State Rep. Dylan Jordan introduces law to repeal seat belt law

Machine Operator & DJ Dylan Jordan in his new role as a State Representative is attacking two topics so far in his first legislative session.

First, he wants fireworks to be sold year-round.  Second, and more to the topic, he has introduced a bill to repeal South Dakota’s 30 year old seat belt law:

I supposed I should say something nice about someone actually trying to repeal something for once.. But then I wonder what that’s going to cost us in federal highway/highway safety funds?

Moving on..

33 thoughts on “State Rep. Dylan Jordan introduces law to repeal seat belt law”

  1. I am perfectly fine if we remove the seat belt and helmet laws under one condition. If you are injured and can no longer care for yourself and require public assistance, you will be denied those public dollars. To be frank, you can become a vegetable as long as I don’t have to pay for it. Anyone who is against seat belt laws is stupid, there is no way around it. They save lives and you can find out first hand by joining your local fire dept.

    1. This. Yes, the reality is we shouldn’t need many of our laws. Most of our laws are passed to protect people from doing harm to others or themselves. Ideally, we wouldn’t need so many because people would do the right thing. In the case of the seat belt law, you’re absolutely correct — if you maim or kill yourself not using a seat belt, then make sure you and your family are taken care of with your own assets and do not become reliant on public assistance.

    2. I like the concept of being able to opt out of services and then not pay for them as well. How would this work for police service? Would their money making operation fall apart when they couldn’t arrest me in my garage alone for committing “crime”?

      1. What problem is there arresting you when you have no one other than yourself stopping them? They will be getting paid by their clients to take care of the problem(you). Laws are there for a reason. In this case, it’s to protect themselves from harm and us paying for it.

        1. This makes zero sense and completely ignores the premise of the previous statement. How would laws have to change if we could opt out of this service? You can’t even grasp this concept through your autocratic delusions. Whoever pays the cops is moot. Many of these laws are only there to appease autocrats like you who have delusions that you somehow have the justification to control the freedom of everyone who lives around you, just because we live around each other. We need protection from people like you, not ourselves.

  2. Mortuary, Cremation Urn, casket and organ donor industries are fully supportive of Dumpsterfire PAC endorsed SD State House Rep. Dylan Jordan.

    We don’t need federal funding for our highways! Freedumb Rules!

    It is nice to have the option to fly out of the front windshield head first being a human missile just in case the vehicle catches on fire. Good thinking Dylan!

  3. Folks I believe Rep Dylan Jordan just volunteered to be a new crash test dummy for the South Dakota Department of Transportation and South Dakota Highway Patrol.

      1. Where is the threat? Do you think this statement is original? I’ve heard this numerous times throughout life to know it’s a sarcastic statement meant to point out the stupidity of smooth brains. If you are a fox news viewer, I understand your confusion.

  4. Most of us do not wear the seat belt anyways, and cops cannot pull you over if you wear it or not, I support this bill.

    1. You realize that insurance rates will go up right? Risk goes up substantially for bodily harm along with mortality rates. Airbags and seatbelts are integrated systems with vehicles safer now than ever before.

      Then again if you don’t wear a seatbelt and replace that factory airbag with a Jiffy Pop Popcorn airbag at least you would have something to eat while waiting for medical services to arrive if you are still alive and are able to eat. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQm7EEnN-0E

  5. He will have support from the Freedom Fighter who believe seat belts are an infringment on liberty. He will be opposed by law enforcement who have seen first-hand the difference seat belts make. He will also be opposed by the indurance industry and by South Dakotans who have lost loved ones in accidents not wearig a belt. I imagine the list of people and organizations to testify against this bill will be long.

    Oh yea, one more will testify in support — the guy who’s written all on Jordan’s bills, crazyman Anthony Mirzayants.

  6. My favorite scenes are partial ejections of non seat belt wearers and their head gets between the roof and pavement while it rolls. It looks like a giant zit that you pop and hits the mirror, only this is someone’s head and the pasty white traffic cone shaped spray on the pavement is brain matter. I’ve seen it many times, but never with a belted person. I just figure that is one less idiot, or patriot as they call themselves these days.

  7. Thanks Dylan! It’s truly amazing how many people think they’re entitled to an opinion about what other people do with their own lives. Keep up the good work! You’ll have our vote next time as well.

  8. I’ve been in two serious rollovers. The first was when I was 10. I was laying down in the back seat of our suburban, not wearing a seatbelt. We rolled 3-4 times, and after being ping ponged around the inside of the vehicle, I was ejected. Law enforcement figured I was airborne for 30-40 yards. 100+ stitches, almost lost a kidney and an eye, broken collar bone, and bruising from head to toe. Thank the Lord a lady came up on us almost immediately and was able to get me to the hospital before I bled out. (Her husband later became a pastor and baptized my youngest son) I was in and out of consciousness the entire 15 min drive there. Frankly, it is a miracle I did not die. The other three people in the vehicle were wearing seatbelts and didn’t have a scratch on them.

    Shortly before my 18th birthday, I was on my way to basketball practice on a Saturday morning. I was t-boned at a rural intersection, the other driver had a yield sign and didn’t slow down. There was standing corn blocking my view and I did not see him until I was in the intersection and just happened to look to my left. We were both doing around 70mph. I rolled 4 times into a telephone pole. The only part of my Dodge Dakota that would have been salvageable was a small piece of plastic underneath the front bumper. My back drivers side tire was found 300 yards away from the accident site. I was wearing my seatbelt and walked away with only some minor scratches and a sore neck. Didn’t make it basketball practice that day, but started right back up on Monday.

    I am, and will always be, a staunch advocate for seatbelt use. Driving a vehicle on a public road is a privilege, not a right. If you want to partake in that privilege, you absolutely should be required to wear a seatbelt. They save lives. They greatly reduce medical bills associated with car accidents. They save your family from having to go through the abrupt trama of losing a loved one. And ask any first responder the difference in crashes where people were vs weren’t wearing seatbelts. Getting rid of the requirement to wear a seatbelt is an extremely shortsighted and flat out bad idea.

  9. Austin, your post is the best, most meaningful so far. Don, your first sentence nicely sums up Austin’s three paragraphs.

  10. Well, well, well. When I saw this bill drop today I literally laughed out loud. Seatbelt violations are already a secondary offense, meaning law enforcement can’t stop people merely because they’re not wearing their seatbelt. This is a bill looking for a problem not solving one. Rep Jordan would be better served by learning his new environment before sponsoring such bills.

  11. Just to clear up several misunderstandings of seat belt use in SD. It is no longer a secondary offense, it is a primary offense, punishable as a petty offense by up to $25 fine.

    As a secondary offense a person had to be pulled over for a primary offense first. That is no longer the protocol. Check state statue 32-37 for further clarification.

    By the way I support this provision in law. As a previous legislator I always opposed provisions requiring seat belt use. Now that I have grown up and acquired much more wisdom and knowledge, I fault myself for not fully understanding the importance of seat belt usage at that time in my life. I now fully support seat belt use and hope that the mandate that requires their use never goes away. I am hoping the the legislature overwhelmingly puts this where it belongs, in the non-existent 41st day file. The sooner they do it the better off we all will be.

    1. Primary offenses are only in relations to minors wearing/not wearing seatbelts. For adults, it is a secondary offense. SDCL 32-38-5.

  12. Dylan, you need to learn to tell Anthony “no” when he brings these stupid bills to you. You need to do a better job balancing South Dakota common sense with your libertarian views. In this bill, you failed.

  13. about people who don’t wear seat belts don’t endanger anyone else:
    tell that to the child who was safely secured in the back seat of his grandparents’ car, while his obese grandmother was in the front seat, not wearing a seatbelt.
    When the accident occurred, she was not ejected from the vehicle, she was thrown into the back seat and on top of the kid, Fractured a couple of vertebrae, some other pretty serious orthopedic injuries as well. At least he survived, but he was probably in a lot of pain for a very long time.

  14. Anonymous 9:22, Check your references to other state statue in state law and you will learn that it is now a primary offense punishable as petty offense. It is not a misdemeanor punishable as class one or two, but rather a petty offense punishable by a $25 fine. Furthermore you lose no points on your drivers license as you do with certain other class 2 and class 1 violations. I suggest you learn how to cross reference state law for a full understanding of, and intent, of the many laws that govern this state. Legal understandings are often found in cross references, and effectively change the meaning without having to repeal certain provisions.

    1. SDCL 32-38-5: Enforcement of this chapter by state or local law enforcement agencies shall be accomplished as a secondary action. A violation of this chapter is a petty offense.

      Chapter 32-37 specifically deals with minors wearing seatbelts. Which can be enforced as a primary offense. Chapter 32-38 specifically deals with the operator and front seat passenger wearing seatbelts. Which can only be enforced as a secondary offense (as long as they are not minors).

      If there is a statute that needs to be cross referenced for a full understanding of our state law, please provide it.

  15. Here’s a question for the lawyers…

    Say someone hits you and did not use a seatbelt, you did, and they ended up flying into you causing more injury to you as a result. What are the ramifications of medical and health insurance premiums? Can’t see how they won’t increase – change my mind.

    Nearly everyone wanting to repeal this law is looking at the minimal events that do not result in injury whilst ignoring the few big events that definitely result in major injuries. It’s like a gun – ain’t gonna harm you until the gun carrier pulls the trigger while pointing at you. Do what you want about driving around without seatbelts but quit your whining when your medical bills have soared – seeing a lot of foolery and little wisdom in repealing any seatbelt law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *