Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the law passes, there is no logical reason not to mandate that all skiers, snow boarders, bicyclists and motorcyclists wear helmets, all boaters wear life vests, or all sexually active residents wear condoms.
Could you imagine the outrage at legislating condom use? However, isn't unprotected sex more of a danger since you could potentially harm both yourself and the other person with an STD not to mention passing it on to future sex partners but yet not wearing a seatbelt does not physically harm another person.
and also:
By the reasoning of seat belt law advocates, when people don't "make appropriate protective responses," the state must compel them to. Once that notion becomes the basis for legislating individual behavior, how do the people justify opposing further protective acts of the state? If it will save lives, anything then becomes a justifiable state action.
Following the logic that there must be a seatbelt law "for our own good", then should the state just have us all living in a bubble or under 24 hour constant watch where everytime we are about to do something potentially "harmful" to ourselves then our designated "watchman" can stop us before we take such actions?
It is a real shame that we have people in office who want to make seatbelts mandatory. If they do pass that law, who knows what they will try to legislate next-because these nanny staters never stop.
NHLA maintains voting records on all of our State Reps and State Senators. You can see who's been voting consistently to take away your liberty by logging on the nhliberty.org
In fact, if your main concern is freedom, you should join the forum and announce yourself. We've gotten dozens of bad bills killed even in committee. You can even see the legislative schedule at nhliberty.org so you can come down and testify against bad bills there. You'll also be armed with the actual info needed to convince other folks back home to vote out the bad ones.
Why again do we need this intrusion on freedom? Oh yeah, the dems want more money and control...
Interesting stats. Looks like RI is the worst as far as trends are concerned. They dropped by 7.2% this past year; worst in the nation. Maybe the liberals from MA should forget about NH and move down to RI to save those people from themselves....
Just as a reminder the senate committee hearing is on Monday 4/20,with a full senate vote in the next week or two. Please contact your senator and ask them to please vote against this law. One good talking point is the finance issue. The $3.7 million the state would receive would be a one time payment, which averages out to less than $3 a resident, a majority of which would be used for education. Then point out all of the cost to the state : police enforcement, court costs, paper work processing, ect. All of these costs over time would equal more than what the state receives in federal money.
Also if you live in Manchester or the North Seacoast please contact Senators DeVries, and Cilley as they are the swing vote. They voted against this last time and are under strong pressure to support it this time.
I'm with Comet Voyager on this one. It smacks way too much of the government telling me, "We know what's best for your child. You cannot be trusted to know as much as we do. Here, let us legislate it for you, so you feeble-minded folk out there need not be confused. Leave us to be the parent and make parental decisions. "
Next thing you know, there are going to be laws about what's in a lunchbox.
You laugh, but what if I told you it has already happened? The only thing I can think of is somewhere along the lines, some of us (Americans) let the decisions sneak by and allowed government to do our thinking for us. Case in point: I've been working in and out of banks for the last 10 years or so. Not my favorite job, but it somewhat paid the bills. I've been absent from that career for the last 4 years. In those SHORT 4 years, I take on a part time teller job up here to find the FED has regulated what I can SAY to my customers on the phone, and in what order I can say them! WTH?? When did just cashing a payroll check become this big-brother-ish?? If I'm regulated at this low level of retail banking, I can't imagine what's going on elsewhere. I'll also tell you that since the bank closings last quarter, the FED made it impossible for me to continue working at the bank. I had to leave. My boss got tired of me hitting my head against my drive through window. She always thought I was kinda awkward anyways....
Now I'm awake. NOW I get it. NOW I'm listening. And we better ban together before it gets worse.
BTW...I'm allowed to take peanut butter and jelly in my lunchbox today. Wait....salmonella...scrap that.
Is Tuna safe today?
One of the major attractions to NH for my husband was no seat belt laws. FREEDOM FINALLY he says, as he strapped on his belt anyway. Years of habit and tickets have us "Trained" to do what they want us to. See how sneaky they are? We're so eager to please and not get tickets, not be hassled, we just go along and do what they say. I'm sick of being a puppet. I want NH to be strong and have a voice in this Union. I want NH to come together and be the shining glory and prove to the rest of the nation that they can't keep doing this to us.
Otherwise we'll be just like every other state, and if anyone thinks that bringing in this new "revenue" will lower any other taxes you pay such as your property tax, I got some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.
I'm a Muppet!
I have already listed the reasons I oppose this law but I think I finally figured out who is paying for the proposal. I'll bet it is the auto and health insurance industries trying to decrease their liabilities while maintaining their prices.
I have already listed the reasons I oppose this law but I think I finally figured out who is paying for the proposal. I'll bet it is the auto and health insurance industries trying to decrease their liabilities while maintaining their prices.
Since we have competition in NH, the insurance companies would not be able to maintain the higher pricing as one of them would lower pricing to gain market share.
It is interesting that MA has a seatbelt law, yet they have lower seatbelt usage and their insurance rates are 32% higher than MA...
I consider these sorts of laws to be not only useless but effectively unenforceable. Therefore I oppose new laws and think old laws should be rescinded. The only things these laws accomplish are to create a lot more scofflaws and decrease the respect for government.
BTW – I wear seatbelts while driving an automobile and a helmet while driving or riding a motorcycle. I do this because I think it is a sensible thing to do. I do not need the law for me to be sensible.
Support for this in the New Hampshire Senate appears to be a bit shaky. The bill has been tabled.
"After support for a mandatory seatbelt law appeared to fall far short - an amendment failed 14-10 - senators voted to table the bill, leaving open the option of voting on it again later this year."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
