• 90
From the 'We Almost Missed It'' file comes word Kansas man has set about testing his state's new seatbelt law. Kansas has just joined the handful of other states that have moved not wearing a seatbelt while driving up to a primary offense, meaning that law enforcement officers can pull over and cite offenders simply for failing to buckle up. According to KWCH CBS 12, Paul Weigand says that he wants to challenge the law because he believes wearing his seatbelt should be up to him. Since the law says that an individual simply has to wear a seatbelt, Weigand has apparently taken to donning a seatbelt that he made himself around his waist at all times. The law apparently makes no mention of the seatbelt needing to be factory equipment nor that the belt needs to actually be fastened to the vehicle.
Not surprisingly, Weigand was cited under the new law and decided to fight the citation. A district judge decided earlier this month that the seatbelt crusader can take his case to court. According to the report, Weigand knows that he's poking fun at the law, but believes that seatbelt use should be up to individuals. He claims to have a phobia of being trapped in a crashed vehicle. Click on the KWCH link below to watch a video and see the homemade safety belt for yourself.

[Source: KWCH CBS 12 via USA Today]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 90 Comments
      • 4 Years Ago
      Sorry to say this but some people just deserve to be in a car accident. Seat belts save lives. Imagine all the car accidents that happen every day and no one wearing a seat belt. It would be chaos.

      oh, but its confining. So's a coffin!
      • 4 Years Ago
      My opinion? Let the guy fight and win his "right" to not wear his safety belt. Though for his 'right' in doing so, if he has medical insurance, they should amend it retroactively to state "injuries incurred while in a vehicle accident, regardless of fault, where no manufacturer installed safety harness/belt was used during the time of the incident will not be covered and must be paid for out of pocket by insuree."
      • 4 Years Ago
      Strange, my 5-year-old's school bus doesn't even have seatbelts. Can this guy argue that police don't pull over motorcycle drivers for not wearing a seatbelt? That's profiling, isn't it?

      Of course, I think everyone should wear a belt. But I might agree just a teeny bit with this guy.
      • 4 Years Ago
      This is in answer to ANYONE in favor of the seat belt law in ANY STATE. In the first place GOD CREATED THIS WORLD AND WHEN IT IS YOUR TIME TO LEAVE IT YOU ARE GONE NO MATTER IF YOR SITTING ON THE COMMODE ARE DRVING A CAR. CHARLES DARWIN WAS / AND IS NOT GOD. THE SEAT BELT WAS STARTED ON A BET BETWEEN TO PEOPLE, ONE SAID I BET I CAN ""MAKE"" PEOPLE WEAR ONE WHETHER THEY WANT TO OR NOT."" Here is a PRIME EXAMPLE of "NOT WEARING ONE AND THIS WAS BEFORE THE SEAT BELT LAW. In 1969 I wasn't wearing a SEAT BELT and got hit from behind by a 27 TON TRUCK WHILE WAITING FOR A GREEN LIGHT, IT HIT OUR CAR SO HARD THAT IT BENT THE FRAME IN 5 PLACES, RIPPED THE SEAT BOLTS OUT OF THE FLOOR, KNOCKED THE KEYS OUT OF THE IGNITION, RIPPED A HANKERCHIEK VAIL OF MY MOTHER'S HEAD ( PINNED ON HER HAIR WITH BOBBY PINS, JAMMED THE DOORS SHUT, AND PROPELLED OUR CAR OVER HALF WAY ACROSS THE INTERSECTION AND THAT IS WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL. NOW I ASK YOU WHICH WOULD GIVE FIRST? YOUR BODY OR THE SEAT BELT? PARACHUTE STRAP IS STRONGER THAN AYONE'S GUT. A 1966 CHEVROLET CAPRICE HAD WAY WAY MORE STEEL IN ITS BODY AND FRAME THAN CARS BUILT NOW. IT SHOULDBE THE INDIVIDUALS CHOICE TO WEAR A SEAT BELT, NOT ANY ""GOVERNMENT OF ANY "NATURE WHATSOEVER.""
      • 4 Years Ago
      I'm fine with people choosing not to wear a seatbelt - if they'll sign a waiver so that emts can ignore them if they're involved in a crash, so they can attend to people who deserve their attention more. You can choose to be stupid, just don't tie up an ambulance crew when my mother is having a heart attack, or make responders risk their lives to save you from yourself....
      • 4 Years Ago
      insurance companies have to pay claims based on injury. Some can refuse to pay if it is shown the passenger/injured party was hurt due to non-compliance with safety belt regulation
      • 4 Years Ago
      Crazy.
      • 4 Years Ago
      I understand his position but how can an officer tell if you are wearing your seat belt? I drive old classic muscle cars that only have lap belts. Is the officer to assume I an riding with it fastened? What of those individuals whom place the shoulder harness behind them when they drive? Are they not wearing their seat belts.

      These are good points to make and should have been considered prior to the law being passed but then again we are talking government and politics where things from them only make sense in Bizarro world.

      • 4 Years Ago
      OK, for all those folks who said "he's only hurting himself" clearly have no understanding how insurance works. So assuming he has a job and is married, the life insurance and/or disability insurance company will payout to his beneficiaries (depending on his policy this can be HUGE $). If he survives then health insurance will payout. Since costs after a major trauma easily ring out in the $100,000+ range with rehab (I'm a physician and often consult on trauma patients), then whose pockets do you think that came out of. All of our premiums just went up, and his company now has a higher risk pool.

      If he has a family, they will become potentially quite harmed by the loss of his income, and may require state assistance (our pockets).

      Also he becomes a missile, so if someone else is in the car, they can get squished by him.

      BTW: This applies to helmets on motorcycles, etc...
      • 4 Years Ago
      I also wear a seat belt but say he's right when it comes to the state MAKING you wear one. Why shouldn't the state outlaw hang gliding? That's an extremely dangerous sport. And what if he's in an accident and the seatbelt mechanism doesn't open and he's burned to death? Can his family sue the state for in effect causing his death?
      cdwrx.. Sorry but your point is not valid. He may be on a public road but to use my hang gliding example again.. You are hang gliding in public airspace. Can the state outlaw that for the same reason? Also, the courts have ruled numerous times that a car is like a house. It can't be searched without either a warrant or for good cause. In other words, a car is private property and must be treated as such. Can the state make you wear safety devices inside your house for your own good?
      • 4 Years Ago
      Why doesn't he just keep one of those implements tethered to the door panel that cuts seatbelts and breaks out windows if you're under water?
      • 4 Years Ago
      After the age of 66 a person should have the choice . With all the recent safety requirements ( front-side-knee-etc.) bags , anti-lock brakes , traction control, roll-over protection & numerous other safety innovations the restrictive belt system should be an optional choice for those over 65 . As safe as the belt system is it does take away some of the enjoyment of driving . If you are planning on driving in five oclock traffic or street racing then of course click on the belt but a slow cruise through the mountains , NO.
      Let the flaming begin.
    • Load More Comments