just because you have survived doesnt mean that is always the case...my brother decided to go driving at night....was hit by another driver, was ejected out of the car and died...does that happen all the time, no...had he been wearing a seatbelt then he would have survived. it is not the govt's fault but they can enforce the laws on the books to lower such deaths that cost taxpayer money and the grief by the families and loved ones like me. so YOUR analogies are off....you are not the rule, but rather the exception
And because of that loss, you think the feds should usurp power by forcing states to enact seat-belt laws, and the states should use ever-more intrusive methods to enforce those laws, such as night-vision googles?
Most bad government comes when someone says "there ought to be a law!" like you've done here.
That argument does not fly. Sorry. It can be used regarding seat belts, helmets, fast food,driving at all, etc.
You are completely missing the point. This is not about whether or not belts save lives. It is about the government forcing it and the hit individual freedom takes, and the collective impact that has on our culture and individuals perception of who they have and what control they have over their own destiny.
It has had a major impact on you, apparently.
I knew you'd get to the first person root of your emotion soon; there is no way to know whether a belt would have saved your brother but not crashing would have delayed it, at least.
I am sorry for the loss of your brother, but one of my brother's ex girlfriends died because she was wearing a seatbelt. She was involved in a car crash. Her seatbelt's clasp jammed and would not release. Her car burst into flames from a broken fuel line and she burned alive. Should her surviving family, I mean they experienced grief and there was a social cost to her death, have the right to sue the state because they had in place a law that contributed to her death? If a law supposedy meant to save laws takes one should the state be liable?