ANSWERS: 4
  • That has to be the stupidest thing ive ever heard. i mean dont get me wrong i LOVE DOGS and animals ingeneral but would you rather have a dog die or a kid/adult. come on now...sure doesnt addd up if you ask me. bascailly if you can ride in the back of a truck no seatbelt....whats the point of having to wear them while sitting in a car.
  • does the law specifically state "but not dogs" or "dogs may sit in the back" because it's possible that the circumstance was overlooked, or seen that it would happen infrequently so disregarded. Laws foremost objective is to ensure safety and order with human lives, so the children were adressed right away. If this bothers you, i'd suggest sending a letter to your congress representative.
  • This is just odd! I thought I'd do some research to prove this isn't the case; however, it is. As long as you have 1 child properly restrained, other children are allowed to be UNRESTRAINED so long as you don't have enough restraints. The seat belt law only applies to those in the front seat of a vehicle. I'm dismayed! http://www.azgohs.state.az.us/occupant_safety.html http://phoenix.about.com/od/parenting/a/childseat.htm I certainly cannot explain it to you. Yes, it seems strange (more than a little).
  • I certainly don't agree with that law...but, maybe it could be because you can tell a kid to stay seated. you know how dogs will run back and forth and stand with their paws on the sides? You just know that they are going to fall out any minute. Also they sometimes lean out to bark and snap at vehicles and pedestrians.

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy