Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wait, there are people who didn't know you need to be buckled in the back seat????
Wow, I'm totally surprised. I took driver's ed in public school in 1985 and I knew that seatbelts are necessary (even if not required by law at the time).
It's not common knowledge that the rules of physics apply to the back seat?
Oh, so your kids wear seat belts on bus rides/field trips? Or do the laws of physics not apply then?
Of course we all know one "should" wear a seat belt - but whether or not it is legally required is a totally different question. And iin 1985 it is doubtful even front seat drivers were required to do so.
Anonymous wrote:Wait, there are people who didn't know you need to be buckled in the back seat????
Wow, I'm totally surprised. I took driver's ed in public school in 1985 and I knew that seatbelts are necessary (even if not required by law at the time).
It's not common knowledge that the rules of physics apply to the back seat?
Anonymous wrote:OP here. They got stopped in DC and the friend is probably 17, not really sure. The friend claims he wasn't aware he had to be belted in the back seat and has offered to pay the ticket but I'm furious that DS was driving with someone unrestrained, although he claims he checked before driving off and the other kid was wearing it. Why would you take off a seat belt after you've already buckled it? Doesn't make sense.
Oy vey.
Anonymous wrote:According to the DC Click it or Ticket it page, all passengers must wear a seatbelt, not just minors:
It's a $50 fine and 2 points for not having your seat belt buckled at all times - for drivers and all passengers, front and back seats.
Anonymous wrote:OP here. They got stopped in DC and the friend is probably 17, not really sure. The friend claims he wasn't aware he had to be belted in the back seat and has offered to pay the ticket but I'm furious that DS was driving with someone unrestrained, although he claims he checked before driving off and the other kid was wearing it. Why would you take off a seat belt after you've already buckled it? Doesn't make sense.
Oy vey.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. They got stopped in DC and the friend is probably 17, not really sure. The friend claims he wasn't aware he had to be belted in the back seat and has offered to pay the ticket but I'm furious that DS was driving with someone unrestrained, although he claims he checked before driving off and the other kid was wearing it. Why would you take off a seat belt after you've already buckled it? Doesn't make sense.
Oy vey.
I think you're being hard on your kid. While, technically, it's your kid's responsibility to make sure everyone is buckled in, it's not unreasonable to assume that the (nearly adult) passenger has fastened his seat belt. The other kid should pay the ticket.
+1. I would have no clue if someone in the backseat undid their seatbelt.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. They got stopped in DC and the friend is probably 17, not really sure. The friend claims he wasn't aware he had to be belted in the back seat and has offered to pay the ticket but I'm furious that DS was driving with someone unrestrained, although he claims he checked before driving off and the other kid was wearing it. Why would you take off a seat belt after you've already buckled it? Doesn't make sense.
Oy vey.
I think you're being hard on your kid. While, technically, it's your kid's responsibility to make sure everyone is buckled in, it's not unreasonable to assume that the (nearly adult) passenger has fastened his seat belt. The other kid should pay the ticket.
Anonymous wrote:What was he really pulled over for? I would think the unbelted passenger wouldn't be noticed until the police officer stuck his head in a car that had already been pulled over.
If he's a teen driver, I'd instill a no-passenger rule because his friends are unreliable. If the friend is a teen, I'd call his parents. Seriously, the friend should pay the ticket.