3x Infringement Notices for Passenger Not Wearing Their Seatbelt

Marf183 on 15/02/2022 - 23:28
Last edited 16/02/2022 - 16:21

I've recently found out I have 3 infringement notices against my name (2 overdue and 1 due in a few weeks) for "Driver drive with unrestrained front seat passenger".

The reason 2 are overdue is that the mail arrived at my old residence during the time I was moving house. So just my luck, I missed them…

My passenger was wearing a seatbelt at the time and it can be seen in some of the photos. The catch is that the shoulder strap is pulled down and in one pic under the passenger's arm (so not on properly).

I have 2 questions I was hoping someone could help me out with:
1 - It's a long shot but if it's clipped in but the shoulder strap is pulled down, does that still count as not wearing a seatbelt?
2 - Is it possible to transfer the demerit points to the passenger's name (the passenger is very happy to take the points if possible)? The QLD gov sites and TRM sites are very difficult to decipher so I was hoping someone had some clear info to help me out here.

As mentioned above it's in Queensland and I do have an open QPL license with no current points against it.

Each infringement is worth 3 points.

I appreciate the help with this not so good situation :/

UPDATE

In relation to question 1, the official response that they give everyone is "Seatbelts must be worn correctly to reduce the risk of injury or death. This includes lap belts which the cameras can detect. The top part of the seatbelt must be on the shoulder, and the bottom part on the hips. "
For question 2, even though the passenger wanted to take the fine, it can't be transferred.

Thanks to everyone who helped to answer my questions. It's much appreciated :)

Automotive

Comments

kyle on 15/02/2022 - 23:38

+8

Why was the shoulder strap pulled down?
- Marf183 on 15/02/2022 - 23:39
  
  -2
  
  It was digging into the passenger's neck
  - AustriaBargain on 16/02/2022 - 00:23
    
    +2
    
    Was the passenger a child?
    - Marf183 on 16/02/2022 - 00:29
      
      +1
      
      No, just short about 5"4'
      - AustriaBargain on 16/02/2022 - 00:50
        
        +4
        
        @Marf183: Does it look like a child in the photo?
        
        Scrooge McDuck on 16/02/2022 - 14:38
        
        +42
        
        @AustriaBargain: How can a driver absolutely guarantee that their passengers wear their seatbelts correctly every single moment of a trip? People do things spontaneously especially when they're uncomfortable. A driver can only react after the fact. And what are they supposed to do? Plead? Nag? Pull over and ask the passenger to leave? What if it isn't safe for the driver to pull over and/or the passenger to walk?
        
        Many approaches could be considered coercive control and therefore domestic violence. Why should an individual be punished for another adult's transgression?
        
        The only foolproof solution I can see for this issue is to not permit any passengers in the first place. But that means more cars on the road, more congestion, more fuel used, etc plus the obvious social fallout.
        
        Euphemistic on 16/02/2022 - 15:16
        
        +23
        
        @Scrooge McDuck:
        
        A driver can only react after the fact. And what are they supposed to do? Plead? Nag? Pull over and ask the passenger to leave?
        
        Yes. Driver should plead, nag and if that doesn’t work stop the car and kick them out.
        
        shreav on 16/02/2022 - 17:47
        
        +71
        
        @Euphemistic: Once, my mother refused to wear a seatbelt. I refused to drive any further and when she made it clear she wouldn't budge, I left the car with her in it. I was an idiot because I thought she'd have a change of heart or something but she drove away and left me to walk home the rest of the way.
        
        The next time she didn't wear a seat belt I checked that the roads were clear and slammed the brakes at a round about. It threw her forward so hard she farted and freaked out. But she's been wearing seatbelts ever since.
        
        Miss B on 16/02/2022 - 18:12
        
        +25
        
        @shreav: That's hilarious. Make sure you take the keys with you when you leave someone in the car next time.
        
        Jackamo on 17/02/2022 - 04:39
        
        -8
        
        @shreav: You probably don't remember the fart she gave when you were born.
        
        trev likes bargains on 18/02/2022 - 06:47
        
        +1
        
        @shreav: Sweet
        
        thegamerulez on 18/02/2022 - 09:09
        
        +1
        
        @shreav: Did she wear the seatbelt when she drove back or was she being a hypocrite? :P
        
        shreav on 18/02/2022 - 17:07
        
        @thegamerulez: Honestly I have no idea, because I was only seeing red at the time.
        
        morse on 17/02/2022 - 04:44
        
        +6
        
        @Scrooge McDuck:
        
        Many approaches could be considered coercive control and therefore domestic violence
        
        Asking someone to wear a seatbelt in a vehicle is not coercive control or domestic violence. Yelling or threatening to get them to wear one might be, particularly if paired with a pattern of similar behaviour in other contexts. But most adults aren’t going to refuse if you ask nicely, and if they do there’s probably more to the story. I have to use rewards (bribes) and fixed choices almost daily to get my toddler properly strapped in - please don’t report me to child safety! Having a drivers license comes with responsibility and the driver needs to be able to communicate to the passenger “I’m not comfortable driving without you being strapped in” without resorting to yelling etc.
        
        if the passenger has cognitive or behavioural difficulties I’d imagine the driver would be able to get out of the fine and might need to engage a professional to assist with the person refusing.
        
        obvious social fallout
        
        People need better friends or family if asking someone to wear a seatbelt causes ‘social fallout’
        
        sarahlump on 18/02/2022 - 13:30
        
        +2
        
        @Scrooge McDuck: its not domestic violence to say 'please put your seatbelt on properly'
        and if they don't pull over and ask them to get out of the car.
      - larndis on 16/02/2022 - 10:00
        
        +8
        
        @Marf183: Average height of women in Australia in 2011-12 was 161.8cm (5"3'). So I wouldn't classify your passenger as short in terms of the general population. We mostly manage to wear our seatbelts without issue.
        
        Source: ABS
      - [Deactivated] on 16/02/2022 - 12:14
        
        +7
        
        @Marf183: Did they adjust the height on the side on the b pillar?
  - Ughhh on 16/02/2022 - 06:08
    
    +16
    
    Buy seat belt covers, should solve the digging issue, they're a few bucks each from SCA.
  - buderim11 on 16/02/2022 - 07:54
    
    -3
    
    I would seek legal advice , if the passenger advised you they where unable to wear the seatbelt properly then as a lay person you would have to take their word for it .
    
    Maybe a stat dec from the passenger confirming that in their opinion that they were unable to wear the seatbelt correctly due to a injury/medical condition .
  - smartazz104 on 16/02/2022 - 17:46
    
    +2
    
    The height can't be adjusted on the pillar?
Jimothy Wongingtons on 15/02/2022 - 23:39

+6

Your seatbelt should be worn with the buckle low on your hip, the sash running from your shoulder across your chest and above your stomach, and the lap part sitting across your pelvis and hips.
- Scantu on 17/02/2022 - 15:42 Comment score below threshold.
  - johnno07 on 17/02/2022 - 15:50
    
    +6
    
    I'd prefer you didn't turn into a projectile when you have an accident.
    Being dumb often affects other people even if you're too dumb to realise it.
    - Euphemistic on 17/02/2022 - 19:13
      
      +3
      
      If you really do want to turn into a projectile in a crash, just go ride a motorcycle like all the other temporary aussies.
    - Scantu on 18/02/2022 - 01:43
      
      -4
      
      I won't because I'll be wearing one, I just don't think other people's choices are my business. If they want to fly through a windshield more power to them.
      - Meeb on 18/02/2022 - 09:41
        
        +2
        
        @Scantu: Such a myopic view you have. Those same people may have families and children, they would be impacted greatly. Imagine growing up without parents/guardians and family members all because someone chose to be stupid. Emergency workers who have to scrape up their mangled body would also be impacted. People's personal choices unfortunately sometimes have far reaching effects since we live in a society (or have you forgotten this fact??).
  - Xuaxace on 17/02/2022 - 19:00
    
    +1
    
    Think of the nurses that have to wipe your incontinent bum when you get brain damage.
    I am not one to favor protectionism but working in a hospital and having to deal with the consequences makes you realise how many externalities your attempt at "personal freedom" can have on other people and the taxpayers.
    - Scantu on 18/02/2022 - 01:43
      
      -6
      
      I'll pay for it out of my pocket as it is my choice. The curse of free healthcare in this country. "Nah you can't do it because we have socialised healthcare and therefore I am going to restrict your choices". It's a shitty slope to privatised health industry imo.
      - Yola on 19/02/2022 - 11:59
        
        @Scantu: You won't. You will be taken to a public hospital.
        
        Scantu on 19/02/2022 - 21:13
        
        -2
        
        @Yola: Arguing that you shouldn't do something because of "the public system" is an argument for privatising healthcare. We don't assign health outcomes based on political opinions. Or at least, we shouldn't do, but a lot of people lack the nuance to understand that. Which certainly worries me.
        
        Euphemistic on 20/02/2022 - 05:51
        
        +1
        
        @Scantu: The public system is supported by a bunch of rules/strategies to help reduce the burden on the public system. Promoting healthy lifestyle, reducing smoking through taxes and anti smoking campaigns, making drivers wear seatbelt and rider wear helmets etc.
        
        People on the whole are pretty stupid. We need stuff like seatbelt laws to protect ourselves from ourselves.
  - Meeb on 17/02/2022 - 19:56
    
    -1
    
    So brave!
    - Scantu on 18/02/2022 - 01:44
      
      -2
      
      Not interfering in other people's lives is brave? I suppose in this climate it probably is. I wear my seatbelt. It's a choice I make and a logical thing to do. There are plenty of logical things I think to do, I don't enforce them on others.
      - Euphemistic on 18/02/2022 - 06:41
        
        +3
        
        @Scantu: You are probably wearing that seatbelt properly because it is a law, and enforced. It took many years for seatbelts to become normalised, just like drink driving becoming largely unacceptable. Both significantly increased safety, both required enforcement.
        
        Scantu on 18/02/2022 - 10:30
        
        -4
        
        @Euphemistic: Nope, I can confirm that it's because it statistically makes you incredibly less likely to die in a car crash. What I choose to do in my private vehicle is my business.
        
        Drink driving and not wearing a seatbelt are not comparable. You put other people at risk if you drink drive.
        
        johnno07 on 18/02/2022 - 16:14
        
        +2
        
        @Scantu: You keep saying that wearing a seatbelt has no impact on others. What happens if you're in an incident that manages to throw you out of your seat because you're not belted in? Now your car doesn't have a driver. Surely not being in control of your car has an impact on others?
        
        Meeb on 18/02/2022 - 20:39
        
        +1
        
        @johnno07: Not to mention the mental impact on emergency workers, cremation costs, investigation costs and mental health impact on investigators, potentially now parent-less children, mental health impact on other family members involved or even innocent bystanders having to witness the horribly mangled body. The list can go on and on how the supposedly isolated "personal choice" may actually have far reaching consequences beyond the idiot who thinks their personal freedom somehow trumps everyone else's in a society. It's a disgustingly selfish and shortsighted view.
        
        Scantu on 19/02/2022 - 21:16
        
        -2
        
        @Meeb: That is just straight out victim blaming. You don't owe anything to anyone else in society, what we choose to do, and be good people, is a choice. Legislating people to do "your opinion of good" is pure evil and it's the kind of legislative attitude that has historically not been a good thing.
        
        dizzle on 19/02/2022 - 23:04
        
        +2
        
        @Scantu: You have a pretty twisted view on "pure evil".
        
        Asking people to wear a seatbelt (or even legislating it) is not pure evil. A passenger in the backsealt without a belt can injure someone in the front seat. Even if it's just for their own good, asking them to do it so there are less injuries/deaths on the road, is not pure evil.
        
        There are many other things that should be considered "pure evil" above asking someone to wear a seatbelt for their own good.
        
        Scantu on 19/02/2022 - 23:27
        
        -1
        
        @dizzle: You have an incorrect interpretation of what I've said then. I am saying that through the course of history, forcing your opinion of what is good or bad when it doesn't affect anyone else has not had good outcomes.
        
        A passenger in the backsealt without a belt can injure someone in the front seat. Even if it's just for their own good, asking them to do it so there are less injuries/deaths on the road, is not pure evil.
        
        If you don't agree with someone's behavior, it's your responsibility to not associate with them. It's not your right to regulate that for someone else.
        
        There are many other things that should be considered "pure evil" above asking someone to wear a seatbelt for their own good.
        
        Traditionally in western society we don't make laws that are "for your own good" unless they affect someone else. This is slowly slipping away though as I can see here and we will just go down the road going back to mob rule again.
        
        dizzle on 20/02/2022 - 00:57
        
        @Scantu:
        
        You have an incorrect interpretation of what I've said then
        
        You were talking about seatbelt laws being for peoples own good, which led you saying "Legislating people to do "your opinion of good" is pure evil" You can see how I interpreted that.
        
        If you don't agree with someone's behavior, it's your responsibility to not associate with them. It's not your right to regulate that for someone else.
        
        You're right, it's not my right to regulate it But it is the governments job to do what's best for the populace and for society. The governement has decided that people should wear seatbelts primarily for their own good. It's a law, and if you "choose" to defy the law you face the consequences.
        
        Traditionally in western society we don't make laws that are "for your own good" unless they affect someone else
        
        Sure we do - Seatbelt laws, helmet laws, suicide laws, age protection laws (such as smoking below a certain age), laws against prostitution often don't differentiate between willing prostitution and coerced, some illigal drugs only affect the user, but they are still laws for their own good.
        
        Primarily these are all for the users own good, but as already mentioned they benefit society through the families, infrastructure (like medical spending), and even in keeping other laws (broken window theory).
        
        Scantu on 20/02/2022 - 01:02
        
        -1
        
        @dizzle:
        
        You were talking about seatbelt laws being for peoples own good, which led you saying "Legislating people to do "your opinion of good" is pure evil" You can see how I interpreted that.
        
        I can see how you incorrectly interpreted it yes, and I corrected you as to what I was actually saying
        
        But it is the governments job to do what's best for the populace and for society
        
        Kind of, that's a bit of a simplified definition that missed some of the important nuance. It's the government's job to facilitate a peaceful society and sometimes that means restricting rights, but it is limited to preventing harm between people.
        
        Sure we do
        
        That's my point. We do now because people like you don't understand the principles which we are supposed to govern on.
        
        Seatbelt laws, helmet laws
        
        You'll be suprised to find I'm against these
        
        , suicide laws
        
        This just straight up isn't a thing
        
        age protection laws
        
        Age protection should only last until the child has capacity to make decisions for itself, a-ok with me
        
        laws against prostitution often don't differentiate between willing prostitution and coerced, some illigal drugs only affect the user, but they are still laws for their own good.
        
        I don't know what to tell you. Laws "protecting people from themselves" with no precondition (Mental illness, incapacitation) are immoral and undemocratic. If someone wants to do something to themselves, and it doesn't effect you, it's their right.
        
        Meeb on 20/02/2022 - 07:48
        
        @Scantu: Lol you’re such a bad troll its not even entertaining. Go to reddit where you can convince 12yo’s with you bad attempts. Blocked.
        
        Scantu on 20/02/2022 - 12:13
        
        -2
        
        @Meeb: I don't know what to tell you, it's called having principles, I know that may be foreign to you.
        
        Also calling me a troll… don't flatter yourself I know you don't understand what I'm talking about.
        
        Scantu on 19/02/2022 - 21:14
        
        @johnno07: Using that logic, people should not be driving cars at all, fullstop. It's a false line of logic.
        
        Euphemistic on 20/02/2022 - 14:51
        
        @Scantu: Not a brilliant argument, taking a point to its extreme.
        
        Scantu on 20/02/2022 - 15:26
        
        -2
        
        @Euphemistic: Only because it's not something you agree with. Principles are principles.
        
        Do you think stabbing someone a lot is not ok, but only stabbing them a little bit is fine? They are both wrong.
        
        johnno07 on 21/02/2022 - 09:24
        
        +2
        
        @Scantu: Eh? Cars are legal to drive because they have regulated construction, features, and modes of operation that offset the risk of using them enough that they worth it for the convenience. A seatbelt is a part of that equation.
        
        Scantu on 21/02/2022 - 12:24
        
        -1
        
        @johnno07: Yep - for the person, personally. It's still none of your business if someone else chooses to wear one or not, it doesn't impact you.
        
        Euphemistic on 21/02/2022 - 12:30
        
        +2
        
        @Scantu: Might be none of our business what the choose, but making the choice and incurring preventable injuries literally costs more for our health system in resources and dollars. That comes out of taxes, which we all pay.
        
        Scantu on 21/02/2022 - 12:33
        
        -2
        
        @Euphemistic:
        
        incurring preventable injuries literally costs more for our health system in resources and dollars.
        
        This is an argument for privatised health care, if you like public health, you need to stop thinking like this.
        
        You cannot enforce your political preferences on people because of health outcomes. We chose to have public healthcare. You cannot control people by virtue of "oh public health".
        
        Euphemistic on 21/02/2022 - 14:27
        
        +1
        
        @Scantu: Why can’t we set up some guidelines/rules that help us all be safer/healthier to benefit our public healthcare system? We do, and we have enforced lots of rules because ‘public healthcare’. I’m all for it because as a group people are too stupid to protect themselves and without it we could not afford decent healthcare for the rest of us/them.
        
        Scantu on 21/02/2022 - 14:36
        
        @Euphemistic: Because in liberal democratic societies, unless something someone does hurts you, you have no right to stop them.
        
        as a group people are too stupid to protect themselves
        
        People are so quick to quip this but think about what you are actually genuinely saying when you say this. It is a scary prospect. One group who thinks they are societally superior to another enforcing what they want by law has not worked out well in the past. For obvious reasons.
        
        as a group people are too stupid to protect themselves and without it we could not afford decent healthcare for the rest of us/them.
        
        And even if I do take this statement seriously, which I don't because of the immoral gravity, laws like these have effectively no observable impact on the operation of "decent healthcare". Nobody elects to go to the hospital if they don't have to. Laws have nothing to do with that.
        
        Euphemistic on 21/02/2022 - 15:12
        
        @Scantu:
        
        One group who thinks they are societally superior to another enforcing what they want by law has not worked out well in the past. For obvious reasons.
        
        What? We elect leaders who are responsible to create laws that ‘we’ want. Of course, not everyone agrees with the laws, but the majority seem to think it’s OK. We don’t have a self appointed ‘superior group’ unlike for example a monarchy or dictatorship. They don’t just impose their will on us at their will although sometimes it appears that way.
        
        Anyway, you are entitled to your opinions, just like I am in our democratic (no, I won’t say free) society. Don’t think we are going to agree either, and that’s OK. I’ll choose who I want to represent me in making laws, just like you do and we’ll see what laws develop. As you carry on with your opinion have a look over the comment votes to see what the majority seem to think.
        
        Scantu on 21/02/2022 - 18:50
        
        -1
        
        @Euphemistic:
        
        What? We elect leaders who are responsible to create laws that ‘we’ want.
        
        This is where you are actually wrong, most people fundamentally don't understand our system of governance which is why Australia is in the state it is today. The concept you are describing is called "mob rule" and it doesn't work for very long. Liberal democratic societies have a floor of rights, and you build laws up from there. Not: "I don't like what you did there, me and my mates say stop". There needs to be a legitimate basis, harm to others is the standard.
        
        As you carry on with your opinion have a look over the comment votes to see what the majority seem to think.
        
        Yes - you're proving my point. The majority of people, including you, don't actually fundamentally understand how democracy works. Unfortunately because I have principles I can't make laws that say "you're too stupid to understand, therefore I am going to be telling you what to do", as you have suggested you like doing.
        
        How nice it must be to not have to think about these sorts of things when you come up with opinions - I envy your ignorance, in a way!
        
        Euphemistic on 21/02/2022 - 19:28
        
        @Scantu: That’s ok. You’re obviously much better than me. Maybe you could make some laws for me?
        
        Scantu on 21/02/2022 - 21:30
        
        @Euphemistic:
        
        Maybe you could make some laws for me?
        
        Only if they revolve around a way that you may cause damage to me. Otherwise, I am a firm believer in liberal democratic values - do and say as you please, without thanking me ;)
DASHCAM NOW DUDE on 15/02/2022 - 23:49

+9
Don't know.

Nah. Driver is responsible for their passengers to be wearing a seatbelt correctly.

https://www.nsw.gov.au/topics/roads-safety-and-rules/safe-dr…
- Marf183 on 15/02/2022 - 23:54
  
  Thanks for your input, I'm in QLD but its probably similar rules :(
  - dizzle on 16/02/2022 - 00:26
    
    +7
    
    In QLD both parties can be fined.
    
    The driver gets a $413 fine and 3 demerit points
    the passanger (if over 16) can also get a $413 fine and 3 demerit points.
    
    Fines and demerits
    - Marf183 on 16/02/2022 - 00:30
      
      +1
      
      wow… good find, might not be worth identifying the person and have us both lose :/
    - DrScavenger on 16/02/2022 - 19:39
      
      What if passenger doesn't have a driving license? They cant give the license with demerit points in the future, can they?
      - [Deactivated] on 17/02/2022 - 17:31
        
        @DrScavenger: No. Just the fine then.
- jaybmate on 17/02/2022 - 22:26
  
  In Vic, passengers over 16y.o. are responsible for their own seatbelt.
- Nereosis on 18/02/2022 - 12:16
  
  +2
  
  I'll make sure to keep a constant eye on my passengers to ensure they don't move the seatbelt even slightly while driving.
  
  Looking at the road ahead is overrated anyway.
  - DASHCAM NOW DUDE on 18/02/2022 - 12:17
    
    That's dangerous. You must keep an eye on the road to avoid causing an accident that may result in death.
    - Nereosis on 18/02/2022 - 12:19
      
      +3
      
      What if my passenger moves their seatbelt though? I don't want a fine, I must keep watching them at all times and turn around constantly if I have passengers in the back seats or else I could get in trouble!
      - Euphemistic on 18/02/2022 - 13:07
        
        @Nereosis: How will you constantly monitor your speed to avoid a fine while constantly watching your passengers to avoid a fine? Can you hire a seatbelt monitor to allow you to concentrate on your speed?
  - UFO on 18/02/2022 - 12:53
    
    I'll make sure to keep a constant eye on my passengers to ensure they don't move the seatbelt even slightly while driving.
    
    Way to over-exaggerate an otherwise very simple proposition. You are the driver. You are responsible for the car and the people in it, case closed.
    Their behaviour whilst in the car is your responsibility.
    
    If they are taking that much attention off of you driving, then maybe they need to get out.
racer1234 on 15/02/2022 - 23:53

+2

I think your passenger can apply for a medical exemption if they are unable to wear a seatbelt properly. Maybe for next time. Otherwise it is the driver's responsibility to ensure passenger is secured.
- Marf183 on 15/02/2022 - 23:59
  
  +1
  
  Might be something to consider in the long run.
  
  It seems to be the general consensus but as the driver, I'm watching the road, not whether my passenger has their seatbelt strap pulled down. Pretty tough rules :/
  
  Thanks for your input though :)
  - racer1234 on 16/02/2022 - 00:06
    
    +1
    
    Here is the webpage. You may have a nasty surprise with the points as they mention double demerits for subsequent offences within one year. https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/rules/road/seatbelt-…
    - Marf183 on 16/02/2022 - 00:09
      
      Oooofff, might lose my license…
      
      Is it better to be on good behaviour for a year or 3-month suspension if it comes to it?
      - racer1234 on 16/02/2022 - 00:11
        
        +2
        
        @Marf183: You may have the option to go to court and argue that the pulled down strap was still worn correctly. No chance with under the arm. Maybe get some legal advice if this will cost you your license.
        Mates have taken the 3 month option as they reckoned it was easier.
        
        Marf183 on 16/02/2022 - 00:14
        
        +1
        
        @racer1234: One picture shows it under the arm. I don't think the others were under arm though. Hard to debate when it's 3 times though…
        
        Thanks for the advice
        
        racer1234 on 16/02/2022 - 00:17
        
        @Marf183: It may help your case if passenger got medical exemption now. Look into legal advice. Depends on how important license and maybe insurance premium increase are to you if you have to declare having lost your license to your insurance company.
        
        Marf183 on 16/02/2022 - 00:42
        
        @racer1234: I honestly don't drive much because I live in the city. 3 months is probably my best option if it comes to that.
        
        Someone just told me their friend did the 12 months of good behaviour and got caught with their car parked slightly over a white line and they lost their license for 6 months anyway.
        
        Some insurers don't need to be told (sometimes only at signup) so it might not impact my premiums hopefully.
        
        alxr0101 on 16/02/2022 - 07:27
        
        +3
        
        @Marf183: "…Some insurers don't need to be told (sometimes only at signup) so it might not impact my premiums hopefully."
        
        Do not do this. If you make a claim they will probably cancel your insurance and, at best, refund you premiums.
        
        You must disclose…If they then don't cover…well…they certainly would not cover when they can and do find out at claim time.
        
        Failing to disclose, in order to "save on premiums", is a flawed strategy.
      - Miss B on 17/02/2022 - 05:20
        
        @Marf183: If you do end up getting double points, you might be able to negotiate down to just the normal points because you didn't receive the notices in time to change the behaviour. It might be trickier if you didn't update your address within 14 days of moving as required, but if you did it would be worth a shot.
  - DASHCAM NOW DUDE on 16/02/2022 - 00:07
    
    +3
    
    I'm watching the road, not whether my passenger has their seatbelt strap pulled down. Pretty tough rules
    
    I see your point but how does this happen 3 times? Please don't say it was the same passenger.
  - mudvin on 16/02/2022 - 04:31
    
    +2
    
    You honestly did not have a single moment to notice your passenger did not have their belt on during the entire trip ?, sound like a pretty intense drive (Or are you suggesting that they just pulled the belt down for a single moment, right where the camera is, 3 times ?)
    
    Lap/ sash belts do not work if you are not wearing the shoulder portion, your passenger will be at least partially ejected in a crash. They do not work like dedicated lap belts, as the spool only has to be fed at a certain rate to grab.
    
    Also look into how pyrotechnic pretension systems work, if you are not wearing the belt correctly, what are they going to squish if they fire during a crash?
    
    Thus, your passenger was not wearing a belt, suck up the fine /s and tell them they will be wearing a belt if driving with you in the future.
- dizzle on 16/02/2022 - 00:29
  
  +10
  
  I'm not sure "digging into the passangers neck" qualifies for medical exemption.
  
  There are seat belt guides that can be purchased that place the strap in a better position while also still providing protection.
  - Yola on 16/02/2022 - 08:24
    
    Or even have a face towel in your car that a passenger can place against their neck.
Gervais fanboy on 16/02/2022 - 00:06

+5

So basically now they have got cameras to ensure surveillance and policing of people inside the car as well ?
Sounds a bit scary that.
- Marf183 on 16/02/2022 - 00:16
  
  +5
  
  Yeah, the pictures are from multiple angles and look pretty well into the car.
  - Gervais fanboy on 16/02/2022 - 00:19
    
    +15
    
    Good thing that historically we have never had a government go rogue against its own people.
    Knowing that to be the case, I can sleep well tonight.
    - DashCam AKA Rolts on 16/02/2022 - 08:26
      
      +5
      
      Enforcing road rules? Next thing they'll mandate masks and vaccinations. Where will all this madness stop?
      - abb on 16/02/2022 - 10:19
        
        @DashCam AKA Rolts: Stop trying to keep me alive dammit!!!
      - Gervais fanboy on 16/02/2022 - 10:31
        
        +10
        
        @DashCam AKA Rolts: Are you that oblivious to not realise what’s happening in China at the moment, with their social credit system. Only made possible by mass surveillance.
        Should we not be skeptical of our own governments too, especially considering the amount of Chinese influence we now have in our country.
        
        DashCam AKA Rolts on 16/02/2022 - 12:57
        
        -6
        
        @Gervais fanboy: Yeah,nah. 'cause Australia is so much like China.
        
        Gervais fanboy on 16/02/2022 - 13:09
        
        +5
        
        @DashCam AKA Rolts: So i should keep quiet and not question anything, if and until we do turn into a totalitarian regime ? Wouldn’t it be too late if we were to wait it out for that ?
        I mean we did witness the harshest lockdowns here in Melbourne, police brutality, completely one-sided media reporting.
        Is that not enough for someone like me to be a bit concerned ?
        
        DashCam AKA Rolts on 16/02/2022 - 14:03
        
        -8
        
        @Gervais fanboy: Is that not enough for someone like me to be a bit ~~concerned~~ paranoid ? FTFY.
        
        Gervais fanboy on 16/02/2022 - 14:44
        
        @DashCam AKA Rolts: Ok thanks
        
        OzCheapo on 17/02/2022 - 20:31
        
        @Gervais fanboy: QLD's camera system is turning into China. While I abject to Australia's government taking away freedoms like guns, and adding cameras to the road, when I see the issues in the states, school shootings, then maybe its not such a bad idea.
        
        Kangal on 16/02/2022 - 22:21
        
        @Gervais fanboy: Just as a tidbit, their surveillance program hit a wall when they were having issues identifying people.
        
        I can't remember the article, but it was just that they had many false positives and false negatives, and the crux was some people's faces didn't have much distinguishing features. No, this is not racist. Their own agency admitted it.
        
        So what they do mostly for surveillance is a mixture of their Own-Inter-Net, compliance with all carrier providers, GPS, Tap-Payment system, and App data from Chinese Android smartphones. The people are opting-in to it, without their knowledge, and against their wishes. The government agency can collate the data to track individuals more accurately, then check footage on nearby public camera system. They can then use better software ("ai") to spot individuals within the captured videos. Think of it like the movie Eagle Eye, nowhere near as impressive or impossible, but still with the eerie vibe.
        
        It is a lot of power. It requires a lot of responsibility. I don't think China can be responsible, nor can any other nation, I just know what human nature is like and how structures of heirachy can attract or promote bad-actors.
        
        Nereosis on 18/02/2022 - 12:18
        
        +2
        
        @Gervais fanboy: The main problem I have with the idiots in Canberra is that they are protesting something that is seriously such a non-issue.
        There are legitimate concerning things all parties are agreeing to in Australia.
        
        Survelliance, banning encryption, extra powers for police to essentially steal your online identityt, etc.
        
        But no, I am sad that I have to wear a mask when I go and buy cookies at Woolies.
        
        Gervais fanboy on 18/02/2022 - 15:52
        
        +1
        
        @Nereosis: Ahh I think you have been slightly misled here.
        Its not so much about the mask mandates but the vaccine mandates in-fact, that have got people so riled up.
        Coz there’s legitimately tens of thousands of people that have lost their jobs because of their vaccination status.
        So it’s not a non-issue like you are framing it to be. You take away a man’s right to earn his bread, Ofcos he’ll get riled up about it.
        
        Having said that, it is indeed comical and sad that it has taken us this long to finally stand up against the corrupt and power hungry establishment. I agree with you fully about the fact that there are some even bigger issues out there that the majority of us have never bothered to care for.
        But now finally we have people that are tuning out of TikTok and trashy love island type crap and finally tuning into politics and things that really matter.
        Lets hope that this does indeed changes things for good.
- racer1234 on 16/02/2022 - 00:19
  
  +3
  
  New mobile phone detection camera's from last year. Multiple undisclosed fixed sites around Brisbane.
  - Marf183 on 16/02/2022 - 00:20
    
    This happened around Brisbane so that fits
    - payless69 on 16/02/2022 - 15:44
      
      All over QLD!

3x Infringement Notices for Passenger Not Wearing Their Seatbelt

Comments

New Forum Topics