Wanna hear something dumb?

ThreeBeans

New member
We have a five and forty law in Mass :rolleyes: (that's not the dumb thing. i mean, it IS dumb, but more dumbness is to follow. please stay tuned.)

We have legislation pending for an 8 and 80 law. It's passed the senate unanimously and is currently in a holding pattern in the House. Why? Why, you ask, would such a valuable law not be passed immediately?

Two reasons. They are both dumb.


1. The ACLU is lobbying AGAINST it :eek: They say that it will cause discrimination against minority families because they won't be able to afford boosters :confused: (Yeah, I'm not following the logic either.)

2. There is a fear that requiring boosters will cause a run on CPS techs and the state won't be able to handle the influx.


IS THAT NOT THE DUMBEST THING YOU HAVE EVER HEARD?!?!?!?
 
ADS

Shaunam

New member
Ok, I have some words now. LOL

1) How is this discrimination? Parents have to afford all sorts of things for their kids. Clothes, toys, food, ect. Is it discrimination to require that you feed your child so they don't become malnourished? Sheesh. And is the law even going to go into specifics about harness vs. high-back vs. low-back. I'm assuming not, so really, it would probably be legal to put them in a $15 booster from wal-mart. Hardly breaking the bank, and yes, I know how hard it can be to even scrape up $15 when you are dirt-poor. But you do it anyways for the important stuff. And what about government (or other) programs that give out seats? Our program isn't the best, but they give out sceneras, cosco harnessed boosters, and dedicated boosters (not sure what brand).

2) Boosters aren't nearly as complicated as harnessed car seats. Are people really going to freak out and stampede the techs to find out how to set the booster in the seat and wrap the belt around the child? Now, I'm not saying people *shouldn't* go to a tech to find out how to properly use them, but they aren't likely to do it voluntarily.

Ok, I feel better. :)
 

MomToEliEm

Moderator
Dumb, but that is the way many people think. They don't think about all the tax savings there might be in health care and other state aid whenever these people might get injured. They are worried about upfront costs to their voting public.

I just wish Texas even had a booster law (or even a decent carseat law). I have pretty much given up it ever passing here (been passed over for the past 4 years). It is crazy that a 36 inch child can be in a regular seatbelt (law is 36 inch or 5 years old, whichever comes first). My children were 2 years old when they were 36 inch so legally they can be in a regular seatbelt (and I do see that often here).
 

Morganthe

New member
Dumb, but that is the way many people think. They don't think about all the tax savings there might be in health care and other state aid whenever these people might get injured. They are worried about upfront costs to their voting public.

I just wish Texas even had a booster law (or even a decent carseat law). I have pretty much given up it ever passing here (been passed over for the past 4 years). It is crazy that a 36 inch child can be in a regular seatbelt (law is 36 inch or 5 years old, whichever comes first). My children were 2 years old when they were 36 inch so legally they can be in a regular seatbelt (and I do see that often here).

ITA!

Then there are those who don't even bother getting kids into a seatbelt of any type. I had to stop and stare when a woman opened up the back 'door' of her Ford Ranger and 5 little kids piled out of it! :eek: I guess if they're crammed in, they pad one another?:confused:

I know there are people who love Texas with all its quirks and the rest of the country ain't perfect by no means, but for me, I can't wait until I see the last of it in my rear view mirror. Unfortunately, I'll have to drive through Arkansas on the way out which had even more dangerous setups for kids in cars. :eek::(
 

amy919

New member
It never ceases to amaze me. Rising health care concerns aren't an issue? They fail to take into account that a lot of kids would be less seriously injured if they were properly restrained.

But then, that's not the issue. We wouldn't want to offend anyone who can't afford to keep their child safe. But I'll bet my last dollar at least 50% of those people that they'd be discriminating against have XBox's, PS3s, whatever. For the cost of one new game, they could easily afford a booster. It's all a matter of priorities. It has nothing to do with discrimination.
 

keri1292

Well-known member
Yes, so D~U~M~B!

So, when these poor folks, who you would assume get health insurance through the state, are in an accident and their child is horribly maimed, injured, etc. Who will pay THAT bill? Hmmm...sounds like somebody needs to work on their math skills. How many boosters could you buy for the amount of money that it takes to care for one critically injured nonboostered kid? DUH!
 

TxMomma

New member
It is crazy that a 36 inch child can be in a regular seatbelt (law is 36 inch or 5 years old, whichever comes first). My children were 2 years old when they were 36 inch so legally they can be in a regular seatbelt (and I do see that often here).


It's 5yrs and 36". Either way, it's still crap.
 

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
Maybe the ACLU should get busy lobbying the automakers to make cars that aren't dangerous for kids. My children's civil liberties are SERIOUSLY infringed because they don't fit in the seatbelts safely. :mad:
 

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
It is crazy that a 36 inch child can be in a regular seatbelt (law is 36 inch or 5 years old, whichever comes first). My children were 2 years old when they were 36 inch so legally they can be in a regular seatbelt (and I do see that often here).

You know...I think when it first changed it WAS 36 OR 5, because I know we debated the poor wording of the law change when it happened, but maybe they've snuck in the AND since then? http://www.iihs.org/laws/ChildRestraint.aspx
 

MomToEliEm

Moderator
It's 5yrs and 36". Either way, it's still crap.

Actually in Texas, it used to be better then it is now. They revised it and made it worse.

Here was the old wording in the law prior to 2005:

A person commits an offense if the person operates a passenger vehicle, transports a child who is younger than four years of age or less than 36 inches in height, and does not keep the child secured during the operation of the vehicle in a child passenger safety seat system according to the instructions of the manufacturer of the safety seat system.

This read:

A: Child less then 4 years old
B: Child less then 36 inches in height
C: Must ride in a carseat

If A or B then C

If either A or B is true, then C must occur. This means that a 3 years old must ride in a seat regardless of how tall they are.
True or False = True
True or True = True
False or False = False

Now in 2005, they changed the wording

A person commits an offense if the person operates a passenger vehicle, transports a child who is younger than five years of age and less than 36 inches in height and does not keep the child secured during the operation of the vehicle in a child passenger safety seat system according to the instructions of the manufacturer of the safety seat system.

Now it is
A: child less the 5 years old
B: Child is less then 36 inches
C: Must be in a carseat

Law reads
If A and B, then C
True and True = True
True and False = False
False and False = False

Only if both A and B are true, does C need to occur. If A or B is false then the entire conditional statement is false and C does not have to occur. It was actually better the way it was prior to them touching it.

Here is some documentation they published after it was first put out that does in indicate that a 36 inch tall 2 year old does not legally need to be in a carseat
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/public_information/pr090705.htm
 

Simplysomething

New member
1. The ACLU is lobbying AGAINST it :eek: They say that it will cause discrimination against minority families because they won't be able to

Do you have a link to this? I can't find anything with google, but I'm notorious for only being able to think of the most obvious search terms.
 

Starlight

Senior Community Member
Actually in Texas, it used to be better then it is now. They revised it and made it worse.

Here was the old wording in the law prior to 2005:

A person commits an offense if the person operates a passenger vehicle, transports a child who is younger than four years of age or less than 36 inches in height, and does not keep the child secured during the operation of the vehicle in a child passenger safety seat system according to the instructions of the manufacturer of the safety seat system.

This read:

A: Child less then 4 years old
B: Child less then 36 inches in height
C: Must ride in a carseat

If A or B then C

If either A or B is true, then C must occur. This means that a 3 years old must ride in a seat regardless of how tall they are.
True or False = True
True or True = True
False or False = False

Now in 2005, they changed the wording

A person commits an offense if the person operates a passenger vehicle, transports a child who is younger than five years of age and less than 36 inches in height and does not keep the child secured during the operation of the vehicle in a child passenger safety seat system according to the instructions of the manufacturer of the safety seat system.

Now it is
A: child less the 5 years old
B: Child is less then 36 inches
C: Must be in a carseat

Law reads
If A and B, then C
True and True = True
True and False = False
False and False = False

Only if both A and B are true, does C need to occur. If A or B is false then the entire conditional statement is false and C does not have to occur. It was actually better the way it was prior to them touching it.

Here is some documentation they published after it was first put out that does in indicate that a 36 inch tall 2 year old does not legally need to be in a carseat
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/public_information/pr090705.htm
Yup. I've had this confirmed through DPS. It sucks.
 

ThreeBeans

New member
Do you have a link to this? I can't find anything with google, but I'm notorious for only being able to think of the most obvious search terms.

I read that one in the Boston Globe back in...August? So I consider it a reliable source, I mean for a newspaper. I'll search and see if I can find the article hang on.

The other thing (about the 'run on CPS techs') I learned in my SafeKids class on Monday. One of the other students is friends with the representative who is trying to push the bill through.
 

Starlight

Senior Community Member
"Playing with their 1-year-old son at Boston Common yesterday, Richie Accime and Paige Fernandes, both 19-year-olds from Everett...

"I feel like my son is already too big for the car seat," Fernandes said of Isaiah, who weighs 33 pounds. "At 8 years old, he's going to be big."

So, why did the interview morons?

And honestly. I'm a teen parent myself. But why couldn't they interview a parent who could legally drink?

Oh, and the nanny, complaining about moving booster seats. I'd fire her. What business does a 19 mo old have being in a booster anyway?
 

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Forum statistics

Threads
219,656
Messages
2,196,898
Members
13,530
Latest member
onehitko860

You must read your carseat and vehicle owner’s manual and understand any relevant state laws. These are the rules you must follow to restrain your children safely. All opinions at Car-Seat.Org are those of the individual author for informational purposes only, and do not necessarily reflect any policy or position of Carseat Media LLC. Car-Seat.Org makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis. If you are unsure about information provided to you, please visit a local certified technician. Before posting or using our website you must read and agree to our TERMS.

Graco is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org! Britax is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org! Nuna Baby is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org!

Please  Support Car-Seat.Org  with your purchases of infant, convertible, combination and boosters seats from our premier sponsors above.
Shop travel systems, strollers and baby gear from Britax, Chicco, Clek, Combi, Evenflo, First Years, Graco, Maxi-Cosi, Nuna, Safety 1st, Diono & more! ©2001-2022 Carseat Media LLC

Top