PUBLIC OPINION > Pets Should Not Be Required to Wear Seat Belts

It is not only in the best interest of the animals. It is in the best interest of everyone on the road. Unrestrained animal are dangerous in vehicles as they roam around and are distracting to the drivers. I know because I have one that will not stay put and continually want to sit on my lap.

^^^^^ I LOVE when I meet people on here that have actual common sense!

Is it really for the pets best interest, or is it just another revenue stream for them to start writing tickets and generate more funds from tax payers to the massive bureaucracy that will need to enforce these rules? Seatbealts are designed specifically to fit around the shape of a human body, it is not designed for animals. Animals can and will face serious injury or death when straped into seatbelts. So what about someone who cant afford a pet harness? They cant bring their pet to the vet if its dying at their house? And many animals do not roam around the car. Every pet I have ever had would just sit or lay on the seat, or just gaze out the window. If it roams around too much and distracts the driver, then that pet owner can purchase a restraint. We dont need laws protecting us from every possible event in life. If we are going to start banning everything that "might" distract someone or "might" end with an injury then you might as well just strap yourself to the chair in your living room and never leave.

There a a lot of harnesses for animals of all kinds and sizes and yes they have been tested. I was not able to afford the harness I got for my service dog after I almost lost him because of a lack of securing him but I squeezed it into my budget ( yes putting off paying a bill for one month ) and it has saved him a few times and proven it's worth. You are right that some can not afford a vet which is another good reason to take as many steps as possible to keep that need from happening. Yes, your dogs lie down or stay where they are supposed to but can you promise yourself beyond a shadow of a doubt that your pets will not act like animal? No matter how well someone likes to think their animals are well behaved or trained ( even by a professional ) it is still an animal that is driven mostly by instinct.

I just really have to wonder when is the nanny state going to stop? At what point? In King County, WA they have discussed banning all swing sets because kids might get hurt on them. They are talking about banning cell phones while walking because one or two idiots didnt pay attention and walked into the road. Schools are banning children from playing sports at lunch because of a couple injuries. This is getting ridiculous. You can always make a good excuse as to why you must make some new law to protect others, but at what cost? Absolute control over our lives and massively wasteful bureaucracies to enforce the regulations, spending more money that we dont have... all because a very small handful of accidents that are almost statistically nonexistent. It is the same thing with the "terror threat". We have lost every single protection of our rights in the Bill Of Rights because of a fear of terrorism when more people die every year from bottle caps blowing off bottles or bee stings. I guess we must ban those too...

You have a good point but for most of those the danger only involves the possibility of one at a time and not threatening the lives of many at the same time. The swing sets and sports are not usually injuries because of someone being stupid just doing normal things. The cell phone thing is just a couple of idiots and happens so rarely whereas the unsecured pet issue has happened many times and hurt many people. With the major increase of traffic and the increase of stupid people driving in it with unsecured animals posses a higher risk than any of those you wrote down.

The "nanny state" will stop when people stop needing it.

It is for SAFETY and nothing more than that.

You are apparently unaware of the fact that there are safety belts made specifically for animals of all sizes. Harness cost on average $35. If you are unwilling to buy one owe those a crate is safe as well. It will stop you pet from roaming around the vehicle and from flying around in the event of a impact. Any object, inanimate or alive will become potentially lethal when propelled at a high speed.

Your statement seem quite illogical and are not related to safety on the road at all. Just like drunk drivers and cell phone users, any distraction is dangerous and common sense is not very common and neither is intelligence from listening to your rant.

Intelligent... this is a post about a law in Jersey, so I am commenting on it. Is that a problem? The state can do whatever they want, but I can also have my opinion about the state. And why do you even bring up the federal government? You act like the fed has authority over a state... well, they dont, no matter how much they try to gain that authority. The tenth amendment to the Constitution states the powers not delegated to the United States (federal government) by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. If you dont want to see other peoples comments, then why are you on this site?

Most animals are very safe in cars, if yours is hyper and liable to cause trouble, you should have enough sense to restrain it without a law to demand it.

So you think that a calm animal will fair better as a projectile crashing through a window and splattering onto the pavement than a hyper one?

If everybody has to be paranoid about crashing and hurling the animal out the windshield they should probably all just stay home. But I really haven't seen that before, have you.

Maybe not only pets should be tied down but every single object you put in your car should be tied down to. You know what? since everyone is so scared, youre right. best to stay home.

I saw a dog in the back of a truck who should have been secured and it jumped out an broke its leg and nobody could catch it. I talked to lady who had a dog who had been secured and when she got into an accident the freaked out dog jumped out and immediatly got hit and killed by another car. It is fine and dandy to say "well they should all just stay home" but they do not and something needs to be done to protect the animal, themselves other drivers, and pedestrians.

Dogs in the backs of trucks should be secured. I wouldn't have one there that wasn't. We don't need more laws that they can't enforce, we need more people to use some sense when driving and transporting their animals and children.

It is unfortunate that people do not use their common sense and then laws need to be made in place for it. Some laws are made because of lack of common sense ( and it sucks ).

Yes, it is sad anymore how they have to try and make things illegal to make people think. Definitely sucks. If they tried this here all the minorities would be up in arms about it being against the poor people. They do it every time.

It's illegal to drive on the interstate with kids unsecured in the back of a pickup, but you still see them from time to time, and they have scattered them all over the median and harmed them, babies in laps instead of car seats, there are laws already for these that they ignore.

Can't force people to do the right thing, they're going to have to want to.

Pet do need to travel from time to time just like children do. Grow up.

I am grown up, she's the one spasming. Don't be an ahole.

Yes.

You haven't seen it because people, like yourself, clearly don't care what happens to the animal in a crash. If you can spend $20 to ensure that your pet will be more likely to survive in an accident...why the hell wouldn't you? Paranoid? So are people who always buckle their kids up "paranoid" too? I guess so. They should just keep their kids home, and hey, if they buckle themselves up they might as well not use the car either.
Despite what you think, un-belted animals get injured or killed in crashes all the time.

http://www2.insidenova.com/ne...
http://www.drive-safely.net/d...

You don't know anything about me or what I care about. You presume too much.
We don't need a bunch of BS laws, we need people to think for themselves.
If people care about their animals they'll restrain them, if they don't another law isn't going to matter. I see accidents here daily, very few involve vehicles with animals because they usually are driving slower and being careful because of their animals/ children being in the vehicle. I have cats they go in a crate. There are laws about restraining people in vehicles and it has been that way a long time.
If the family vehicle has just enough seating for the humans what are they supposed to do, the poor people are going to be upset because they don't even wear their own seat belt a lot of the time and any additional cost to them is an affront, you can't force people to care. Despite what you think most people take care of their animals when they are in the vehicle. Perhaps the law should enforce the speed limits and driving laws so we have fewer accidents.

I believe if there is a law that you must buckle your kids then pets should have the same courtesy. They should not have to deal with the consequences of things they can not control. That isn't fair. If they can't protect themselves then someone has to. You think click it or ticket laws have been around a LONG time? I remember when seat belts were not necessary if you were above a certain age and I'm only 21.
"Despite what you think most people take care of their animals when they are in the vehicle". Honestly, there is no possible way you would know that, you and I are not in every car with an animal in it.

Common sense is so rare it is like a super power

Yes, I know, everyone wants to try and force it on people, won't work , you're either a responsible person or you're not.

But choosing not to should not allow someone to hurt others be it a human or an animal. Those who chose not to are the ones who are actually bringing these laws up ( lets put responsibility where it belongs ).

Drunk driving laws are there to FORCE people to obey the law and for the most part it takes time for people to understand and learn. You seem like a very slow learner to me.

It should be secured even if it is not hyper because a well behaved dog is a projectile whether an accident or sudden stop is your fault or not. My extremely well behaved service dog came close to either being killed or seriously injured because of a sudden stop. He was sitting in his place and being calm when this happened.

There's a strong likelihood that being tied down would be stressful and cruel for certain animals. But people have to contend with lawmakers intruding into areas of which they don't have a complete understanding.

There are several ways to secure your animals in a vehicle that are in no way cruel and if someone is willing to get off their butt and do training for it the animal would not be stressed. Most of the time when an animal is secured they fell less stressed.

Instead of politicians telling us to get off our butts why don't we voters send them a message to butt out?

If people would actually use their common sense and logic laws would not have to be made.

People should use their logic and common sense to vote these domineering busy bodies out of office.

Well using common sense and logic to get the ones we have in now and the ones in either party trying to get in need to be kept out also because they are ALL busy bodies.

So should I suppose that you are no fan of busy body politicians who think they're somehow qualified to be our guides in logic and common sense to distract from the obvious fact that they're not competent enough to work out a sustainable budget as is clearly the case in New Jersey?

This has nothing to do with budget or trying to distract people from the budget problem. This has to do with people asking for help to make it safer ( even if just a little bit ) for lives of humans and animals alike. No, I do not like or approve of 99% of our politicians but once in awhile they might get something right.