Ya hear about the new Ohio law?
-
said_aouitaA new law in Ohio now requires you to have your head lights on, if using your windshield wipers. Or, a $100 fine.
http://www.wtrf.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=72588
Seriously, isn't this dumb? What ya think? -
BRFYeah, brother, I've got twins who have their permits......know all about it.
What the heck?
To all the FreeHuddlers, heed the word of said_aouita (<----hey, I typed that without even looking!!):
Wipers on.............get those headlights on................in OHIO............THE FUN STATE! Pah! -
BuckeyeBlueThey have this law in New York too. It took me a bit to get used to it when I was stationed up there, but after a while you don't even think about it.
-
slide22You should do it anyways. I hate it when its raining and people don't have their headlights on. Makes it difficult to see a gray car.
-
devil1197I always drive with my headlights on anyway so it doesn't matter.
-
krazie45My car has running headlights so they're on all the time. No effect on me
-
2kool4skoolYou should anyway. Regardless, who cares, does this really negatively affect you?
-
Crew Love
From the linked article:krazie45 wrote: My car has running headlights so they're on all the time. No effect on me
Norris said people whose cars have "running lights" will not get any slack.
He said it has to be headlights -- and hence taillights also -- that are on when the wipers are working. -
BRFyeah, I had a car (Bonneville), like krazie45 with the lights on all the time. That is good.
I think it's just the point that we are not used to in Ohio, to have your lights on with your wipers OR get stopped and fined. That would really suck. -
se-alumIt's a secondary violation, so you have to be doin' something else wrong to get the ticket.
-
just_a_swimmerI thought that was a law a long time ago.
-
ts1227It actually went into effect in 7/1/09, but there was a 6 month period where only warnings were issued from then until now.
Most states have had something of the sort on the books for 20 years, it's not a big deal. Ohio is just light years behind, as usual.
It's common sense to do this regardless so that people can definitely see you in poor conditions. -
BRFse-alum wrote: It's a secondary violation, so you have to be doin' something else wrong to get the ticket.
Like not having your seat belt on? -
Laley23I pretty much always do this anyway.
I do have a question though. What if you're just using the washer fluid and drive by a cop?? -
BRF
Then I hope you have your seat belt buckled, brother!Laley23 wrote: I do have a question though. What if you're just using the washer fluid and drive by a cop?? -
ts1227
They're both secondary... you get to be the ultimate badass and not be pulled over!BRF wrote:
Then I hope you have your seat belt buckled, brother!Laley23 wrote: I do have a question though. What if you're just using the washer fluid and drive by a cop?? -
Laley23
What if your speeding? The get you for THREE violations!ts1227 wrote:
They're both secondary... you get to be the ultimate badass and not be pulled over!BRF wrote:
Then I hope you have your seat belt buckled, brother!Laley23 wrote: I do have a question though. What if you're just using the washer fluid and drive by a cop?? -
sleeperAs long as you can still have sex while driving I'll still be driving.
-
FlashGood reason to buy Rain-X, then you don't have to use your wipers.
-
BRF
Oops........wait just a minute.ts1227 wrote: They're both secondary... you get to be the ultimate badass and not be pulled over!
I believe that not having your seat belt on is no longer a secondary violation.
"Click it or ticket"! -
BRF
I see that you didn't go to the game, either.Flash wrote: Good reason to buy Rain-X, then you don't have to use your wipers.
I've got 3 BRF reps at the game, though!
I'll post up the final score.
AND..................back to the thread..........
Sleeper.............I tell ya.........what about this guy?
Should I ask what gender that sex would be with?.............nawwww.....I won't go there.
You're too busy making fun of a guy who had to put his dog down. -
ts1227
Not yet. It was a sticking point in the transportation budget this year. R's would not sign off on the higher truck speed limit unless language that the D's had inserted was removed that would have made seat belts a primary violation.BRF wrote:
Oops........wait just a minute.ts1227 wrote: They're both secondary... you get to be the ultimate badass and not be pulled over!
I believe that not having your seat belt on is no longer a secondary violation.
"Click it or ticket"!
http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2009/03/speedcamera_seatbelt_proposals.html -
Heretic
I agree that it's common sense to have lights on while in wiper-use conditions, but to mandate a $100 fine for not doing so....pure BS tactic to make money. Just like the seat belt deal. I wear mine. It's common sense to do so. But to be like, "Do this or we'll take your cash!" is one of those little steps towards governmental/police control.ts1227 wrote: It actually went into effect in 7/1/09, but there was a 6 month period where only warnings were issued from then until now.
Most states have had something of the sort on the books for 20 years, it's not a big deal. Ohio is just light years behind, as usual.
It's common sense to do this regardless so that people can definitely see you in poor conditions.
It's hilarious when laws are made under the guise of "saving us from ourselves" when the whole motive is to raise cash. -
ChesapeakeThey've had this law in West Virginia for years but ya never hear of them enforcing it.
-
dlazzI thought this was a law anyways. It's a good thing.