New Child restraint laws
 

For those of you with kids, remember the new laws are now in.

[URL="http://rac.com.au/About-Us/RAC-eNews/October-2010/Kids-up-to-seven-now-need-child-car-restraints.aspx?cmpid=enewsoct10&cmptp=enews&cmppt=&cmpag=&cmpprv=vmail"]Read More here.[/URL]

What fucking grinds my gears, is the fact that they keep putting bandaid child restraint laws in place, yet they won't update the archaic legislation to incorporate the allowance for Isofix mounts in Australia.

They've also just fucked people who want to have 4 kids or more all under 7 years of age.. there are not many cars that will take 4 child seats due to a lack of anchor points.

Booster seats don't need Anchor points Joe? You mean 4 kids under 4 then your fucked, and if you have 4 kids under 4 you're fucked anyway, sif you would ever be able to leave the house.

Depends on the size of the kids.. forward facing restraint still needs anchor points

[QUOTE=BALISTC;502720]Depends on the size of the kids.. forward facing restraint still needs anchor points[/QUOTE]
Yeh forward facing restraints with a harness (baby seat) need anchor points which your child will be in until 4 then they move to a booster seat after that which doesn't need an anchor point.

Anyway if you plan on having a tribe you should be prepared.

See here for stats 2005-2009 on all road users.

[URL]http://www.bitre.gov.au/Info.aspx?ResourceId=769&NodeId=167[/URL]

[QUOTE=PIGSTi;502724]Anyway if you plan on having a tribe you should be prepared.[/QUOTE]

Not me.. maybe you though? :)

[QUOTE=BALISTC;502734]Not me.. maybe you though? :)[/QUOTE]
hahaha us skips usually stick to 2 or 3 mate ;) Well NOR we do anyway. I do not speak for Rockingham, Armadale or anywhere SOR..........

Also bites that they have made no allowance for classic cars, so my mate with the '64 Thunderbird can no longer take any kids for a ride. He is still not required to fit rear seat belts, but can not carry anyone (adult or child) in the rear seats unless they have a medical certificate e.g. pregnant woman.

i completely agree with joe. having one of the bigger cars on the markets (prado) i can physically fit only 2 baby seats at the back even though there are three anchor points. So for whatever reason i cannont have a third child until both of them are older than 7. It's absolutely farked. What gives me the shits is that all of our goodie goodie two shoes politicians base their policies on some stupid statistics. As a kid we never even had a seat belt at the back! I understand that these things might an injury or two but do inconvinience others and limit our travel options. So if you're going to introduce these stupid laws you might as well introduce the fitment of the anchor points (no anchor points on the 3rd row of seats) and subsidise it.

The company i work for has introduced a policy where every car taken onto an unsealed road has to be a 4wd with 4wd engaged AND IT HAS TO HAVE A ROLL CAGE! FARk mission impossible to book a hire car in dunsborough (my next project) where i have to drive on an unsealed road (500 meters in total) with a fakin roll cage. The recent rule was introduced as some chick fell asleep behind the wheel and roll the car....so one stupid incident (nothing happened to her) will inconvinience others.