[i]Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta yesterday called on states to pass "primary" seat-belt laws, which allow police to stop and cite motorists solely for failing to wear a seat belt.
Twenty states, including Maryland, and the District of Columbia have primary seat-belt laws. Twenty-nine other states, including Virginia, allow officers to write a citation for not wearing a seat belt only if the motorist is stopped and cited for another infraction. Only New Hampshire has no seat-belt law.
Primary seat-belt laws have been a hot-button issue for years in Virginia, where all efforts to enact a primary law have been beaten back.[/i]
Yes! Another area in my life in which the government wishes to step in and dictate for me what I can do. I'm so excited. As the article states, there have been many many failed attempts here in Virginia to enact a law in which a person could be pulled over and given a citation for not wearing a seat-belt. The police must pull you over for some other reason and then, if you are not wearing a seat-belt, they can give a citation (which, by the way, basically means that if you aren't wearing a seat-belt, be prepared to be pulled over- once they find some reason to do so). There are people such as my dad who refuse to wear a seat-belt becuase they think the seat-belt is deadly- he was in an accident years ago and claims that had he been wearing one he most likely would have been killed. Naturally, the people are not capable of making their own decisions in matters such as this, so we need the government's intervention. No, I don't think so- I think the government should stay out. By not wearing a seat-belt, I am not harming anyone else, so why should I be cited for this?
The biggest reason for this push by Mineta to "encourage" states to enact primary seat-belt laws is the cost of accidents. I'm not so sure of this logic; if everyone was forced to wear a seat-belt, there would be fewer accidents? Maybe that's not the point, but that if seat-belts were required, there would be fewer deaths resulting from accidents.
"A total of 1,400 lives could be saved each year if all remaining states enacted primary laws, he said"
So all it takes is a [b]law[/b] to save lives, how 'bout that. The problem is, obviously, not all people obey all laws. Not all people are saved by seat-belts. And not all of us want to be forced by the government to live safe, healthy lives (according to the government's standards). Seat-belt violations do not result in violence against others, why should those who choose not to wear one be punished by law?
I think the logic of "more belts, less cost" comes from wearing seatbelts would reduce the extent/number of injuries, thus the cost. I say they make it legal to pull you over, but the maximum fine be like $2. That way the "Pro belt" folks can have the law, and "Anti- pro belt" folks are happy too, 'cause police aren't going to waste their time pulling you over for a $2 ticket. :)
Reply to: whoisjohngalt
Well, aren't you Mister Compromise? I always wear my seatbelt, but I still refuse to compromise my freedoms and think that the government dictating our decisions for us is dangerous, no matter how insignificant the decision.
And the police around here certainly would pull you over to give a $2 ticket. :)
"Tragically, a nation that was created by intellectuals and visionaries has now been completely taken over by venal corporate gangsters, delusional Christian fruitcakes and hopelessly shallow Texas shit-kickers." -Tom Robbins
