Seat Belt Laws Save Lives? (Nanny Staters Should Show Restraint)

Boston Herald ^ | July 9, 2009 | Michael Graham

[suspects]

If seat belts save lives, how come you’re not dead?

For days now, horrified Nanny Staters have been wringing their hands over the fact that Massachusetts - liberal Massachusetts! - has the lowest rate of seat belt use in the nation. Lower, even, than those yahoos up in New Hampshire, and they don’t even have a mandatory seat belt law.

This recent spate of “viewing with alarm” is inspired by the handful of roadway deaths over the weekend where seat belts were not in use. Across the state, only 67 percent of drivers are buckling up. There’s death, destruction and mayhem across Bay State highways.

Only . . . there’s not.

Yes, Massachusetts is ranked 50th in seat belt use. But we are also ranked 50th in highway fatalities per miles traveled. By that measure more drivers kill themselves and each other in every other state than we do. How can the so-called “riskiest” drivers also be the safest?

Advocates of Big Brother government dismiss Massachusetts as an aberration. I know how they feel.

Unfortunately for them, the disconnect between seat belt laws and citizen safety extends far outside Massachusetts. Michigan, for example, has America’s highest rate of seat belt usage (97.2 percent), but ranks a modest 44th in fatalities. That puts it behind Minnesota and Rhode Island, neither of which has a primary seat belt law (Minnesota becomes a primary-enforcement state today). Michigan also ranks behind - horrors! - New Hampshire.

So tell me why we’re pushing for a primary enforcement law again?

Sen. Pat Jehlen (D-Somerville) leads this effort. She’s the one who opposes road tests for 85-year-olds, suggesting instead that drivers be forced to hand over medical records to the Registry of Motor Vehicles if there’s an issue about their health. Given how well the RMV handles...

[Perdogg]

I live in VA and we have a secondary seat belt law and I don’t wear mine. It’s not the business of the govt.

[pnh102]

So tell me why we’re pushing for a primary enforcement law again?

Money of course.

[swatbuznik]

(Minnesota becomes a primary-enforcement state today).

That and the sales tax increase have got me bristling pissed!!!

[bamahead]

Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
(View past Libertarian pings here)

[US Navy Vet]

“mandatory seat belt laws: = more “revenue(money)” for crooked feds/states/cities/towns/counties.

[Blogger]

Hope you don’t wreck.

[Perdogg]

Thank you, that was very nice of you.

[Blogger]

Well, I am serious. You could get messed up pretty quickly. You have the right to do what you want, and more power to you. But I would wear the belt for my own safety, not because the gov’t says to do it.

[cripplecreek]

While I think seat belt laws are intrusive, only a fool believes seat belts don’t save lives.

[relictele]

This article touches on one of the most-overlooked issues i.e. the ability of ANYONE to drive safely with or without a seatbelt. For better or worse an elderly driver (85 or older) is often an unsafe driver due to physical infirmities, poor eyesight and/or slower reaction times. We all get behind them in traffic and have a laugh or a growl at how oblivious they appear to be but what is a minor annoyance can and does turn into mayhem and bloodshed.

Politicians are convinced that the ‘grey panthers’ will have their guts for garters if they address real issues of safety so as the article states the politicians ‘solve’ a problem that doesn’t exist. Cops spend more time on silly ‘Click It Or Ticket’ initiatives dreamed up by milquetoast safety nannies and less time pursuing lawbreakers.

[muawiyah]

In case of accident I am prepared to simply step over your body.

Nothing like freedom from morality to give you a charge in the morning.

[Perdogg]

I sort of misstated the facts. I do wear it because of safety about 80% of the time, especially on the highway and beltway, but sometimes I do forget to put it on. When I do see I cop, I also put it on.

[CORedneck]

Primary belt laws are another reason for more gov’t harassment - another excuse to stop you even though you are doing nothing wrong.

[NEMDF]

My son was in an accident in 2005 (hit black ice, spun out, crossed median and lanes of oncoming traffic on interstate by Fort Morgan, CO). The truck he was driving rolled at least 5 times. He was wearing his seat belt. He is alive and well. I read about so many similar rollover accidents in which the outcome is tragic.

[Blogger]

Glad to hear it. Some things they ask us to do are actually beneficial. Not much, but a few.

[cripplecreek]

Its become such a firm habit for me that I feel like I’m going to fall out if I don’t wear a belt.

[nevergore]

Of course the issue is not whether seat belt usage prevents some catostphic injuries but whether the state should have the right to dictate to over 18 adults.....

Higher insurance rates would be one answer or no coverage for the persons injured why not wearing the seatbelt would be another way of targetng stupidity....

A potential third method would be that their would be no legal recourse for any person not wearing a seatbelt who is injured....

[BluH2o]

I'm not against seatbelts, what I resent is the fact I can be stopped and ticketed for not wearing one. While the officer is writing me up some biker dude goes by on his Harley, no helmet, wearing shorts, a tank top & flip flops. Meanwhile, I'm sitting in 2006 heavy duty well constructed Range Rover with all sorts of safety devices such as air bags, etc.. But I neglected to snap my seat belt so I'm getting a ticket. This is BS of the first order.