Blythewoodjoe
Active member
- 985
- 56
- 28
- Location
- Blythewood, SC
Well I found some good info in the SC code of law. It deal with seat belts and it is subject to interpretation, to some degree. I think it is a little contradictory myself but it does give one some points to argue. I quote:
SECTION 56-5-6520. Mandatory use of seat belt. The driver and every occupant of a motor vehicle, when it is being operated on the public streets and highways of this State, must wear a fastened safety belt which complies with all provisions of federal law for its use. The driver is charged with the responsibility of requiring each occupant seventeen years of age or younger to wear a safety belt or be secured in a child restraint system as provided in Article 47 of this chapter.
SECTION 56-5-6530. Exceptions.
The provisions of this article do not apply to:
(1) a driver or occupant who possesses a written verification from a physician that he is unable to wear a safety belt for physical or medical reasons;
(2) medical or rescue personnel attending to injured or sick individuals in an emergency vehicle when operating in an emergency situation as well as the injured or sick individuals;
(3) school, church, or day care buses;
(4) public transportation vehicles except taxis;
(5) occupants of vehicles in parades;
(6) United States mail carriers;
(7) an occupant for which no safety belt is available because all belts are being used by other occupants;
(8 ) a driver or occupants in a vehicle not originally equipped with safety belts.
End of quote.
According to (7) if you put three children on a seat and there are only two seat belts, is it OK to not buckel up the third?
Or according to (8 ) if the back of ambulance was intended to transport people but didn't have restraining devices, do you have to buckel up? Very gray areas to me. But all this is irrelevent because I do not plan to transport kids with out seat belts. My concern at this point is this, if I install seat belts (as an added safety feature) can I be help liable for the welfare of the occupants? OR IS OLD JOE JUST FREAKIN' PARANOID????
SECTION 56-5-6520. Mandatory use of seat belt. The driver and every occupant of a motor vehicle, when it is being operated on the public streets and highways of this State, must wear a fastened safety belt which complies with all provisions of federal law for its use. The driver is charged with the responsibility of requiring each occupant seventeen years of age or younger to wear a safety belt or be secured in a child restraint system as provided in Article 47 of this chapter.
SECTION 56-5-6530. Exceptions.
The provisions of this article do not apply to:
(1) a driver or occupant who possesses a written verification from a physician that he is unable to wear a safety belt for physical or medical reasons;
(2) medical or rescue personnel attending to injured or sick individuals in an emergency vehicle when operating in an emergency situation as well as the injured or sick individuals;
(3) school, church, or day care buses;
(4) public transportation vehicles except taxis;
(5) occupants of vehicles in parades;
(6) United States mail carriers;
(7) an occupant for which no safety belt is available because all belts are being used by other occupants;
(8 ) a driver or occupants in a vehicle not originally equipped with safety belts.
End of quote.
According to (7) if you put three children on a seat and there are only two seat belts, is it OK to not buckel up the third?
Or according to (8 ) if the back of ambulance was intended to transport people but didn't have restraining devices, do you have to buckel up? Very gray areas to me. But all this is irrelevent because I do not plan to transport kids with out seat belts. My concern at this point is this, if I install seat belts (as an added safety feature) can I be help liable for the welfare of the occupants? OR IS OLD JOE JUST FREAKIN' PARANOID????