Skip to main content

I Want to Wear My Seat Belt, Thank You!


I think it's a very good idea for people to wear their seat belts while driving. But I'm not sure how it is the government's business to require me to wear my seat belt. Current Utah law requires those under the age of 19 to do so. Pending legislation would require everyone to wear a seat belt. Why should such a common-sense driving accoutrement be a legal requirement?

Current Utah law requires those aged 18 and younger to wear a seat belt; if a police officer sees someone in this age category not wearing a seat belt, they can issue a citation on the spot. For those older than age 18, another violation must occur before a citation can be issued for failure to wear a seat belt. That may be about to change if Democrat Senator Pat Jones' bill passes the Utah legislature.

Why?

Why is government in the business of requiring you to wear your seat belt? In their response to Governor Huntsman's State of the State address, Democrats expressed that their main concern is for the welfare of the individual. I'm not sure how taking away the individual's choice increases his welfare.

Senator Jones' bill seems to have gained more support simply because it was amended to expire in 2010. So now it becomes an experiment not to see whether it constitutes good government, but how many lives it supposedly saves. We'll never really know, and besides, that's not the point. While we're at it, why don't we outlaw skydiving, hang gliding, and motor vehicle racing?

I wear my seat belt almost everywhere I go. The only time I don't is maybe when I'm going across town to run an errand. Ask my kids how many creative ways I have developed to harp on them, especially the younger ones, to put on their seat belts. I agree with the mantra--seat belts save lives. It's just that government doesn't have any business getting into my car with me.

It's pretty obvious that wearing my seat belt is the safer thing to do. I don't need government to tell me that. I don't need them to require me to do it either.

Comments

  1. I don't move my vehicle until everyone is buckled up. That's my personal rule. Period.

    It burns my toast to see people driving around with their kids bee-bopping around the inside of the vehicle unrestrained (breaking current laws). My wife used to be an insurance adjustor. She has seen the results of failure to wear seatbelts, and it ain't pretty.

    I am still unsure about making seatbelt violations a primary offense. Why don't we outlaw smoking and drinking while we're at it? Should I be forcing my neighbor to wear his seatbelt, or should I educate him and let him deal with the consequenses of his choices? I'm not sure that's the proper role of government to force people to wear seatbelts.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I like your point about education. I think it's the best solution.

    I think we (especially those in jobs like your wife's) should educate them and if they still want to be 'stupid', then that's their business.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting. If you have a Google/Blogger account, to be apprised of ongoing comment activity on this article, please click the "Subscribe" link below.

Popular posts from this blog

Red Clothing and Resurrection: Jesus Christ's Second Coming

The scriptures teach that when Christ comes again to the earth, that he will be wearing red apparel. Why red ? They also teach that at Christ's coming, many of the dead will become resurrected. Will this only include members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Not by a long shot, no matter what some Mormon might tell you.

School Vouchers: "The Bramble Memo"

$429 million? What? Where? The legislative fiscal analyst for the State of Utah calculated the costs to the public schools over the next 13 years if school vouchers are implemented. It said the costs would be $5.5M in the first year, and $71M in the 13th year. Suddenly, the number I have started seeing thrown around was $429 million, the total costs for vouchers over 13 years. Where did that number come from? Enter the mysterious "Bramble Memo". In the past few days several of us (Jeremy, Utah Taxpayer, Craig, Sara, Urban Koda, Jesse, and me) have (sometimes?) enjoyed a lively discussion about school vouchers in Utah . Jeremy clarified to me the costs of the venture by linking to a copy of the Utah Legislative Fiscal Analyst's Impartial Analysis (LFA) of the costs of Vouchers , found on "The Senate Site". In my previous voucher article, I quoted some of Lavar Webb's article from last Sunday's Deseret News, wherein he stated that those total costs ...

What's Your Reaction to California's Decision on Same-Sex Marriage?

Yesterday a "Republican-dominated" California Supreme Court struck down state laws against same-sex marriages. The LDS Church issued a press release, calling the decision "unfortunate". I agree, but not for reasons you might think. Did the California Court make the right decision? Update 5/17/2008 : California decision does not affect prohibitions against polygamy and marriage of close relatives. Why not? Government should not sanction same-sex marriages for the same reason that it should not sanction heterosexual adultery--such activities tend to be destructive to the family as the fundamental unit of society. Before you get too far into reading into my words, let me echo and agree with something that Madeleine Albright wrote in her recent book, The Mighty & The Almighty (one of the better books that I have read in a long time): I oppose discrimination against gays and lesbians and am convinced that heterosexual adultery is a greater danger to the institu...