurisdiction to begin with, and
then eventually everywhere. I like the fact that you are dealing with a
whole lot of different unconstitutional laws (seat belts, helmets,
etc.).
I attach a link to an article showing how a beautiful young girl was
killed by drowning since her seat belt was stuck. I thought this might
interest you.
Please visit link: <http://www.northumberlandnews.com/news/article/91401>
<<http://www.northumberlandnews.com/news/article/91401>>
Keep up the good work.
Susan Pruvli
spruvli@mcleanwatson.com
<mailto:spruvli@mcleanwatson.com> (e-mail)
e-mail message from Gary Fay to editor, safetychoice.org, November
13, 2007:
I am trying to find out what is involved in appealing my seatbelt ticket
to
the California Appelate Court. I am interested in any sources for free or
inexpensive legal consultation. I also need to know what the costs
involved for such an undertaking would be. I have been in two accidents with
my girlfriend in the car. In both cases she was wearing her seatbelt and I
was not. She suffered severe whiplash requiring months of physical therapy
and I walked away completely unhurt from both accidents. I am sick of
paying $100 each time I am stopped for exercising my right to choose my own
safety device.
I am really impressed with your site, but as long as millions of dollars of
federal money is backing the seatbelt laws, I don't feel our legislature will
change the laws. And the Senators in Congress making the laws are getting
money from lobbyists to keep the funding in place. Besides the majority of
people are brainwashed into believing seatbelts always work, so petitions
won't work either. I think the problem also needs to be tackled in the
courts. Unfortunately, without legal advise, its almost impossible for an
average citizen to make use of the court system, and the costs involved to
continue any further may make it impossible for all but the wealthiest to
pursue, but I'd like to find out. It would be great if there were some
resource to help people trying to fight these tickets in court or a database
of experts that can help. It seems like most lawyers don't want to even
touch something so minor as a seatbelt ticket.
I originally appealed this case to the LA Superior Court for violation of my
14th Amendment Right to choose my own medical care. The all female panel of
four judges completely ignored my argument. They rewrote my contention on
appeal to be "The mandatory seat belt law is an unconstitutional exercise of
police power and therefore unenforceable." which was never my argument. Then
they went on to cite a 2-page case from 1988, People v. Coyle. This case
bases its entire argument of constitutionality on a 1985 privacy case from
New York, Wells v. State. I didn't even think case law from other states is
applicable. The appeals court never even addressed my questions of my
liberty rights to choose my own medical care.
My other arguments for appeal were similarly ignored. I don't understand how
the judges can completely ignore my constitutional questions and completely
rewrite my reasons for appeal to one that fits a past case they can
regurgitate instead of answering the questions I actually asked. It was very
frustrating, and I want to know what my legal options are at this point.
Thanks,
Gary
THANKS for this useful info. I just forwarded it to Ms
Ritchie at the OC Register. She is doing follow-up on
this story.
Don Hull
--- editor@safetychoice.org
<mailto:editor@safetychoice.org> wrote:
Dear Don,
I just found this message on my Suse Kmail. I don't know how I could have overlooked it.
With five computers and ten operating systems, I sometimes lose
track of my mail. I do apologize for not replying sooner. Thanks very much for letting me
know about this. As you may know. NHTSA is so anxious to keep
the public from knowing the cause of death in automobile accidents that not only is it not
included in the FARS data base, but the death certificate numbers are crossed out, just to
make sure the public has no way of finding out.
I do appreciate your putting me on your mailing list. Please be assured that I read all
your messages with interest, even when I do not reply.
Best wishes, Steve S.
> On Wednesday 18 July 2007 18:12, you wrote:
> > From: Don <dhmktg@sbcglobal.net
<mailto:dhmktg@sbcglobal.net>>
> > Date: Wed Jul 18, 2007 5:04:21 PM US/Pacific
> > To: editor@safetychoice.org
<mailto:editor@safetychoice.org>
> > Subject: Coble kids tragedy
> >
> > Stefan:
> >
> > A heartbreaking tragedy of monumental proportions happened about a month ago
near Mission Viejo, CA when a semi truck on fhe I-405 going South, rear-ended a van caught
in a long line of stopped traffic at the freeway exit. Three kids, aged 5, 4 and 2, the
entire complement of the Coble family of Mission Viejo, were killed...probably, crushed to
death in their child booster seats, but of course, this was not mentioned in any of the
stories. The dad was at the office. Mom and grandmom were driving/riding in the front
seats and were "moderately" injured. When the "officials" learned the
truck driver was cold sober and they couldn't pin the cause of the accident on a DUI, they
seemed to lose interest in researching the "cause" of the fatalities. This is an
ongoing story and will be reported on in future issues of the Orange County Register,
according to Erika Ritchie, the reporter who wrote the first story. www.ocregister.com. Ms
Ritchie's email: eritchie@ocregister.com
<mailto:eritchie@ocregister.com> I am following this for obvious reasons
and will report anything I learn that is helpful to the cause of liberating motorists from
seatbelt and booster seat laws. Meanwhile, you can find several pieces on the web by
googling Coble+children and see how the entire Orange County community has been impacted
by this awful tragedy.
Don Hull
Costa Mesa
Tel/Fax: 714/641-1570
dhmktg@sbcglobal.net <mailto:dhmktg@sbcglobal.net>
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Senator Mike Crapo (also sent to Senator Craig)
239 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Crapo:
Reference is made to HR 5576 which the senate will probably be taking up when it returns
from recess. In particular, we refer to the section on “Highway Safety”
contained in the report of the Senate Appropriations Committee, 109-293. We have posted
the following language on the front page of our web-site and call it to your attention is
case you have not seen it:
“Comment: Your attention is called in particular to the
Senate report, "Highway Safety Programs". Notice the following statements:
1. "Promote High Visibility Enforcement". Police harassment required by federal
law. Have the American people really sunk so low that they are prepared to accept this?
2. "Educate prosecutors and judges". This is an arrogant interference by the
legislative branch in the judicial branch of government, in violation of the separation of
powers as provided by the U.S. Constitution.
3."To supplement NHTSA's overall safety belt effort, the Committee recommends funding
to continue the "Click It Or Ticket" national public service message
program". In other words, use taxpayer money to spread lying propaganda and threats
to bamboozle or intimidate people into using these dangerous devices.
Notice that the House report is much more guarded in its language, referring only to the authority granted the committee under P.L. 109-59.
We need to be clear on where these "Click it or Ticket" campaigns are coming from. They are not coming from your local police. They are not coming for from your state police. They are not coming from your state government. They are coming from the United States Senate.
The last report says "The federal government's regulatory role in motor vehicle and highway safety began in September l966". Since then, this particular federal bureaucracy has cost the American people thousands of lives and billions of dollars.
On July 18, 2006 the transportation subcommittee of the Senate appropriations committee issued the following statement as part of their report on HR 5576:
"National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: $811 million; this amount is $5 million above the FY06 level. These funds will maintain current programs and continue the mobilization and paid media initiatives that have proven so effective in increasing safety belt use and impaired driving awareness. "
On July 20, 2006, as expected, the full committee rubber stamped the report of the subcommittee.
For those of you who may not remember, "mobilization" means massive campaigns of police harassment and "paid media initiatives" means massive campaigns of lying propaganda, threats and intimidation to try to bamboozle, or coerce, the public into wearing seatbelts.
Our web-site also points out that in the entire 40 year history of
NHTSA, no administration, democrat or republican, has ever appointed a director of NHTSA
who knew anything about highway safety. The federal government has never regarded NHTSA as
anything but a pretext for pork barrel spending and a cynical exercise in public
relations. They have served as an excuse to infringe on our liberty, wasted billions of
dollars of our tax money and, by their incompetence, cost thousands of lives.
The web-site goes on to say,
“Given the fact that the overwhelming majority of the public is opposed to, and
resents, these campaigns, you have to wonder why congress is doing this. We are
being treated to the remarkable spectacle of a republican congress which would rather
listen to Ralph Nader and Joan Claybrook than to their constituents; which prefers the
advice of crackpots, charlatans and self appointed do-gooders to that of responsible
experts. Maybe what we need is a new congress.”
Sincerely yours,
Stefan Schreier, PhD
Safety Choice Coalition
Reply from Senator Craig:
Mr. Stefan Schreier
Safety Choice Coalition PO BOX 2591
Boise, Idaho 83701
Dear Stefan:
Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 5576, the Transportation Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2007. I appreciated hearing from you, and I apologize for the delay in my response.
You mentioned your concern regarding funding for various seat belt initiatives. As you may know, H.R. 5576 was approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee on July 26, 2006. The bill included funding for Occupant Protection Incentive Grants, Safety Belt Performance Grants, and Child Safety and Child Booster Seat Safety Incentive Grants.
While I strongly support the use of seat belts and believe their usage has significantly reduced auto accident mortalities, I want to emphasize that seat belt use regulations and their enforcement are determined at the State level. The federal government does, however, provide support for these programs through grants such as those listed above, but does not mandate that States have safety belt laws.
When H.R. 5576 comes before the full Senate for a vote, I will support the safety belt funding provisions. However, I appreciate your contacting me with your views on this issue. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I may be of any future assistance.
Sincerely,
LARRY E. CRAIG
United States Senator
LEC\zzz
Note: Please do not reply to this message because it was sent by an unmonitored account
used for outgoing correspondence only. If you would like to contact Senator Craig, please
send your email message through his website. Visit http://craig.senate.gov/email/ to send
your message or to learn about other ways of contacting Senator Craig or one of his staff
members. Should you need immediate assistance during regular business hours or while the
Senate is in session, you may call Senator Craig's Washington, DC office at 202-224-2752.
Reply from Senator Crapo:
August 23, 2006
Dr. Stefan Schreier, Ph.D.
Safety Choice Coalition
PO Box 2591
Boise, Idaho 83701
Dear Stefan:
Thank you for contacting me. I am always pleased to hear from fellow
Idahoans interested in current affairs and I appreciate your opinions.
It is essential for me to be informed of the concerns of all Idahoans. I
appreciate your willingness to share your thoughts with me. Please rest
assured, I will keep your comments and ideas in mind as I continue to
work to ensure Idaho's views are represented at the national level.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to contact me
on this or other matters of importance to you.
Sincerely,
Mike Crapo
United States Senator
MDC:td
Sign up for Senator Crapo's monthly e-newletter at
http://crapo.senate.gov
<http://crapo.senate.gov/newsletter/news_add.cfm>
11-30-05
Dear Stefan
I just received a copy of the latest CIPS' minutes with a copy of your article, "Should we fasten out seat-belts? ." You did a great job in telling the truth and hope what you wrote gets wide circulation. However, knowing from past experience with the U.S. press, they will never print even half of the truth you put together. That has been our biggest problem in fighting seat belt harness laws getting the truth out into main stream national news. It seems the U.S. press corps will print columns of information on the most heinous crimes, along with extensive details of the crime, itself, but nothing ever on opposition to seat belt laws.
Although I have had to step aside from being active in opposition to the law because I had to take time with my aged 85 year-old sister who needs help in her old age, I have put together a summary of information, a copy of which is inclosed. You are free to use it as you please.
I actually had very extensive files on opposition but with stepping aside in this political fight, I gave most of it away to two persons. One in Wisconsin some years back said he was going to write a book on the subject but so far, has not, and the other in the Chicago area, is still politically active as money permits.
While you gave a great deal of information, there still is plenty available for those who have the time, money and energy to "dig" through the records, much the same way you brought out in quoting statistics in your information. This is especially true on the negative side of forced seat belt use. To help fool the public, the press still always mentions when a person was killed in an accident that that person was not using a seat belt, but very seldom mentions one was used if killed while using one. Also, if the news story does mention the seat belt use in a fatal accident, it always is followed by that the accident was so severe even a seat belt could not save him. Of course, that might be truth in some cases, however, the severity of. the accident in not mentioned if killed while not wearing a seat belt. And, of course, the federal government refuses to keep records of those killed only because of using one, as well as records of those actually saved only because a seat belt was not used. .
As for examples of accidents: in my old files which I still have, I have a 28 page list of accidents under, "Proof of Danger." Since I am no longer on the Internet, if you want a copy I would have to print one but I can't afford making a copy of such a long list. I am sure it would eat up plenty of ink which I can't afford to keep buying. However, I believe one or more web sites might still have that same list. As of last year, there were several dozen web sites carrying a great deal of what I wrote. I never had a web site but gave what I wrote freely to anyone who would like to carry a copy. You can locate such web sites, that is, if they still carry such information, by searching Google using my full name William J. Holdorf
Thanks again for doing such a great job in fighting to regain our freedom.
Mr. William J. Holdorf, Apt. 517, 5839 S Harlem Ave. Chicago, IL 60638
Steve,
Glad to see that your website is back in business. Some of your communicants
might be interested in the early history of the seat belt debate. I have
scanned, and put on my website -
<http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk/~jadams/publish.htm>
http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk/~jadams/publish.htm - my first contribution:
The Efficacy of Seat Belt Legislation, Society of Automotive Engineers,
Transactions, 1982, pages 2824-38
Also on my website and of possible interest are the following:
2005
The failure of seat belt legislation
Chapter 6 of Clumsy Solutions for a Complex World, Marco Verweij and Michael
Thompson (eds), Palgrave Macmillan, to be published in 2006
2002
"Risk compensation theory should be subject to systematic reviews of the
scientific evidence: debate about cycle helmets"
Injury Prevention (2002;8:e1-e1)
http://ip.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/8/2/e1
1999
Cars, Cholera and Cows: The Management of Risk and Uncertainty
Policy Analysis
No. 335, Cato Institute, Washington
Published with new introduction by the Adam Smith Institute (1999) as Risky
Business
1983
Public safety legislation and the risk compensation hypothesis: the example
of motorcycle helmet legislation, Environment and Planning C: 1983 vol.1
pages 193-203
Also, my book Risk (available from Amazon) has a chapter on the subject.
Best wishes
John
Prof. John Adams
Geography Department
UCL
26 Bedford Way
London WC1H 0AP
home tel/fax 020 8442 0306
mob 079 7122 0883
email: John.Adams@UCL.ac.uk
website: http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk/~jadams/publish.htm
Steve,
I appreciate the information. I would be pleased to speak with you about this in greater
detail should you wish.
Thanks,
Jay Jackson
Executive Director
ABATE of Indiana
1-800-23ABATE
-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Schreier <tiktin@omnicast.net>
To: jay@abateonline.org
Sent: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 15:35:48 -0700
Subject: safetychoice.org
Dear Mr. Jackson,
We dont know if you're at all interested but we thought we would call your attention to
our new web-site, www.safetychoice.org.
Right now, our "coalition" is more of a hope than a reality. Our main issue, as
you can see, is mandatory seatbelt laws, but we are opposed to all laws of this type,
including motorcycle helmet laws, bicycle helmet laws, and so on.
We read with interest, admiration, and, quite frankly, some envy, about your success in
the legislative area. As you can see from the documents and messages posted on our
web-site, our efforts in this area pretty much paralleled yours. What you see represents
maybe one percent of our efforts but our success was much less. We did get the primary
seatbelt law requirement for "occupant protection grants" taken out of the final
bill (thanks to Rep. Don Young) and got the House requirement of 85% seatbelt use for one
year instead of the senate version of 95% for two years into the conference report. But we
have a long way to go.
Right now, our main concern is the funding bill, HR 3058, for the highway bill, H.R. 3. I
know this may not be of much concern to you since you got all mention of motorcycle
helmets taken out of the bill, but H.R. 3 authorizes the expenditure of, potentially, more
than a billion dollars for seatbelt propaganda and coercion. Of this, $500 million is
specifically for seatbelts, including "high visibility enforcement", and another
billion is discretionary but may be spent by states on seatbelt propaganda and coercion. I
dont know how you feel about this but I hope you will be able to read some of our material
on this subject.
Sincerely yours,
Steve S.
Founder and webmaster, Safety Choice Coalition.
Comment: I did speak to Mr. Jackson and he said he would pass the information on to his members.
The following is from Maryland ABATE:
Thank you for the info. Sound like the same BS that the federal govt. pulled to get the mandatory helmet law in 92. I will pass it on, and please keep me informed.
Thanks
John
--- Stefan Schreier <tiktin@omnicast.net> wrote:
> Dear John and Maryland ABATE, > > I suppose this should go to your legislative > director or research director but I couldnt find an > e-mail address for them so I thought I would send it > to you. > I read your web-site with great interest, > particularly the part about the effect of helmet > laws, since I have long been doing research into the > effect of seatbelt laws, with similar results. > While the new highway bill, HR3, no longer > mentions helmets (congratulations), it authorizes > the expenditure of over a billion dollars through > fiscal 2009 for seatbelt propaganda and coercion. In > order to get this money, states have to maintain a > high degree of seatbelt use. They must then use the > money to further bamboozle and coerce people into > using seatbelts. > HR 3058, the funding bill for HR 3, for > fiscal 2006, appropriates $380 million dollars for > so-called "highway safety programs", $136 million of > which is specifically designated for seatbelt > propaganda and coercion. States may also use part, > or all, of the remaining money for the same purpose, > at their discretion. This is not counting an > additional $15 million for "high visibility > enforcement" which states may use either to enforce > drunk driving laws or to enforce seatbelt laws, > again at their discretion. > Seatbelts have severely injured and killed > thousands of people. There is not a single verified > case of a person's life ever being saved by a > seatbelt in automobile accident. For the full story > on this and the pending legislation, please visit > www.safetychoice.org. Here you will find a wealth > of material in the Documents section, both on the > legislative and the technical side. > If you dont think the government should be > spending a billion dollars of your money to > bamboozle and coerce people into doing something > which is liable to kill them, please let your > senators and representatives know. And please pass > the word to your members. > Thanks. > > Sincerely yours, Steve Schreier, PhD, Aeospace > Engineering, (University of Maryland), founder and > webmaster, Safety Choice Coalition.
__________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.6/111 - Release Date: 9/23/2005
The following is a message from Mayor Jim West of Spokane, Washington:
Well I'm not satisfied either. When in the legislature I did not vote to make seat belt
violations a primary offense but I was outvoted. I believe in personal responsibility in
nearly all cases and making this a primary offense went against that. In fact, when the
law was first passed to make it a secondary offense I believe I voted against that too.
Having said that I do believe that all drivers owe it to me and the rest of the driving
public to practice safe driving habits and using a selt belt falls in that catergory for a
number of reasons. But that's another story for another time.
I do not tell officers which laws to enforce or not enforce because that would be in
violation of my oath of office, something I take seriously. I swore to uphold the laws of
the City of Spokane, the State or Washington, the Constitution of Washington and the
Constitution of the United States.
I haven't checked with the Police Chief yet but I don't believe we are currently
conducting any emphasis patrols on the South Hill. It could be just new signage? or was it
a tempory sign warning drivers to buckle up because we were doing a special patrol. I do
suspect that as school starts and more young drivers hit the roads we try to remind them
to buckle up..........
Jim West
Mayor
By the way, I was ticketed for this two years ago by the Washington State Patrol when I
crossed Sprague Avenue from one parking lot to another without buckling up (I mean it was
just across the street for crying out loud). .........
________________________________
From: Stefan Schreier [mailto:tiktin@omnicast.net]
Sent: Sat 9/24/2005 11:27 AM
To: West, James
Subject: click-it-or-ticket
Dear Mr. Mayor:
I realize you have other troubles right now but I do not think we can let this go without
protest. I was stunned when I saw the "click-it-or-ticket" sign on Spokane's
South Hill. I could not believe that. after a hiatus of almost two years, the Spokane
police department is once again stopping people and ripping them off. ......
Sincerely yours, Steve S.
The following is from the office of Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington:
Dear Mr. Schreir, Thank you for contacting Senator Cantwell regarding the reauthorization of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (Tea-21). The Senator appreciates you taking the time to share your concerns on this issue and we regret the delayed response. As I work on transportation policy, Senator Cantwell has asked that I respond to you directly. As you may know, on July 29, 2005 Congress succeeded in passing the Tea-21 bill which will send desperately needed infrastructure funding to Washington state. Our state will bring home over $4 billion over the next five years to ease congestion on our overcrowded roads, repair our highways, maintain our ferries and help expand our public transit systems. If you have any further questions regarding this legislation, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you again for taking the time to share your concerns with the Senator. Sincerely, Erin C. Hiemstra Legislative Correspondent Office of Senator Maria Cantwell 717 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 T.202.224.3441 F.202.228.0514
From: Don Hull
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 12:38 PM Subject: Article from Packards Int'l magazine. Your readers might like to see this 2-page article from the
Summer issue of the Packards International magazine. A magazine for members of the Packards International Motor Car Club.
Even tho the seatbelt laws do not pertain (yet) to our classic Packards, this is a freedom issue that needs wider
dissemination. And besides, seatbelts do pertain to Packards because some of our members are installing them in their cars, and I think
they should be aware of the potential dangers.
Comment: To see this article and more from Don, click on this LINK
To: Dr. Stefan Schreier
tiktin@omnicast.net
Dear Stefan,
Thank you for contacting me regarding the primary seat belt enforcement legislation before
the General Assembly. I appreciated hearing from you.
I share your concerns regarding the impact of this legislation because I believe our
founding fathers intended to maximize the number of free choices that we, as citizens,
enjoy. They believed in limiting individual choices only when my rights began to
infringe on your rights, and I do not believe our nation was founded with the intent of
protecting people from their own decisions.
With regard to seat belts, it is interesting that Arizona has the highest seat belt usage
in the country, but does not have a primary seat belt enforcement law. They simply
allow seat belt usage to be admissible in civil cases. Arizona citizens make a free
decision on whether or not to wear a seat belt and measure that decision against the
reality that if one doesn't buckle up, one may not be able to collect damages if they are
in an accident. Public policy ought to maximize free choices and tie consequences to
personal decisions rather than simply impose government edict. The bill that passed
the Senate does the reverse - it imposes a fine if you don't do what government deems
best.
After debating the legislation, the House of Representatives sent it back to the Education
and Public Works Committee for further review. I will be watching that process and
will not support any proposal that does not include what we both believe in - market-based
solutions that preserve and maximize an individual's free will.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Take care.
Mark
Comment: Mark is Mark Sanford, the governor of South Carolina. Unfortunately, the South Carolina legislature subsequently passed a primary seatbelt law, "without the governor's signature". However, this law contains so many restrictions it is not clear how, or if, it is going to be enforced.
As it stands, I don't think this is going anywhere.
Rod Jetton
Speaker
Missouri House of Representatives
________________________________
From: Stefan Schreier [mailto:tiktin@omnicast.net]
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 11:02 AM
To: Steve Hunter; Leonard Hughes; Rodney Hubbard; Joe Aull; Jim Avery;
Brian Baker; Judy Baker; Otto Bean; Carl Bearden; Robert Behnen; Walt
Bivins; Lanie Black; Craig Bland; John Bowman; Amber Boykins; Rachel
Bringer; Sharon Brooks; Jason Brown; Michael Brown; Mark Bruns; John
Burnett; Richard Byrd; Ron Casey; Maria ChappelleNadal; Kathy Chinn;
Nathan Cooper; Wayne Cooper; Shannon Cooper; Michael Corcoran; Jane
Cunningham; Mike Cunningham; Melba Curls; Bruce Darrough; Michael Daus;
Cynthia Davis; David Day; Bill Deeken; Tom Loehner; Scott Lipke; Albert
Liese; Paul Levota; Jim Lembke; Sara Lampe; Brad Lager; JC Kuessner;
Will Kraus; Fred Kratky; Gayle Kingerly; Van Kelly; Robin Jones; kenny
jones; Cathy Jolly; Bob Johnson; Rick Johnson; Connie Johnson; Rod
Jetton; Jack Jackson; Allen Icet; Tom Dempsey; Charlie Denison; Mike
Dethrow; Bob Dixon; Margaret Donnelly; Curt Dougherty; Gary Dusenberg;
Yaphett El-Amin; Ed Emery; Doug Ervin; Sally Faith; Kathlyn Fares;
Barney Fisher; Tim Flook; Ward Franz; Barbara Fraser; Thomas George;
Jack Goodman; Jim Guest; Belinda Harris; Jeff Harris; Esther Haywood;
Wayne Henke; Steve Hobbs; Theodore Hoskins
Subject: Please vote no on SB 221
Dear Representative,
I am writing to ask you to oppose senate bill SB 221, the mandatory
seatbelt bill. This bill has been scheduled for third reading on Monday,
May 9, and so the next vote may well be on final passage. Before
deciding how to vote on this bill, please visit,
www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/Cover2.pdf
and
www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/seatbeltvictims.pdf
Cover2.pdf is a 157 page, documented report which shows that wearing
a seat belt in an automobile increases the danger of being killed or
injured in an accident. Seatbeltvictims.pdf speaks for itself. Seatbelts
have killed and seriously injured thousands of people. There is not a
single verified case of a person's life ever being saved by a seat belt
in an automobile accident. Please do not be taken in by MADD, NHTSA, or
the so-called "National Safety Council". These organizations are not
what you may think. Not a single other state has, so far this year,
passed a primary seat belt law, even at the cost of losing federal
grants. The people are overwhelmingly opposed to this type of
legislation. Please vote no on SB 221.
Sincerely yours,
Stefan Schreier, PhD
Aerospace Engineering
Comment: The Speaker proved a true prophet. The bill was defeated by a wide margin.
Stefan
Thanks for the E.
Non nobis, sed aliis - Not for us but for others.
My NHTSA stats came from the report cited in my piece by
The Reliability Center, Inc in Virginia. You can Google the firm and find the same report.
I suspect you will find it as odious as I.
In actuality, I am not impressed with or have much patience with statistics. Although the
saying goes, "Figures don't lie...", in fact liars can make them, especially
when relying on the ignorance of others.
My "message" to my radio/reading audience is akin to Washington's famous quote
about Government: a fearful master and a dangerous servant. (I tend to say it a tad
stronger than George did). On radio, numbers. per centages, statistics tend to put the
audience to sleep. I try to give people enough informatio to motivate them into looking
deeper into the issue at hand. Only when people overcome their own inertia and apathy can
we begin to hope for help in turning the USS Big Government around. And if that doesn't
happen soon, the Titanic would be the only big boat that goes under.
I'll do what I can to encourage interest and support for any legislation that will stop
the deterioration of rights, shrink the government and stop the intrusion of regulation.
Please keep me posted on the progress if HR3 in the Senate.
In Liberty,
BW
Brian Wilson
Talk Show Host
ABC Radio Networks
Comment: Brian Wilson survived a serious auto accident only because
he was not wearing a seatbelt. He survived because he was "ejected". Had
he not been "ejected", he would have been crushed to death.
June 8, 2005 Update
I have just received a notice in the mail from "Alliance One" (a dept
collector) for $186.48 pertaining to my $86.00 seatbelt ticket. After
speaking to Kitsap County District Court on the phone I found out that they
claim to have sent out a notice on April 7, 2005 that I never received. When
I informed the court representative that I had not received the April 7th
notice she said that she had no way of knowing that, and that they would not
take payment. The matter had been handed over to a collection agency and I
would have to deal with them. So it is, the court concludes that because I
can not prove that I did not receive the notice, I must have received it.
This was a representative of Kitsap County District Court concluding that I
am lying because I cannot prove otherwise. My reaction to this, is to assume
that she was lying and never sent out the notice. Of greater concern to me
is wether or not I am getting selective treatment or does the Kitsap County
District Court treat every citizen as guilty unless they can prove themselfs
otherwise?
Anyway, the collection agency (Alliance One) threatened to damage my credit
if I didn't respond within 30 days, so I wrote back to them. In my letter I
told them that I had paid the Court $250.00 for an Appeal and that the Court
refused to hear it. I regard this as funds paid for a service never rendered
and the Court should have refunded my $250.00. Thus, I would pay the $86.00
that was the original fine when I am refunded the $250.00. I think any
creditable, reputable, reliable business would be expected to refund money
taken for a service that was never rendered.
After all, the WA Court of Appeals ruled that they could not hear the case
because the original fine was $200.00 or less, and they did this after
taking $250.00 from me to hear the Appeal.
It is no wonder that Justice can not be had from such a legal system that
does not practice what they preach.
I hope that enough people will respond to this hypocrisy by contacting their
WA State legislator to change things for the better. The people of WA are
not being served by this injustice. How many people do you know that have
been done injustice by the WA Court System?
If the legal system is allowed to assume that everyone that steps into a
court room is guilty, we are no more free than the people of a Communist
Country. Perhaps we are less free because we have more laws governing us.
You could spend three years in law school and only get a sampling of the
laws that could be used to selectively harass any good citizen.
If we don't wake-up and start fighting for freedom in our own back yard,
(Now), it will cease to exist, and tyrants will rule our lives.
No one should be prosecuted for something that does not effect others, and
victimless crimes should cease to exist.
Dan Goebel
PS Seek Liberty, Join the Libertarian Party at www.LP.org
"The United States of America" -
One Nation under God, with Liberty and Justice for all.
Not a reality, but a goal that every public employee must strive for.
Comment: Dan Goebel has been engaged in a determined fight against a seatbelt ticket for the last two years.
Thanks for all the work you've done on this. I'll get cracking on
it.
Regards,
Nedd
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 13:52 , Steve Schreier <tiktin@omnicast.net>
wrote:
The chairman of the House Transportation Committee, Donald Young, made a statement
yesterday saying he hoped they could reach agreement by the end of June. He also said the
staff was doing most of the work.
http://www.house.gov/transportation/
Hit the link on the right under Top Story to get to the statement.
That means we still have time to make our voices heard. If you have already written
to individual members or the committees, I would suggest that we now write to individual
members of the staffs. We have got to keep up the pressure. There is a lot more at stake
here than just seatbelts.
The senate pulic works committee, which is handling the negociations for the senate
side, has an e-mail address: guest@epw.senate.gov
Please e-mail them if you have not already done so. Again, their phone number is
(202) 224-6176, FAX (202) 224-5167. This is the only FAX number and e-mail address they
publish. In addition, you can contact:
Ellen Stein, Majority Staff Director for Transportation and Infrastructure,
(202) 224-6176, and Ken Connolly, Minority Staff Director, (202) 224-8832. If you
get an answering machine, leave a message on their machine.
On the House side, you can contact:
Lloyd Jones, Majority Chief of Staff, House Transportation and Infrastucture
Committee. (202) 225-9446
Derek Miller, Investigations Counsel (202) 225-5504 (Tell him to investigate
Jeffrey Runge).
David Heymsfeld, Minority Staff Director (202) 225-4472, and
Kathleen Zern, Counsel, (202) 225-4472. (The last two went to Harvard but dont hold
that against them)
Again, the e-mail for the House committee is transcomm@mail.house.gov and the FAX is
(202) 225-6782
In your statement I would suggest to them that they can find a lot better use for
$667 million dollars than giving it to Jeffrey Runge. Last year they diverted that money
away from Runge and used it instead to fund more than a hundred projects for individual
members of the House. This was in the final version of last year's bill, HR 3550 EH,
Section 2002. This was passed by a vote of the whole House. It was done very quietly with
no public announcement. I would suggest to them that they do it again this year.
Alternatively, they can just take the money out to reduce the size of the bill and
help insure that the president will sign it. The president has said that both bills are
too large and he will veto either one if they are not cut. Remember, the sections we want
cut are 7216 in the senate bill and sections 1405, 2001a (2and6), 2002 and 2005.
Keep the faith and hang in there.
As we know, they did reach a compromise. See the Documents section of this web site ofr the details.
Steve, this is worthwhile and excellent stuff. I'm trying to figure
some addition here. 144 + 59 = 203. I'm thinking maybe the 59 is actually 61.
RE: And if we consider only the total killed who were inside a vehicle, it is 144 out of
36,281.
Do you mean those who were not thrown from the vehicle? If so, if I read this
correctly, the 144 sounds like a coincidence since "According to the FARS data base
for 2001, the number of persons killed by being "thrown through the windshield"
that year is 144. If we consider only the total killed, it is 144 out of 42,116. And if we
consider only the total killed who were inside a vehicle, it is 144 out of 36,281. ".
Am I missing something here? I need a bit of clarification. But in general, I
understand what you are saying.
Also, refresh my mind on the Rosalia crash.
Regards,
Nedd
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 10:52 , Stefan Schreier <tiktin@omnicast.net>
wrote:
I have been doing some more research in the FARS data base because I really did not
feel I had dealt with this question of ejections in an entirely satisfactory manner in my
report. As you know, the principal reason for seatbelts touted by the seatbelt advocates
is to prevent persons from "being thrown through the windshield". So I thought I
would check the FARS data base to see how many persons are actually killed by being
"thrown through the windshield".
This is for 2001 but the data doesn't change that much from year to year. 101,175
persons were involved in fatal traffic accidents that year. That includes all those in the
vehicles involved, not merely those who were killed. It also includes persons outside the
vehicles who were killed by a vehicle. According to the FARS data base for 2001, the
number of persons killed by being "thrown through the windshield" that year is
144. If we consider only the total killed, it is 144 out of 42,116. And if we consider
only the total killed who were inside a vehicle, it is 144 out of 36,281. Interestingly,
not all those who were "thrown thru the windshield" were killed. The total
number "thrown through the windshield" was 182, of whom 144 were killed. 182 out
of 101,175.
182 out of the roughly 250,000,000 people who ride in cars in this country, all of
whom are supposed to wear seatbelts for this principal reason. I checked to see how many
people are killed by lightning in this country each year. It averages around 150. In other
words, the number of people killed each year by being "thrown through the
windshield" is about the same as the number killed by lightning. We will certainly
have to pass a law requiring everyone to carry a lightning rod at all times.
Now these figures are for "total ejections". I also checked for
"partial ejections". According to NHTSA, if there is any penetration at all, it
is counted as a "partial ejection". If we include "partial ejections"
through the windshield, the total number of fatalities is still only 205. That is, out of
36,281 vehicle occupants killed in traffic accidents, only 59 were killed by "partial
ejections" through the windshield.
But here is the final nail in the coffin of the seatbelt advocates. Using the
program on the NCSA web-site we find that the average speed of a vehicle involved in a
fatal, total ejection in 2001 was 66 mph. Of course the force depends on the rate of
deceleration which depends on multiple factors not all of which are given. We do know,
however, that in the Rosalia crash last year, the speed of the vehicles involved was given
in the police report as 60 mph and the two boys who were wearing seatbelts were so
seriously injured by their seatbelts that they had to be placed in intensive care. We know
from other accident reports that many are killed by their seatbelts. Not all those who are
"thrown through the windshield" are killed. In other words, even in this
tiny number of highly unusual cases there is no evidence that a person wearing a seatbelt
would be more likely to survive than one who is not. Yet this is the principal
justification given for forcing 250,000,000 people to wear seatbelts.
Comment: For the answer to Nedd's questions, see the next message
Thanks for this info, Steve, and also the info from the other message.
This is really good stuff. And while it's true it may not always be reliable,
it nonetheless is a good barometer to use. The disparity between the police stats
and that of the NHTSA is for the most part irrelevant as both sets of figures prove the
danger of mandatory belts.
Regards,
Nedd
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 11:20 , Stefan Schreier <tiktin@omnicast.net>
wrote:
The 42,116 includes 5,835 persons who were killed by a motor vehicle but were not
in a motor vehicle. In other words, they were struck by a motor vehicle. These are mainly
pedestrians, bicyclists and motor cyclists. The 36,281 are those who were killed who were
in a motor vehicle - so called "vehicle occupants". You are right about the
arithmetic. I think the mistake resulted from the fact that the program does not always
give you the exact same answer. I went back and checked it again today and this time
it gave me 143 and 62.
You can check this out yourself at
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/queryReport.cfm?stateid=0&year=2003
The other thing to bear in mind is that these figures are based on police reports
and, as NHTSA themselves have admitted, these are not always reliable, especially where
seatbelts are concerned.
Comment: You can find out about the Rosalia crash in "seatbeltvictims" in the documents section of this web site
Hello. Steve. Thanks for your Email. I agree with the need for
ASBLC and
the use of a letterhead to deal with politicians. The nannies have been trying
since 1985 to put South Carolina in their camp. They used some very sorry
political moves to achieve their goals. And considering that most South
Carolina politicans are mentally on the level of a fifth to sixth grade school boy
coupled with federal bribes the rational people in our state hardly had a
chance. I dont know how the new man Bush has appointed to the Supreme Court will
vote but the last vote of the high court was 5 to 4 against us. Maybe it
will change 5 to 4 our favor. And in 1950 a doctor lobbied congress to require
seat belts to be installed on automobiles. This doctor believed so strongly
in seat belts that he had seat belts installed on his 1950 Chevrolet. Sometime
in the 1990's this doctor was killed in an automobile accident in
Cincinnati,Ohio. He was wearing his seat belt. CBS evening news reported
the accident
and showed the gorry accident with the doctor's brains running out his
head.I do not remember the doctor's
name. I wish I could acquire a copy of this accident (a picture) with
the
doctor's name to send to some of our dumb doctors in South Carolina who have
taken up a cause to save a relatively small number of us from ourselves.
Last year about 1300 died on South Carolina highways. At the same time over
6,000 smokers in South Carolina died a smoker's death. Smart!
Keep my name on your list as I am a strong supporter of liberty and I
cannot
be content until I see constitutional goverment restored in the U.S.A. and
our people enjoying their freedoms as they did in the 1950's and 1960's and
1970's. Regards
William Huneycutt.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/073005dnbushelmets.2
1afbf19.html
Car helmets for kids may save lives
08:45 PM CDT on Friday, July 29, 2005
Chicago Tribune
Michael Fleming, amateur inventor and full-time Houston attorney, has filed
a patent application for a new safety device for kids.
It's called the Automobile Helmet. "The time has come for a helmet that
protects children in autos," Mr. Fleming said.
Actually the time is overdue.
"Too many children are killed in car crashes from head injuries and too
many who survive face a future filled with head injuries," Mr. Fleming
said, citing government statistics that 2,500 children are killed and
294,000 injured annually in vehicle accidents.
"A protective helmet must be produced to confront this problem," he said.
But being produced and being worn are two different things.
Based on age and weight, kids move from infant to child safety to booster
seats, which are required by law until age 8.
"But once they reach school age at 5 or 6, they resist booster seats," said
John Ulczycki, director of the Transportation Safety Group for the National
Safety Council.
And how do parents who refuse to use seats belts persuade kids to not only
belt up, but helmet up as well?
Mr. Fleming thinks he has the answer: loading the helmet with electronics.
"By building a helmet that allows a child to listen to music, watch a DVD
movie or play a handheld game, I'm hoping they'll want to wear a helmet
without complaint," Mr. Fleming said.
-----
Reply from Kenn Gividen:
Eventually they've ban vehicles altogether.
Also note:
1 - New law would require seatbelts for dogs (Pennsylvania)
2 - New law would ban smoking while driving (New Jersey)
It's epidemic. See links to above stories: http://www.hillarysvillage.com.
Ms Stein:
I understand there is a proposal to spend $667 million to promote more
police harassment of peaceful motorists through seatbelt law
enforcement.
This is to urge the committee to eliminate all such funding because---
- it is unConstitutional. There is no constitutional authority for the
federal government to be harassing anyone for peaceful, nonviolent,
voluntary behavior. (That should be enough right there.)
-waste of government resources. At $20,000/yr per HH in income taxes,
$667 million is the total collections from 33,350 HHs.
Just as importantly, the "Click it or Ticket" campaign itself is--
-Based on a lie. Seatbelts don't always "save
lives," they often
take them. In 30% of fatal accidents in
which a passenger was ejected from the vehicle, the
fatality was
the belted one trapped inside the vehicle.
i.e, the ejected
person SURVIVED. (source: National Motorists Assn) In any case, the
choice of if and when to use a seatbelt rightly belongs to the motorist,
not the government.
-Immoral by telling me the government owns my body. Violates my rights
to determine my own health
behavior.
-Impractical and abuse of police, by wasting police resources on
victimless behavior, it turns cops into babysitters.
-Philosophical madness. Women have "free choice"
in the life and
death issue of abortion, but not
whether to wear a seatbelt. Can anything be more
incongruous?
-Government corruption. By bribing local police departments
with overtime pay to pursue violators. i.e., the feds
are using
money they stole from us through the tax
system to bribe our local cops into hijacking us for yet
more
money.
-An axis of evil between the feds and the
locals against THE
PEOPLE.
Summary: LAWS which criminalize peaceful, nonviolent,
voluntary
behavior have no place in a free society. They should be repealed.
Don Hull
Costa Mesa, CA
2X Libertarian candidate for Congress
editor of an antique car club magazine
Comment: Ellen Stein is the chief of staff of the senate transportation committee
Dr. Schreier.
Thanks for the information. I have been opposing this bill for the last
two years. It looks like it has sufficient backing to move through this
year. In Judiciary Committee I was able to amend the bill to require
that probable cause for stopping an automobile must be demonstrated
before a citation can be given. However when it gets to the floor I will
oppose it.
John Coghill
________________________________
From: Stefan Schreier [mailto:tiktin@omnicast.net]
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 11:27 AM
To: Rep. John Coghill
Subject: SB 87
Dear Representative Coghill,
I am writing to ask you to oppose
SB 87, the primary seatbelt
law bill, which, as I understand it, is going to be considered by the
Judiciary Committee on April 22. I have been studying the effect of
seatbelts in automobile accidents for the past year and have not found
any evidence which would support the claims of the seatbelt advocates.
For a full report on this matter, please visit
www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/Cover2.pdf
<http://www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/Cover2.pdf>
and
www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/seatbeltvictims.pdf
<http://www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/seatbeltvictims.pdf>
Surveys show that the overwhelming majority of the American people and,
I am sure, the people of Alaska, are opposed to this type of
legislation. Thank you very much for your thoughtful consideration of
this matter.
Sincerely yours,
Stefan Schreier, PhD
Aerospace Engineering
Comment: This bill passed in different versions in the Alaska house
and senate and the legislative session ended before it could go to conference.
April 20, 2005
Dear Stefan,
Thank you for your recent e-mail in regards to Senate Bill 87, relating
to seatbelt violation as primary offense. I couldn't agree with you
more on this subject. Your study highlights some very informational
points.
I greatly appreciate your thoughts. Warm regards,
Nancy Dahlstrom
State Representative
________________________________
From: Stefan Schreier [mailto:tiktin@omnicast.net]
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 11:57 AM
To: Rep. Nancy Dahlstrom
Subject: SB 87
Dear Representative Dahlstrom,
I am writing to ask you to oppose SB 87,
the primary seatbelt
law bill, which, as I understand it, is going to be considered by the
Judiciary Committee on April 22. I have been studying the effect of
seatbelts in automobile accidents for the past year and have not found
any evidence which would support the claims of the seatbelt advocates.
For a full report on this matter, please visit
www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/Cover2.pdf
<http://www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/Cover2.pdf>
and
www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/seatbeltvictims.pdf
<http://www.omnicast.net/~tiktin/seatbeltvictims.pdf>
Surveys show that the overwhelming majority of the American people and,
I am sure, the people of Alaska, are opposed to this type of
legislation. Thank you very much for your thoughtful consideration of
this matter.
Sincerely yours,
Stefan Schreier, PhD
Aerospace Engineering
Comment: Representative Dahlstrom fought this bill tooth and nail for two days running. It was largely through her efforts that this bill was stopped.
"MADD - It seems as though they are a part of the government now."
Yes, at least in IL. They receive grants from both Fed and local government to be
"advocates". This includes blatantly supporting candidates and laws that
are consistent with the agenda that they are paid to advance.
They originally were funded for DUI issues. But like any group run by grantsmanship,
they now will argue for any issue for which they get funding.
Bob Schmidt
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Comment: In fact, MADD is now a wholly owned subsidiary of NHTSA,
being run by Jeffrey Runge's pals. How they gained control of this organization is an
interesting question.