Legal question about Antique vehicles and the seat belt laws

-
I have been a believer in seat belts ever since I walked away from stuffing my '66 A100 head on into a telephone pole at about 30 mph 50 years ago. I firmly believe they saved me from serious injury or death. And they were just lap belts.
 
In WV you are good to go, if the car did not come with them from the factory.
 
to say getting ejected in a rollover is safer is total BS. Your safer strapped in a steel cage than flying into a rock/road/wall at 60MPH. To say a car that never had seatbelts is safer than retrofitting seat belts to that car is the same BS. Id like to meet that engineer and see his reasoning. Even a lap belt is going to prevent you from flying through the windshield..but it aint gonna prevent you from hitting a bare metal dash with your head or non crumpling steering wheel or said steering column driving into your chest like a pugil stick. Drive defensively and dont put yourself into situations where accidents are a higher probability, ie. street racing. Buckle up, teach your kids responsible driving.
 
I wrecked a 71 D100 on black ice, pegged a guardrail head on the interstate, I was wearing a lap belt, just broke my nose on the steering wheel, did not need medical attention, my 3 year old son was sitting in the middle, buckled in, he was fine.
My wife did not have her seat belt on, she leaned over our son to protect him, her head it the windshield hard, she was black and blue for over a week on her chest and ribs from the metal dash.
 
I agree with basically all the safety items being safer than none.Proof in the pudding is all the crashes in motor sports at 200 -300 mph and most walk away. Granted some do not. Just lucky? Hell no it's all the safety items . But that is not what I asked. Just wondering what the law is in different states.
 
The way I read the Florida seat belt law was if you are under 16 you have to be in a seat belt, no matter what the year of the car is.
 
To go with my post#40, I have been using seat belts since Drivers Ed. in 1966, when we were required to wear seat belts. I just don't feel comfortable without them in any car. That's just me. Flashback to Bullitt.
 
There is no easy way to answer the question that has been posed about seat belt laws.

I practiced law in Pittsburgh, PA for over 25 years and did a lot of vehicle cases - speeding tickets, DUI's, improper registration, etc. Pittsburgh has several interstate highways passing through it and is within a 30 minute drive to the States of W.Va. and Ohio. consequently, i would often be giving legal advice to a PA resident with a PA license who had received a vehicle ticket of some kind in W.Va. or Ohio.

All the States have vastly different vehicle laws. Some States have strict "inspection" standards and requirements and others (Ohio) have rather lax vehicle inspection rules. The same is true with their "moving violations."

The answer to the seat belt requirement for your van obviously depends upon what State you have that registered in and what State (or States) you are going to drive through. Remember, when you cross over into another State, you "may" be subject to their motor vehicle laws. Generally, if your "out of State" vehicle is in violation of the vehicle code of the State you are stopped in, the Officer will "usually" issue a warning ticket and let you go. BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TOO! If the cop wants to be a problem, he can tell you that the vehicle cannot be driven and that you will have to have it towed back to your State.

Another thing to bear in mind is that all the States that are "contiguous" to one another have "cooperative agreements" with each other regarding motor vehicle laws. Thus, a speeding ticket received in North Carolina will be processed against a person who lives in South Carolina by the South Carolina Dept. of Motor Vehicles.

My best advice regarding "seat belts" is to find out what the State that you are going to drive your van in requires. As noted above, some of the States still exempt vehicles manufactured before 1968 from the seat belt laws. Some States do not. AND - most States treat "antique vehicles" differently, however, the vehicle has to be registered and licensed as an "antique" vehicle to qualify for these certain exceptions.

As with all questions of law, you have to talk to a lawyer in the State that your are interested in finding out the answer to a specific legal question for that State.

hope this helps a bit...
 
talked to a cop in Illinois. Some states don't make you have license plate in the front, but Illinois does require both plates. He said if they are from state the does not require both plates, then there is nothing he can do about it. Don't know if the same applies to the seat belt law or not.
  • still, it's hypocrisy. It's about money. Again, cars with protection all around them PLUS air bags has to wear seat belts. But cycles go by all the time, no helmets, wives in spaghetti straps and shorts, loud pipes, or 4 year old kids on the back..... and somehow the state sees this as "ok and safe" but cars with airbags and shields on all sides still require seat belts. Nope, it's $$$$$
  • Again, I'm not against cycles or seat belts, just that the hypocrisy burns me a bit.
 
Here in AZ if it has seat belts you better be wearing them. Small children must be in the back in an approved child seat.
 
In New York State, at the DMV, it states that any vehicle from 1964 and before, does not require adults to wear seat belts. It is best to ask at your state's DMV, to get the proper information. I asked a Sheriff about children riding in antique cars, her answer was, children have to abide by the child seat law, regardless of car vintage.
 
RAT ROD AL said:
Any law enforcement men or women and anyone else who know the answer. My question is for instance my 1966 van I have licensed with antique plates in the state of FL. I have put lap belts in front. No seats in the back , In the FL rest stops along the highway on their bulletin boards states people over the age of 8 or 12 or something (age not important ) are not required to wear seatbelts in the back seat in FL. Is it LEGAL in other states for an ADULT to ride in BACK if the van doesn't have seatbellts ?
Click to expand...
Likewise, Texas DPS says if it was built with them, they are required. IF it never had them, then they are not required.
 
California does not need seatbelts in the car if it did not come from the factory with them. Any car 1964 or newer should have seat belts. Any child 6 years or younger has to be restrained with proper belts and booster regardless of year of car. So if you have a classic car that didn’t have belts and you want to take your young child in the car , you will have To add seat belts. Adults do not need to add.
 
Interestingly people can ride unrestrained in the back of an rv legally.
 
340dartley said:
California does not need seatbelts in the car if it did not come from the factory with them. Any car 1964 or newer should have seat belts. Any child 6 years or younger has to be restrained with proper belts and booster regardless of year of car. So if you have a classic car that didn’t have belts and you want to take your young child in the car , you will have To add seat belts. Adults do not need to add.
Click to expand...
I do not believe that is true anymore. The exemption was removed a few years ago, the other night I was looking for a copy of a 89 Vehicle Code book that would have shown the exemption in it, the current one does not have it, I have confirmed this with the CHP recently.

All occupants, All years, no exception.


Alan
 
Cuda Al said:
I do not believe that is true anymore. The exemption was removed a few years ago, the other night I was looking for a copy of a 89 Vehicle Code book that would have shown the exemption in it, the current one does not have it, I have confirmed this with the CHP recently.

All occupants, All years, no exception.


Alan
Click to expand...
Like anything in California it depends on how the chp interprets the rules. Typically you can ask 3 different chp officers and get 3 different answers. I will check on this later today to see what they say.
 
340dartley said:
Like anything in California it depends on how the chp interprets the rules. Typically you can ask 3 different chp officers and get 3 different answers. I will check on this later today to see what they say.
Click to expand...
Show me in the current Vehicle Code the exception, if it isn't in there it doesn't exist.


Alan
 
I don't live in CA, but according to a friend of mine who lives in San Jose and has antique cars, pre-1964 antique, classic, or other older cars are not required to have seat belts, but California law does not allow a driver or their passengers to drive on the highway without wearing functional seat belts. Also, California law states it is illegal for children under the age of 7 to ride in a vehicle without being properly secured in the backseat. He interprets the first part to mean that if the car does not have seat belts, it cannot be driven on the highway. Anyway, its just an FYI. This is one time a National Standard would be nice, maybe?
 
Last edited:
...unless the Cal standard is adopted nationwide.

No thanks.

I'm not a big fan of seat belt laws in general.

...and I totally understand what they do and how they work.
 
rc_brooks said:
All ABS does is prevent you from locking up your brakes. As a driver if your only braking method is to stand on the brakes, then yes. You'll stop shorter. However if you practiced controlled braking, it won't make a difference at worst or perhaps take a little shorter to stop. This is probably most pronounced in the snow in my experience.
Click to expand...

Maybe in snow, bit on the paved highway, WET (or black ice), at speed (say 70+ mph) ABS is superior my friend. On high $$ models, you are not pumping as fast as a solenoid cycles as directed by 1's and 0's directed by the on board computer. Just think of the computer controlled solenoid suspension that models like cadillac have. @rc_brooks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top