Legislators appear to be tripping over each other trying to improve all-terrain vehicle safety, with five different bills working their way through the system.
Two of the bills hit roadblocks Tuesday in the House Agriculture Subcommittee. After about 20 minutes of discussion on each bill, debate was adjourned on both H.4322 and H.4342.
“We do want to revisit this issue,” said Rep. Laurie Slade Funderburk, D-Kershaw. “I just don’t know if these bills are the proper vehicle.”
For two years, the legislature has passed ATV safety bills only to have them vetoed by Gov. Mark Sanford. Each year, the vetos were upheld. A copy of that bill, named Chandler’s Law after Chandler Saylor, who died in an ATV accident in 2003, has been reintroduced as S.797. Still in the Legislature are two similar bills, S.812 and H.3622.
Rep. Kris Crawford, R-Florence, introduced H.4342, which says anyone ineligible for a driver’s license or permit can’t drive an ATV. That means anyone younger than 15 or anyone older than 15 who has had his or her license revoked.
Crawford, a physician, bemoaned the number of children showing up in emergency rooms with serious injuries from ATV accidents. But subcommittee members had serious problems with the bill’s restrictions and, especially, its penalties. The bill would allow law enforcement to confiscate ATVs driven by anyone under 15.
“We’re talking about children in the state and what we do and do not allow them to do,” Crawford said, comparing riding an ATV to drinking alcohol.
Rep. David Hiott, R-Pickens, couldn’t imagine telling his constituents that their youngsters can’t ride ATVs. “Little Johnny’s been driving an all-terrain vehicle all his life,” Hiott said. “And I’m going to tell his parents they can’t let him anymore?”
The committee members greeted the other bill with a little more enthusiasm. Rep. Herb Kirsh, D-York, admitted he copied his bill straight from a N.C. law. The committee members were concerned that, as written, the law would require adults to wear helmets and eye protection.
Kirsh recognized his bill needs some fine-tuning, but he said he felt the need to do something after the recent deaths of two children in ATV accidents near his home. “I just hate to see this thing die from the two vetoes,” Kirsh said.
_ Joey Holleman



I applaud Gov. Mark Sanford for his veto's. Thank you for placing the children back in their parents hands. I don't own ATV's, never have and chances are I never will. My children have never operated one, but I will never support something that interferes with a parents rights to raise their own child how they see fit.
Posted by: Rayhawk | 23 January 2008 at 05:40 AM
Heaven forbid any common sense come to this state. When little Tommy, who is too young to fully control a vehicle or comprehend the dangers of responsible use, and becomes injured for life due to a preventable accident, who pays for his long term medical expenses?
Taxpayers.
Go ahead and live your life, but the moment your actions cause the rest of us to pay for your mistakes...your right for that action ceases.
Posted by: wtf | 23 January 2008 at 06:15 AM
Well, your rights end where mine begin. In Chapin, I have to dodge children on ATV’s, go-carts, small off road motorcycles, even golf-carts every week. I nearly hit 3 kids on a go-cart last Sunday. No license, no skills, and no good parents. If I hit one, I’ll be the bad guy that caused their deaths. Not the sorry parents who think they have a right to put their children on expensive toys on our public streets, or race them around trees on public & private land. I’ve witnessed the death of a child on one of these toys. I tried to warn them, but they didn’t listen. They rode right into the street, and into traffic killing a young boy. It was an ugly sight that I wish Sanford could have seen instead of me. Maybe if it was one of his kids torn to pieces, brain dead, or left for the tax payers to support the rest of their life: he’d have a little different attitude. Yes, Sanford gives us our rights: he gives us the right to look like complete fools to the rest of the Nation: which is mostly correct!
Posted by: CHAPIN RESIDENT | 23 January 2008 at 11:57 AM