How would you interpet Missouri law?......

[stacim]

Don't mean to hijack here, but I just read through the actual verbage of the law (thank you Qarin for posting b/c I had some questions about the law as it relates to my tall skinny 9 yo). If I am reading the following two points correctly, this is unbelievable. Although I don't like the implications of #5, at least it calls for seatbelts, but #6 :jaw:.

Somebody please tell me I am reading this wrong.

(5) A child who otherwise would be required to be secured in a booster seat may be transported in the back seat of a motor vehicle while wearing only a lap belt if the back seat of the motor vehicle is not equipped with a combination lap and shoulder belt for booster seat installation;

(6) When transporting children in the immediate family when there are more children than there are seating positions in the enclosed area of a motor vehicle, the children who are not able to be restrained by a child safety restraint device appropriate for the child shall sit in the area behind the front seat of the motor vehicle unless the motor vehicle is designed only for a front seat area. The driver transporting children referred to in this subsection is not in violation of this section.


~Staci

 

[christineka]

I think many states have clauses that allow people to be transported without a seat belt if there are more persons than seat belts.

I'm impressed with the law's detail. Our state law just says they need to be in a child restraint until age 8.

 

[stacim]

Wow! That surprises me a bit.

I do agree about the detail, though. Very good indeed.

I think many states have clauses that allow people to be transported without a seat belt if there are more persons than seat belts.

I'm impressed with the law's detail. Our state law just says they need to be in a child restraint until age 8.