tomgregory2000
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:00 PM |
|
|
Wearing seat belts? mini rant
I thought that all people in a moving vehicle MUST wear seatbelts.
Just watched 'traffic cops' and there were 2 police officers and a drunk bloke sitting in the back of the police van as they driving along
with no seat belts on!! 
One rule for them and one rule for the rest
|
|
|
|
|
thunderace
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:02 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by tomgregory2000
I thought that all people in a moving vehicle MUST wear seatbelts.
Just watched 'traffic cops' and there were 2 police officers and a drunk bloke sitting in the back of the police van as they driving along
with no seat belts on!!
One rule for them and one rule for the rest
been told by a police mad they dont need to were it lol
|
|
|
graememk
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:08 PM |
|
|
taxi drivers dont have to wear then either
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:23 PM |
|
|
From The Motor Vehicles (Wearing of Seat Belts) Regulations 1993
quote:
Requirement for adults to wear adult belts
5.—
(1) Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every person—
(a) driving a motor vehicle (other than a two-wheeled motor cycle with or without a sidecar);
(b) riding in a front seat of a motor vehicle (other than a two-wheeled motor cycle with or without a sidecar); or
(c) riding in a rear seat of a motor car or a passenger car which is not a motor car; shall wear an adult belt.
(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to a person under the age of 14 years.
Exemptions
6.—
(1) The requirements of regulation 5 do not apply to—
(a) a person holding a medical certificate;
(b) a person using a vehicle constructed or adapted for the delivery of goods or mail to consumers or addressees, as the case may be, while engaged in
making local rounds of deliveries or collections;
(c) a person driving a vehicle while performing a manoeuvre which includes reversing;
(d) a qualified driver (within the meaning given by regulation 9 of the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1987[10]) who is supervising the
holder of a provisional licence (within the meaning of Part III of the Act) while that holder is performing a manoeuvre which includes reversing;
(e) a person by whom, as provided in the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1987, a test of competence to drive is being conducted and his
wearing a seat belt would endanger himself or any other person;
(f) a person driving or riding in a vehicle while it is being used for fire brigade or police purposes or for carrying a person in lawful custody
(a person who is being so carried being included in this exemption);
(g) the driver of—
(i) a licensed taxi while it is being used for seeking hire, or answering a call for hire, or carrying a passenger for hire, or
(ii) a private hire vehicle while it is being used to carry a passenger for hire;
(h) a person riding in a vehicle, being used under a trade licence, for the purpose of investigating or remedying a mechanical fault in the
vehicle;
(j) a disabled person who is wearing a disabled person's belt; or
(k) a person riding in a vehicle while it is taking part in a procession organised by or on behalf of the Crown.
[Edited on 14/10/09 by matt_claydon]
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:24 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by graememk
taxi drivers dont have to wear then either
That's the first I've heard of that! Iirc it's only through a medical exemption or there's no belt fitted
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:29 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ninehigh
quote:
Originally posted by graememk
taxi drivers dont have to wear then either
That's the first I've heard of that! Iirc it's only through a medical exemption or there's no belt fitted
See my post above, it's not quite as simple as 'they don't have to wear them' though.
These days I don't really understand why people care what the law says; why wouldn't anyone just wear a belt whenever provided anyway?
Whether you're in your own car, or a passenger in a taxi or on a coach, it seems like a no-brainer to me.
[Edited on 14/10/09 by matt_claydon]
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:37 PM |
|
|
Lol I didn't have to wear it while carrying passengers, but once they got out I had to put it on...
You must have posted while I was doing mine 
|
|
|
BenB
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:46 PM |
|
|
(c) a person driving a vehicle while performing a manoeuvre which includes reversing;
Excellent. I'm driving everywhere backwards  Oh how the plod would laugh.....
|
|
|
Neil P
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:47 PM |
|
|
Good idea - strap yourself to a chair while the pissed bloke whacks you!
Think that may have something to do with it.
Neil
|
|
|
COREdevelopments
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:53 PM |
|
|
(h) a person riding in a vehicle, being used under a trade licence, for the purpose of investigating or remedying a mechanical fault in the vehicle;
im exempt woohoo
Rob
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 09:54 PM |
|
|
Any LTI, Eurocab etc or MPV/Van conversion Hackney Carriage with a polycarbonate security screen offers no risk to the driver and yet I can't
remember the last time I saw one wearing his belt. Also when just 'searching for a fair' or picking up a little old lady at 1 in the
afternoon I don't think the risk of attack is higher than the risk of a crash.
I simply can't understand why just because you don't legally have to wear it anyone would choose not to except the very few cases when it
would pose a risk.
[Edited on 14/10/09 by matt_claydon]
|
|
|
splitrivet
|
| posted on 14/10/09 at 11:58 PM |
|
|
I got side swiped by a 25 tonner on Friday, I dont give a monkeys what anyone else does I'm glad I was belted in.
Cheers,
Bob
I used to be a Werewolf but I'm alright nowwoooooooooooooo
|
|
|
speedyxjs
|
| posted on 15/10/09 at 06:17 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by COREdevelopments
(h) a person riding in a vehicle, being used under a trade licence, for the purpose of investigating or remedying a mechanical fault in the vehicle;
im exempt woohoo
Rob
Me too but that isnt going to stop me
How long can i resist the temptation to drop a V8 in?
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 15/10/09 at 06:58 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by splitrivet
I got side swiped by a 25 tonner on Friday, I dont give a monkeys what anyone else does I'm glad I was belted in.
Cheers,
Bob
how do you know is was 25 tonnes and not 24.74 Tonne or 25.003 Tonne ?
|
|
|
Dangle_kt
|
| posted on 15/10/09 at 07:51 AM |
|
|
There arn't seatbelt on buses.
|
|
|
Agriv8
|
| posted on 15/10/09 at 08:03 AM |
|
|
wearing of seat-belts arround bradford 'appears' to be optional depending on your faith including the 6 kids in a
people carrier none restrained even the one in an infant seat
regards
Agriv8
Taller than your average Guy !
Management is like a tree of monkeys. - Those at the top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. BUT Those at the bottom look up and see a
tree full of a*seholes .............
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 15/10/09 at 08:03 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dangle_kt
There arn't seatbelt on buses.
yip all the busses I drove had no belts for the driver  flimsy deathtraps in a crash too, seen quite a few after crashes with cars and about 2m of
the busses front caved it 
|
|
|
Richard Quinn
|
| posted on 15/10/09 at 11:39 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BenB
(c) a person driving a vehicle while performing a manoeuvre which includes reversing;
Excellent. I'm driving everywhere backwards Oh how the plod would laugh.....
See, I thought I would make some smart a$$ remark about
you having a BEC but now you've actually got me thinking!
Slightly unconventional, and it may only be feasible in a BEC midi, but if you turned the engine around so that you had 6 reverse gears and no forward
gears, not only would you not have to wear your seat belt but with the IVA requirement "to reverse under its own power" is there actually
a stated requirement to move forward under its own power. Et voila, slightly inconvenient but no need for a reverse (or in this case) forward
mechanism.
(It's been a long morning!!)
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 15/10/09 at 12:01 PM |
|
|
I don't understand how anyone under 35 can drive without a seatbelt on since it's been law since 1981 was it?
Driving without a seatbelt feels weird, like I've got the door wide open or no pants on
|
|
|
morcus
|
| posted on 15/10/09 at 01:28 PM |
|
|
I agree with what seems to be the common sentament here, and would wear one even if it wasn't the law, that said I do understand why some people
don't think it should be a legal requirement (Though mostly because it being the law means you can get done for being sat it the car with it
turned on and no belt even if your not moving)
I'm surprised to see so many exceptions though.
I will admit to having travelled without a belt, its great to ride in a van on the Motorway without one so you can move about a bit more. That said, I
have driven a car with just one arm and one leg inside the vehicle. (And once with just one foot inside but that was a mistake and more a guy almost
being knocked over by his own car because he left it in D.)
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 17/10/09 at 07:50 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dangle_kt
There arn't seatbelt on buses.
I asked someone about that who did the testing for bus seatbelts and he said he wouldn't bother wearing one because 'in an accident would
you rather go flying to the front of the bus, or go flying toward the front of the bus with a seat strapped to your back?'
|
|
|
