I had lunch with a friend today and as we discussed it, we both had to admit not knowing what it really says. Without that knowledge, we can only debate what we think it says or what we think it should/should not say.
As a service to those who like to debate intelligently, I’m providing a link to the bill.
What I find missing is any language that helps the reader understand how this law will be enforced. If the method of enforcement means a “peace officer” can simply stand on a street corner and challenge passers-by, I have a problem with that. If the enforcement is in conjunction with other activities such as a traffic stop, arrest, question for other matters, etc., then I don’t see a problem.
The difference between the two is a delicate balance between a police state and law enforcement in America. My vision follows the way in which states used to enforce seatbelt laws. Officers could not stop you simply because of not wearing a seatbelt but could cite you if you were found to be in noncompliance during another stop. That has changed in some states and one has to believe that the Arizona law may change one day as well. If that happens, then I would certainly object but then again, I can’t believe law enforcement officials in Arizona really have the time or resources to enforce it at that level.