Seat belts in Canada

[TDO]

Is it true that you have to have seat belts in your Model A if you tour in Canada

[fredski]

Originally Posted by TDO

Is it true that you have to have seat belts in your Model A if you tour in Canada

any car not originally equiped with seat belts are exempt/\ to seat belt
law.\

fred

[30Ford]

Yep Just original equipment

[buddyholley19]

Originally Posted by TDO

Is it true that you have to have seat belts in your Model A if you tour in Canada

Your be fine in British Columbia

[glenn in camino]

That's the question I missed on my last drivers test in California. In Ca. all cars must have seat belts regardless of age.

[TDO]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Thanks for clearing that up, I've heard it both ways. we where talking about going to Niagara falls then into Canada.

[SGT in Ont.]

If the vehicle was not equipped with seat belts originally then you don't need to have them installed to drive the vehicle in Ontario.

[Napa Skip]

“In Ca. all cars must have seat belts regardless of age.”

First off, I acknowledge the original poster’s question involved seat belt requirements in Canada, and therefore apologize for drifting off-topic. Second, I also apologize – in advance - for the length of this response.

However, I thought the above statement (regarding seat belt laws in California) interesting, inasmuch as I just finished installed seat belts in the rumble seat of my coupe in response to my daughter and son-in-law’s repeated requests to include our grandsons in the next parade our club participated in. I had long resisted these requests, not because I didn’t want to further the younger generation’s interest in and enjoyment of Model A’s, but out of pure fear of something happening to my children’s children while doing so, a fear exacerbated by the 'rambuctioness' of 10- and 6-year old boys whose unbridled “Hey, watch this!” approach to life seems singularly unsuited to trips in a Model A rumble seat, restrained or not.

Furthermore, the age of our youngest grandson raises the question of the use of child restraint seats.

Here are the relevant sections of – for those in California (and for those who might want to visit California in their Model A) – the California Vehicle Code (with some abbreviation for clarity):

Section 27315(f) – Mandatory Seat Belt Law: An owner of a motor vehicle…operated on a highway shall maintain safety belts in good working order for the use of the occupants of the vehicle...This subdivision, however, does not require installation or maintenance of safety belts if it is not required by the laws of the United States applicable to the vehicle at the time of its initial sale.

Section 27360 – Child Passenger Restraint System, Requirements for Children 8 Years of Age or Younger: Except as provided in Section 27363, a parent, legal guardian, or driver shall not transport on a highway in a motor vehicle…a child or ward who is under eight years of age, without properly securing that child in a rear seat in an appropriate child passenger restraint system...[This] subsection does not apply to a driver if the parent or legal guardian of the child is also present in the motor vehicle and is not the driver.”

Section 27363 – Exemptions: (a) The court may exempt from the requirements of this article any class of child by age, weight, or size if it is determined that the use of a child passenger restraint system would be impractical by reason of physical unfitness, medical condition, or size.

(b) In case of a life-threatening emergency, or when a child is being transported in an authorized emergency vehicle, if there is no child passenger restraint system available, a child may be transported without the use of that system, but the child shall be secured by a seatbelt.

(c) A child weighing more than 40 pounds may be transported in the backseat of a vehicle while wearing only a lap safety belt when the backseat of the vehicle is not equipped with a combination lap and shoulder safety belt.

(d) [A] child or ward under eight years of age who is four feet nine inches in height or taller may be properly restrained by a safety belt…rather than by a child passenger restraint system.

(e) [A] child or ward under eight years of age may ride properly secured in an appropriate child passenger restraint system meeting applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards in the front seat of a motor vehicle under any of the following circumstances: (1) There is no rear seat; (2) The rear seats are side-facing jump seats; (3) The rear seats are rear-facing seats; (4) The child passenger restraint system cannot be installed properly in the rear seat; (5) All rear seats are already occupied by children seven years of age or under; (6) Medical reasons necessitate that the child or ward not ride in the rear seat.

(f) Notwithstanding subdivision (e), a child shall not be transported in a rear-facing child passenger restraint system in the front seat of a motor vehicle that is equipped with an active frontal passenger airbag.

Sorry for the long – and somewhat off-topic – post.

[JoeWay]

Originally Posted by glenn in camino

That's the question I missed on my last drivers test in California. In Ca. all cars must have seat belts regardless of age.

Glenn,

Sounds as if you got caught by an ignorant clerk or a poorly worded question.

California does not require and never has required seat belts in cars that were not originally equipped with them. This matter is addressed in Division 12 of the vehicle code. Here's a link to the section of the code. September 1962 was the date of the federal seat belt requirement law, after which new cars could not be sold in the US without seat belts.

If it's legal for a used car dealer to sell a pre-September 1962 without seat belts, it is by extension legal to operate it without belts. The only case I'm aware of where California has required retroactive fitting of safety equipment is in the area of lighting. ALL vehicles must have headlights, a tail light, and a stop light, whether they were originally fitted or not.

Note, however, that if a vehicle IS equipped with seat belts, they must be used regardless of vehicle age or original requirements.

Joe

P. S. Skip posted while I was writing this. Section 27315(f) supports what I wrote. However, it does appear that Section 27360 requires restraints for children under 8 regardless of the age of the vehicle. I stand corrected to that extent.

JW

[Napa Skip]

I suppose I could have been more succinct had I posted this summary from the California Highway Patrol:

California [Seatbelt] Law:

1. Children under the age of 8 must be secured in a car seat or booster seat in the back seat. 



2. Children under the age of 8 who are 4' 9" or taller may be secured by a safety belt in the back seat.

3. Children who are 8 years and over shall be properly secured in an appropriate child passenger restraint system or safety belt.

4. Passengers who are 16 years of age and over are subject to California's Mandatory Seat Belt law. 



Where a rumble seat fits in with regard to a "back seat" I do not know.

[heneste]

My friends and I once asked a local Ottawa officer to clarify the issue regarding seatbelts and old cars. His response was that if the vehicle didn't originally come with seatbelts installed then you're not legally required to have them installed.

He did also point out that should you decide to have them installed in the vehicle, from that point onwards, you can't turn around and decide to remove them and you are required by law to use them whenever you drive the car.

[Mike V. Florida]

Here in Florida (and it seems true of Cali.) any child must have restraint regardless of year the car was built.

[showerxpert]

It is interesting to me that we think we need to have seatbelts in the old cars and while the car mfgs. spend many $ to test and meet the safety requirements required for anchorage and strength, we some how think some Macgiver can just modify the old cars and then be safe! And what is more alarming is that some politician thinks it is ok and want to enforce it! ....Just my thoughts!

[Ross/Kzoo]

Originally Posted by showerxpert

It is interesting to me that we think we need to have seatbelts in the old cars and while the car mfgs. spend many $ to test and meet the safety requirements required for anchorage and strength, we some how think some Macgiver can just modify the old cars and then be safe! And what is more alarming is that some politician thinks it is ok and want to enforce it! ....Just my thoughts!

That's a very valid point.

[glenn in camino]

Regardless of the law, I put them in all my cars. I've heard about several people that were injured or killed by falling out of Model As. Buckle up!

[Napa Skip]

Imho, Glenn has it right. Seatbelts are just one part of what ought to be a strong suite of defensive driving habits that are critical to continued enjoyment of a Model A in modern traffic.

I realize this view is not universally subscribed to, including by my closest Model A friend who would no sooner think of getting into his 1966 AC Cobra without buckling up than of strolling across I-80 during mid-day traffic. But he adamantly refuses to install seat belts in his 1929 coupe.

[dr.j]

TDO,
while at the Falls, take a run to Niagara on the Lake via the Niagara Parkway; it is beautiful.

[Tom Wesenberg]

Also, if you have the time, Hamilton has a very large walking beam steam engine that would be nice to see.