I don't know who interpreted the law for the journalist who wrote the article. Or maybe there's been another amendment to the statute. But the law seems very, very clear. Here's the actual law for reference:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ute&URL=0300-0399/0316/Sections/0316.613.html
It does not apply to the parent, but to the driver (316.613(1)): "Every
operator of a motor vehicle as defined in this section ... shall ... provide ... a ... child restraint device.
But not using a car seat does not count as negligence, which would seem to preclude the offense from 39.01 (316.613(3)): "The failure to provide and use a child passenger restraint shall not be considered comparative negligence, nor shall such failure be admissible as evidence in the trial of any civil action with regard to negligence."
(316.613(5)): "Any person who violates this section commits a moving violation" A parent in a back seat can't be guilty of a moving violation.
The exemption applies to the transportation method, irrespective of any individual person (316.613(6)): "The child restraint requirements imposed by this section do not apply to a chauffeur-driven taxi ..."
The obligation under 39.01 has nothing to do with car seats. Feel free to point out where you think that requirement persists:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ing=&URL=0000-0099/0039/Sections/0039.01.html
What you missing is the the reference to 39.01 is simply defining the person responsible for the child being in a child safety seat. IF the parent/guardian etc were not responsible then the last sentence simply would not be there. But it is. I never said 39.01 had anything to do with child safety seats, you did. I pointed out that the definition of the person responsible is in 39.01. If fact 39.01 is titled definitions.
Here you go
Here is the sentence in the child safety seat law
It is the obligation and responsibility of the parent, guardian, or other person responsible for a child’s welfare
as defined in s. 39.01 to comply with the requirements of this section.
The reference to 39.01 is defining a parent, guardian or other person responsible for a child's welfare. That person according to 39.01 is:
“Other person responsible for a child’s welfare” includes the child’s legal guardian or foster parent; an employee of any school, public or private child day care center, residential home, institution, facility, or agency; a law enforcement officer employed in any facility, service, or program for children that is operated or contracted by the Department of Juvenile Justice; or any other person legally responsible for the child’s welfare in a residential setting; and also includes an adult sitter or relative entrusted with a child’s care. For the purpose of departmental investigative jurisdiction, this definition does not include the following persons when they are acting in an official capacity: law enforcement officers, except as otherwise provided in this subsection; employees of municipal or county detention facilities; or employees of the Department of Corrections.
definition of parent
Parent” means a woman who gives birth to a child and a man whose consent to the adoption of the child would be required under s.
63.062(1). If a child has been legally adopted, the term “parent” means the adoptive mother or father of the child. The term does not include an individual whose parental relationship to the child has been legally terminated, or an alleged or prospective parent, unless the parental status falls within the terms of s.
39.503(1) or s.
63.062(1). For purposes of this chapter only, when the phrase “parent or legal custodian” is used, it refers to rights or responsibilities of the parent and, only if there is no living parent with intact parental rights, to the rights or responsibilities of the legal custodian who has assumed the role of the parent.
So to put it together the person who is responsible for a child's welfare as defined by 39.01 is the person responsible for conforming to this section of the car seat law.
You have to read the entirety of the section.