crunchierthanthou
New member
a bill was introduced today that will undermine our booster law passed in 2008 (8 years or 57").
http://le.utah.gov/~2010/bills/hbillint/hb0113.pdf
here's the text of the proposed change -
so basically, no booster needed if the child is over age 5, you're within 4 miles of your house, and it's a scheduled activity. oh, and as long as you don't actually have any type of restraint available in the vehicle. Apparently the bill sponsor is failing to recognize that most crashes happen close to home. It does say that you have to provide a seatbelt according to the seatbelt law, but that has a nifty little loophole saying that you can have more passengers than seatbelts, as long as all seatbelts are in use. :doh:
On the plus side, my neighbor who loads up all the kids from his street into the back of his suv to drive them to school wouldn't be breaking the law anymore. .
http://le.utah.gov/~2010/bills/hbillint/hb0113.pdf
here's the text of the proposed change -
(c) Notwithstanding the requirement under Subsection (1)(a)(ii), a person:
(i) is not required to use a child restraint device to restrain a person who is five years of
age or older but younger than eight years of age if:
(A) the operator of the motor vehicle is operating the motor vehicle directly to or from:
(I) the operator's residence; and
(II) (Aa) a school where one of the passengers is enrolled;
(Bb) a church sponsored activity; or
(Cc) an organized recreational activity;
(B) the distance from the operator's residence and the location described in Subsection
(1)(c)(i)(A)(II) is four miles or less; and
(C) all available child restraint devices in the vehicle are being occupied; and
(ii) shall provide for the protection of a person described in this Subsection (1)(c) by
securing, or causing to be secured, a properly adjusted and fastened safety belt on the person.
so basically, no booster needed if the child is over age 5, you're within 4 miles of your house, and it's a scheduled activity. oh, and as long as you don't actually have any type of restraint available in the vehicle. Apparently the bill sponsor is failing to recognize that most crashes happen close to home. It does say that you have to provide a seatbelt according to the seatbelt law, but that has a nifty little loophole saying that you can have more passengers than seatbelts, as long as all seatbelts are in use. :doh:
On the plus side, my neighbor who loads up all the kids from his street into the back of his suv to drive them to school wouldn't be breaking the law anymore. .