Reader comments
Seat-belt legislation dies this year, too

If I don't want to wear a seatbelt, that's my business. But the sponsors of this bill will cry..."it's about safety". Let's all be honest. Bottom line...it's not about safety. It's about revenue. It's about mining the drivers in Utah for more money over a silly (soon to be) law.

Legislators should stick to real issues. Seatbelt laws are unconstitutional.

How many people out there are not willing to wear a seatbelt but more than willing to sue the insurance company for injuries sustained for not wearing a seatbelt.

Do you really think that not wearing a seat bealt is just your business? Let's say you don't have insurance, like many Utahns, who is going to pay your medical bills? You will probably end up on Medicaid and the tax payers will have to pay for you... now let's say you do have insurance. Do you think there is a possibility that my insurance rates will go up because of your expensive medical bills? Now let's say you have a wife and kids, and you die due to your neglect, what happens to them? They may go on public assistance as well. They start getting Social Security death benefits. Can you see that more is at stake than "your business"?

It is your business as long as you don't expect Utah taxpayers to pick up your medical bills if you are out of work or disabled. Sort of like a smoker. Do it if you want but don't expect me to pay your bills if you end up with cancer.

Hey Really... Yes I think it is just my business or whoever it is that chooses to not wear a seatbelt. You have a good point on the insurance statement, but that is just one of many things that could make your rates go up or have people get on public assistance. People can start getting Social Security death benefits from anything that might take someones life. I have to agree with the above comment, I do believe its not about safety, it really is about the money. We should have a choice whether or not to wear a seatbelt. Remember this is America.

To Really.
Sadly, your comments are based on the Socialistic notion that somehow society is responsible for me.
Granted, Socialism is the dangerous system into which we have already slipped too far.
Interestingly, if you will only turn your efforts toward eliminating the Social responsibility lies you will do much toward getting everyone to wear seatbelts which you seem to advocate.
Eliminate the specious Socialistic safety net!
Make everyone honestly responsible for their own welfare. Then, and only then, will people buckle up; because it is then in their own best interest to do so.
As you continue to advocate for ever more foolish and insipid laws, you create exactly that environment where the only real benefits are to the Ruling Class.
If indeed stronger seatbelt laws really make sense in saving lives and taxpayer money, why don't we simply extend that wisdom and move toward laws that dictate exactly when each person can leave home so that the highways are never crowded or dangerous? Or, should we just legislate an end to automobile travel altogether?
Sadly, Laissez-faire is nearly dead. Long live Social Control.

Of course unbelted drivers can sometimes cost more money to society, but they can also save the public money. An unbelted driver who dies affects insurance rates a lot less than his belted counterpart who is seriously injured but lives. Sometimes the departed is on public assistance, freeing up even more of your precious tax dollars. Just like obese people and smokers actually cost less in health care costs than their healthier counterparts who live longer.

My main problem with the "it's everybody's business" argument is that, by looking only at selective data and using a little imagination, just about every personal decision is everybody's business! Can you think of anything that's not?

Actually, your not wearing a seatbelt is my business as long as we both share the same road. There are plenty of times that a person loses control of their vehicle after they get hit because they are knocked away from the steering wheel. Every bit of control helps. Some minor accidents have turned into horrible tragedies involving more that the original two vehicles because one of the drivers was knocked away from the steering wheel. Your driving with your eyes closed is my business too. Same deal.

Safety First: The �loses control� argument is a red herring, without scientific proof. This unsubstantiated claim has been raised previously in an attempt to justify this blatant intrusion into personal freedom. I do wear my seat belt, but that doesn�t make other drivers safer. Sometimes the greatest threats to our freedom don�t come from foreign enemies � they come from well-meaning politicians who want to improperly use the power of government to force us to do what�s good for us.

(Try #2) Safety First: The �loses control� argument is a red herring, without scientific proof. This unsubstantiated claim has been raised previously in an attempt to justify this blatant intrusion into personal freedom. I do wear my seat belt, but that doesn�t make other drivers safer. Sometimes the greatest threats to our freedom don�t come from foreign enemies � they come from well-meaning politicians who want to improperly use the power of government to force us to do what�s good for us.

Larsen,
Are you LDS? Because everytime science contradicts the LDS faith they cry "science isn't true. only faith is true" I have faith you not wearing a seatbelt is something to be regulated by our government that regulates our driving. I drink and drive regularly and have never had an accident. So are DUI laws unconstitutional? How about speeding?