SSS Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 You will find wearing a seat belt is an ACT not a LAW and infact if you dont sign or admit anything you dont have to pay But if you don't accept the offer of a £100 fine, they give you a court summons and you could (probably will) end up with a much worse punishment. Ask for them to produce evidence first and it will mount up against you. Terry, I apologise if it seems like I was having a dig at you. I wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good shot? Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 I am so habituated to wearing a seat belt, that I now find it difficult to even move off my drive without wearing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSS Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Surely the Road Traffic Act is the basis of law?Answered your own question buddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munzy Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 (edited) I was responding to Theosmith's comment about a distinction between an Act and Law which in my small understanding of the law doesn't exist. The Road Traffic Act is what underpins the law in this case. What am I missing? The RTA is what is quoted in all speeding and "failure to furnish" cases in a magistrates court for example. Edited December 15, 2013 by Munzy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 (edited) Oh dear, the Act is not a law argument has appeared. I know this is something that is often discussed and argued, especially by those purporting to be 'freemen'. No doubt the argument of 'common law' versus an Act shall be told and that an Act is not worth anything if you don't give your consent to being bound by that Act, but sadly it is all tosh. Precedent in the hierarchy of our court systems determines 'common law' and although anybody certainly does have the right to challenge an Act, once precedent has been set then the courts are bound to follow that precedent, then an 'Act' does indeed become 'common law'. Edited December 15, 2013 by grrclark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperfection Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 (edited) I carnt believe anybody would drive with out wearing a seat belt . Any how ,if you tried to drive my truck (navarra pick up )with out the seat belt on the beeping would drive you mad . Harnser. Thats easy-you plug the passenger belt into the clip then no more beeping. Edited December 15, 2013 by Imperfection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munzy Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Oh dear, I didn't realise an Act versus Law debate was even possible! Count me out, I'm simply a layman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 I carnt believe anybody would drive with out wearing a seat belt . Any how ,if you tried to drive my truck (navarra pick up )with out the seat belt on the beeping would drive you mad . Harnser. If you just drive the bleeping will stop after about 3 minutes,tested while out foxing in the fields,but if you want to stop it straight away get down the scrap yard and just cut an old seat belt up with the metal bit the same shape. I use the dogs safety harness(yes even my dog wears a seat belt in the truck)just click it into my seatbelt fixing and no noise as you drive x country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenboy Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 I don't wear mine if I'm just nipping street to street but any further and I do . I think it's your choice if you want to get killed . And you have chose to get killed ? Seriously guys if you have seen and had to deal with what I did a few years back you would be more enthusiastic about wearing one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 (edited) Oh dear, I didn't realise an Act versus Law debate was even possible! Count me out, I'm simply a layman! It is absolutely rife regrettably. In some respects a challenging approach to accepted wisdom is healthy, but the internet is full of misinformation (as well as dirty pictures) and there are an increasing number of people in the UK who subscribe to the misguided belief that they/we can avoid prosecution based on some favoured interpretations of what is Law versus an Act. Some of the forums/blogs make for an entertaining read. If you thought that PW can get a bit heated in discussions then these really take the cake. Search for "freemen of the UK" or some such... Edited December 15, 2013 by grrclark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslad Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Some off u should get real i have just been very lcky to walk out off a serious car smash on black ice and i'm really glad i don't wear a seat belt. I would have been far worse if i had when u see state of the pick up roof. I never wear a belt and i'm not going to start now because off that accident, I'm surprised more folk aren't admiting to it as most of the farmers/keepers i know generally don't wear seat belt when driving, Ur that used to just njuping in and driving and in and out opening gates never even comes into my head to put a belt on Althou funnily enough i do wear one on the rare occasions i'm sitting in the back seat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12boreblue Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 (edited) Ok let's deal with the issue of being fined for absolutely everything in this country. I am about to give you information I have kept to myself for many years and has stood me in good stead, I worked it out as I was at one time ill and in a similar position. Now what you do is not pay the fine, and claim mitigating circumstances, for instance if you had had a fall recently and bruised your chest, it would have been to painfull for you to wear a seatbelt, and of course you had to wait to make an appointment at your local GP. Now this might or might not be accepted, if not you inform them that you woud have breached health and safety regulations if you had driven the vehicle with a seat belt on which would have caused considerable pain, and could attribute to a loss of concentration and therefore cause an accident. Also there was no alternative driver for you to call upon. They will then ask for evidence, to wit you reply that as not weraing a seatbelt is a deemed criminal offence the onus is on the prosecutor to obtain evidence. I have yet to hear of a succesfull prosecution in which the defence is based on health and safety grounds. Or you can pay the fine and it will all go away... well for you anyway!!!! Edited December 15, 2013 by 12boreblue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Some off u should get real i have just been very lcky to walk out off a serious car smash on black ice and i'm really glad i don't wear a seat belt. I would have been far worse if i had when u see state of the pick up roof. I never wear a belt and i'm not going to start now because off that accident, I'm surprised more folk aren't admiting to it as most of the farmers/keepers i know generally don't wear seat belt when driving, Ur that used to just njuping in and driving and in and out opening gates never even comes into my head to put a belt on Althou funnily enough i do wear one on the rare occasions i'm sitting in the back seat The statistics paint a very different story about your chances of serious injury or death when not wearing a seat belt compared to wearing one,there are always a few who survive,but more die. Two examples, My mum and dad in the early 60's driving their bmw on the autobahn and a driver came down the wrong way,head on crash,no seat belts,but this saved my dads life as he leaned across to try and protect my mum and his steering column went through his seat.my dad spent 3 weeks in hospital with a fractured skull,my mum went through the wind screen and had over 100 stitches in her face,it was thanks to a very clever micro surgeon that her nose was saved and you cannot see the scars,she lost 4 teeth and her little finger. 30 years on in a new peugeot my dad and mum were forced off the road at about 50 by a couple of joyriding scum my dad hit a bank flew 40 feet ,the car rolled 3 times,the police,fire brigade and ambulance men could not believe that they both walked away from the crash with just a few sprains and bruises,this was down to the advances in crumple zones and seat belt/air bag technology. 30 tears ago technology was different,but in this day and age with all the emphasis on safety built into a car wearing a seat belt is common sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munzy Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Ok let's deal with the issue of being fined for absolutely everything in this country. I am about to give you information I have kept to myself for many years and has stood me in good stead, I worked it out as I was at one time ill and in a similar position. Now what you do is not pay the fine, and claim mitigating circumstances, for instance if you had had a fall recently and bruised your chest, it would have been to painfull for you to wear a seatbelt, and of course you had to wait to make an appointment at your local GP. Now this might or might not be accepted, if not you inform them that you woud have breached health and safety regulations if you had driven the vehicle with a seat belt on which would have caused considerable pain, and could attribute to a loss of concentration and therefore cause an accident. Also there was no alternative driver for you to call upon. They will then ask for evidence, to wit you reply that as not weraing a seatbelt is a deemed criminal offence the onus is on the prosecutor to obtain evidence. I have yet to hear of a succesfull prosecution in which the defence is based on health and safety grounds. Or you can pay the fine and it will all go away... well for you anyway!!!! As mentioned, I'm not a solicitor but I can see straight away the major flaw in this defence... The CPS do indeed have to prove you were breaking the law (eg. not wearing a seatbelt). So they present the magistrate with such evidence. Case closed. I doubt "bruised chest" is listed as a justified defence in any subsection within the RTA. They don't have to prove you didn't have a bruised chest. Anyway, like I said, I'm not a solicitor so I'll bow down to your word if you indeed are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslad Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Until my recent crash it was never a concious decision not to wear 1 just the fact ur in and out my motor so often driving throu fields opening/closing gates, 100m-couple of miles down back roads, putting a seat belt on is something i have never done in 20 odd years of driving just does not even come into my head. When i'm on a shoot or picking up it is unusual to see any other folk ever put a seat belt on when ur in a motor even omn public roads Must admit i'm now making a more concious decision not to wear 1 now. Not really affecting anyone so i don't see the big problem without gettin to philosophical but folk fall over and hit there heads every day some die some don't, i don't walk about with a helmet on, yet that would probably save 100% of people, and i fall over far more often than i crash my car. There is a massive ammount off luck in any accident esp severe ones and to be blunt if ur times up ur times up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 As mentioned, I'm not a solicitor but I can see straight away the major flaw in this defence... The CPS do indeed have to prove you were breaking the law (eg. not wearing a seatbelt). So they present the magistrate with such evidence. Case closed. I doubt "bruised chest" is listed as a justified defence in any subsection within the RTA. They don't have to prove you didn't have a bruised chest. Anyway, like I said, I'm not a solicitor so I'll bow down to your word if you indeed are. I agree Munzy. If the injury, real or otherwise, to the drivers chest was such that they should not wear a seatbelt then the implication would be that they should not be driving at all. Taking this line of defence could actually lead to an escalation of the offence. There is no absolute Health & Safety reference either, so there is no defence in taking that approach. Different when it comes to employers and employment law, but as an individual you are allowed to do silly things, providing of course it does not breach some other law (like not wearing a seatbelt on public roads) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rimotu66 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 (edited) Used to be a free country where we could make our own choices, but its a better place now we are all wrapped in cotton wool and every things cosy I guess in the not to distant future motorcycle racers will have to wear 4" thick leather suits and are not allowed to exceed 30mph, bloody lilly livered tree hugging society we live in, Brunel, Wallis, Montgomery. Stephenson , Dibna etc must be turning in there graves. Edited December 15, 2013 by rimotu66 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
figgy Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 I can't believe some of the self righteous posts on here the nanny state is so obviously working its magic. As an adult you can make a choice to wear a seat belt or not. If you think you should because of the damage you can cause to another car or driver/passenger by going through the windscreen, all motorcycles should have seat belts fitted so no matter what you can't leave it in an impact and go through a car window or under another vehicle and ban horse and riders frm all roads. In fact ban riding in all forms all together on public highways as you may hurt yourself or others. Yes it's against the law not to wear your seatbelt so it should be worn. Figgy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Used to be a free country where we could make our own choices, but its a better place now we are all wrapped in cotton wool and every things cosy I agree with the sentiment behind that, way too much stupid legislation for stupid reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
figgy Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Way to much stupid at the top for me. Figgy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Used to be a free country where we could make our own choices, but its a better place now we are all wrapped in cotton wool and every things cosy I guess in the not to distant future motorcycle racers will have to wear 4" thick leather suits and are not allowed to exceed 30mph, bloody lilly livered tree hugging society we live in, Brunel, Wallis, Montgomery. Stephenson , Dibna etc must be turning in there graves. Would you ride your bike without a helmet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun4860 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Would you ride your bike without a helmet? +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rimotu66 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Would you ride your bike without a helmet? No I would not, I'm not stupid. But if I was and I did I do not see why I should be prosecuted for it because someone in a bubbled wrapped ivory tower has decided I shouldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 (edited) No I would not, I'm not stupid. But if I was and I did I do not see why I should be prosecuted for it because someone in a bubbled wrapped ivory tower has decided I shouldn't. Then the same answer should apply to seat belts, they both save lives.And it is for the very fact that some people are stupid enough not to want to wear them that it was made compulsory. Edited December 15, 2013 by welsh1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
castletyne Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Would you ride your bike without a helmet? Maybe we should have the choice like in other countries Or like the the Sikhs do in this country Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts