dasiffy
Well-known member
yes. you're right. my bad.
here's what i'm gattering from all of this:
______________________
Bill 148, Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Seat Belts), 2006
passed november 2,2006
law says anyone in a car/vehicle must use a seat with a seatbelt, and they must use that seatbelt.
couple of exceptions, kids car seat... driving in reverse... etc.
from the intent of the law, the maximum number of people that can fit into a vehicle is equal to the number of seatbelts availible.
______________________
from R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 613
if the car/vehicle was manufactured without seatbelts, and an aftermarket sealbelt was not installed...you don't have to wear a seatbelt.
______________________
from Bill 33, Jay Lawrence and Bart Mackey Memorial Act (Highway Traffic), 2001
sitting in the back of a pickup, is deemed being outside of the vehicle, hence seatbelts are not required
i think the reason this bill never passed, was because of times when work requires you to ride outside of the vehicle.
in the transcripts from the readings, they mentioned working on a farm, but also think about garbage and blue box collection
any amendment to the HTA would have an effect, on those examples as well.
technically you're outside the vehicle, when you ride a motorcycle too.
personally i think if it were to become illegal to ride in the back of a pickup, it would have been made law back in 2001
______________________
i would say it's legal to ride in the back of a pickup without a seatbelt.
