A new primary seat belt law was passed by the Massachusetts state House this week, and will be signed by the Governor, Mitt Romney. The law passed 76 to 74. This is nothing more than insurance companies finding a way to boost profits by not having to pay auto injury claims.

Buy Me A Vote Daddy

By only two votes, the state House of Representatives narrowly passed a law to allow police to stop vehicles if the occupants are not wearing seat belts, following an impassioned debate that centered on civil liberties and the role of government in the safety of its citizens.

Under current state law, adults are already required to wear seat belts. But police cannot use seat belts as the reason for pulling someone over, unless a passenger under 12 years old is not buckled up.

Under the proposed change, the fine for not wearing a seat belt would remain $25. It still would not count against a driver’s auto insurance. The legislation would not allow police to search a vehicle or its occupants “solely” on the basis a seat belt stop.

If It Ain’t Broken…

If two thirds of the citizens are already wearing their seat belts, why is this law needed? Massachusetts already has one of the nation’s lowest fatality rates when it comes to auto-related accidents. Again I ask, why is this law needed? Frankly, because the insurance companies are not happy with their current profits, they want more.

In counting about 20 passing cars, I found that about 15 of them had seat belts– and this is before the new law. So people see that they are safer wearing a seat belt. Why get the government involved in enforcing your safety?

My Brother, Big Brother

Common sense will tell you that if you are going to be in a moving vehicle, a seat belt is always a good idea. If you get into an accident, you are far more likely to walk out unharmed if you have your seat belt on. But does this give the government the right to set up roadblocks and demand entry into your car because you happen to not be wearing a seat belt?

And by not wearing a seat belt who are you hurting? Who are you saving? A better question might be, why is the government trying to save you from yourself?

Studies have shown that seat belt use is only really effective in head-on collisions and role-overs.

When we speed, we can cause harm to others. We can hurt not only ourselves, but innocent people. If you choose not to wear a seat belt you only can cause harm to yourself. So in effect, the insurance companies are saying “we will protect you regardless if you want that protection.”

Brother Knows Best

Why stop with seat belts? Why not tobacco products? Smoking-related illness a leading burden on our health care system, yet smoking is fine and dandy. You can smoke to your heart’s content while driving, however you now better be wearing a seat belt while doing it.

This is just insane. Where do we stop? Do we now go into the home; the bathroom, kitchen, bedroom, basement? Do we start sending “big brother” to inspect your home weekly, monthly? Are your knives too dull? Is your bathroom floor too slippery? Where would it end?

What about the food we eat? Obesity is another growing problem for our health care system. Do we set up video surveillance outside your kitchen window so you don’t have more than one egg and a strip of bacon each day?

Taking away liberties is not the way to run a government. Unjust laws are laws that do not need to be obeyed. The state can kiss my @ss on this one!