Karl B. Hellberg - Comment

Karl HellbergOpposeIndividual
Summary: A former Oregon State Trooper argues against the mandate for backseat Seat Belt Reminder Systems (SBRS), claiming it lacks supporting data and will increase vehicle production costs for consumers. The commenter contends that seatbelt compliance is best achieved through increased law enforcement presence, citations, and public safety campaigns rather than new vehicle technology.
The most effective Seat Belt Reminder System (SBRS) is the professional law enforcement officer out on the road enforcing traffic laws. As a former Oregon State Trooper, my experience has shown that the overt presence of marked patrol vehicles slows traffic, makes motorist buckle up and facilitates compliance with traffic laws. The combination of a visible patrol presence, the issuance of citations and warnings and highway safety campaigns, such as click it or ticket, are the most effective encouragement for the public to obey the law. There is no doubt as to the effectiveness of seatbelt use in reducing fatalities and injuries. The key, though, is wearing the belts and wearing them properly; the only way to accomplish this is by an overt police presence on the roads. The proposal to mandate backseat SBRS appears to be a self licking ice cream cone as it lacks any data to support its justification. While it is no doubt well intended and makes its advocates feels good, the initiative promises to increase the cost of production to auto manufacturers which will in turn be passed on to consumers. If back seat injuries are truly a rising concern, then the problem need to be addressed through stepped up enforcement, enhanced monetary penalties and expanded seatbelt campaigns.

View on Regulations.gov