This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Feb 6, 2005
Why
can't juries consider failure to wear a safety belt?
The South
Carolina Senate finally took the common-sense and fiscally responsible step of
approving the seat belt bill last week.The bill allows police to enforce the
state's mandatory seat belt law. Under current law, a police officer can't cite
a motorist for failing to wear a seat belt unless he stops the motorist for some
other reason. The bill allows officers to stop motorists if they havea clear
view that someone is not wearing a seat belt.It makes sense to allow police to
enforce the law. The bill will surely increase seat belt use in South Carolina.
This state has one of the highest highway fatality rates in the country, and
most of those killed were not wearing seat belts at the time of the accident.The
bill also will preserve the state's ability to receive its full allotment of
federal highway funds, which would have been curtailed if the state had not
strengthened its law.But there is one provision in the law that boggles the
mind. It prohibits juries in civil cases from considering the fact that an
injured person was not wearing a seat belt. The law specifically bans
consideration of this fact.That makes no sense.If you make a mistake on the road
and cause a minor accident, but the person driving the other car is hurt badly
because he was not wearing a seat belt, should you be forced to pay all the
damages? That person's injuries were increased because of his decision not to
wear a safety belt. He should share the responsibility for his injuries.But
according to state law, he does not. The legislature has decided that when
people get hurt not wearing seat belts, someone else has to pay for their
decision.The trial lawyers in the Legislature have given themselves a nice
advantage in their lawsuits.Gov. Mark Sanford wants this provision fixed in a
separate bill dealing with other litigation reforms. It should be addressed
there. It should also be struck from this bill when the bill reaches the House
of Representatives.South Carolina juries should be able to consider all the
facts in the cases presented to them. Whether an injured person in a traffic
case was wearing a seat belt is a pertinent issue they should be able to
consider.