New Hampshire, Join The Rest Of Us

Contributor Lloyd Garver Notes The Ruggedly-Individualistic State Doesn't Require Seat Belts

(CBS)  When I was a kid, I became intrigued by the state mottos that I saw on various license plates. Growing up in Chicago, I was used to seeing "Land of Lincoln," and that slogan seemed perfectly acceptable. I actually felt bad for the people of Oklahoma whose license plates bore the motto, "Oklahoma is OK." My feeling was that if you're going to brag about your state, then brag about it. Don't say it's just "OK." You don't see Texas plates saying, "Texas Is So-So." New Mexico's "Land of Enchantment" was alluring to a city kid, but New Hampshire's motto topped them all. The first time I saw "Live Free or Die" on a license plate, I knew that it had to be the best slogan of any state. I loved its defiant pride. But now, in the area of seat belts and safety, that spirit of "nobody's going to tell us what to do" just doesn't make sense.

Currently, New Hampshire is the only state that doesn't have a mandatory seat belt law. They do require that restraints be used for children and teenagers, but not for adults. Wednesday (May 31), their state senate is scheduled to vote on such a bill. The New Hampshire Senate Transportation and Interstate Committee voted three to two to recommend that the bill be killed. If it is, obviously some of the people of New Hampshire will also suffer that fate.

One member of the committee who voted against the bill, Bob Clegg, says, "I choose not to buckle, and I think it's baloney that the government would tell me that I have to, or else."

New Hampshire has the lowest rate of seat belt use in the country, 49 percent, according to the National Transportation Safety Board — no doubt an organization that Clegg and others consider a bunch of outsiders pushing "baloney." However, New Hampshire's own Safety Department says that last year 77 percent of fatal crashes in the state involved people who were not wearing seat belts.

So it's not surprising that many people in New Hampshire believe that seat belts save lives. But that doesn't mean that they think there should be a law requiring their use.

Some of them feel that a law in "stay out of my business" New Hampshire might backfire. Another committee member who voted against the bill, state senator Robert J. Letourneau, said that requiring people to do things breeds resentment, while encouraging them doesn't. So he and others are afraid that if there's a law "forcing" people to use seat belts, the people of New Hampshire will rebel and have the attitude of, "Nobody can tell me what I can do in my own car," and actually use seat belts less than if there were no law.

It seems to me that this attitude underestimates the people of New Hampshire. Any group that could come up with "Live Free or Die" is not stupid. They're not a bunch of immature adolescents who resent it when their parents say they have to do their homework before they go out, and then don't do their homework and sneak out. We're talking about mature, intelligent adults. Just to be defiant, do they speed up when they see a sign that says "School Zone?" Do they sell liquor to kids because they resent that there's a law against it? Do they go to work naked because they don't feel the government should tell them they have to wear clothes?

Some people believe, "If the only one I may hurt is me, why should the government be involved?" Proponents of seat belt laws point out that New Hampshire would get $3.7 million from the Federal government for enacting a seat belt bill, and the state would save an estimated $48 million in medical costs. That money's not "baloney."

Putting money aside, if you are a victim of an accident because you don't use a seat belt, you aren't the only one affected — what about the loved ones left behind? Should they have to suffer because you wanted the government to "mind its own business?"

Obviously, I'm hoping that common sense will prevail and that New Hampshire will join the rest of the nation and pass a seat belt bill. If not, I'm afraid that their motto might have to be changed to, "Live Free And Die."

---

Lloyd Garver has written for many television shows, ranging from "Sesame Street" to "Family Ties" to "Frasier." He has also read many books, some of them while in a car (but not while driving).

[chrissmith22]

Loyd, why don't you just mind your own business! You don't live in New Hampshire, so don't worry about us. Over here, we don't like the government running our lives, nor do we care about how outsiders feel we ought to live.

[creeper00]

I believe in seat belts passionately. I wear them religiously.

I also believe it's a human being's right to risk his life in any way he sees fit. This flaming liberal doesn't need my government to protect me from myself.

To my government: Get out of my bedroom, quit tapping my phone, leave my library records alone and keep your hands off my mail. I don't need your false concerns for my safety. I'll take care of myself, thank you.

[gkc99]

People in New Hampshire don't care how "outsiders"--i.e. other US citizens--feel? Then why are they always jockeying to make sure their pathetic little primary election is before everyone elses, if not to have a disproportionate impact of their tiny minority of white people on national politics.

Insurance companies--make NH come to heel like a good doggie!

[diskman111]

I've been a New Hampshirite all my life (and a Liberal for the latter part, and a "flaming Liberal" since the Bush administration) and I use a seatbelt all the time, you may think I wouldn't care about a seatbelt law but I do. The government shouldn't be the one to decide whether I buckle up or not.

I don't understand those people who would wear a seatbelt due to the risk of a ticket, but not the risk of losing their lives, but it's their choice. I don't want the govenrment protecting me from myself.

To gkc99: Any American who calls a primary pathetic is not someone worth wasting any more time on than this sentence.

[mitch0927]

Hey New Hampshire, I like the way you set examples for your children. Gripe and whine in front of them like this and see how thy are when they grow up. Doing what ever they want, when they want, to whom ever they want. Good example setters.

[mitch0927]

So, when a natural disaster hits your area, we better not hear about the government not helping you. If you don't want the government "telling" you what to do, then you shouldn't need anything from the government. Because I surely don't want my federal taxes going to you people.

[tapytl]

Get a life! Why do you feel that the government should have the right to tell you to wear seat belts? We are supposed to be adults. If I choose to wear a seat belt fine, if I choose not to wear one I should not have to worry about the local police "protecting" me. It is a ploy to put more money in the pockets of local governments.

[mike71067]

I personally think it's arrogant for citizens of other states to tell the citizens of one state how to conduct themselves. For example, I'm in Virginia, and I would strongly oppose any efforts by the liberals in California to take away my guns, and to make gay "marriage" legal here. Conversely, they would probably oppose my suggestions that they raise their children on a Biblical moral foundation, be allowed to own sufficient firepower to protect their families from armed intruders, etc. So I understand why people in New Hampshire would have a problem with people like Lloyd Garver telling them how to live.

[diskman111]

1st - by fighting and voting what I believe in I hope I am setting a positive example to my children, instead of lying down and accepting what others feel is best for me. If something gets passed into law, then I'll continue to fight it if I disagree but will abide by it while it is a law.

2nd - I'm sorry you feel New Hampshirites are "you people" as I've never considered people from other states as such. And since we are talking about state government possibly making this into law, I would still expect the federal government to help out during a disaster because I can promise you i've paid my share of taxes over the years.

[mitch0927]

Live Free And Die

[afsc30574]

Good for New Hampshire! When the gov't has time to worry about whether or not adults are wearing their seatbelts, there is too much gov't!

[mitch0927]

I could actually see a compromise. If cars and trucks are equipped with air bags, then it should be a choice....but if they're not, then I could see the governments argument. Not sure if anyone on here has seen what a windshield can do to a person's face and head, but I have. It isn't a pretty sight. Guess children who have lost their parents to accidents such as these can say proudly, "my mom/dad chose not to wear their seat belt because they didn't want the government telling them what to do." Suppose they can be martyrs, because a martyr is a person who is put to death or endures suffering because of a belief, principle or cause.

[puzzler125]

Have you ever seen the face of your child after it has hit the windshield of his or her car? Have you seen the wounds that could have been prevented, the scars that don't fade completely, and the body laid out in a coffin, of your child after a death that could have been prevented? Have you dealt with pain caused by injuries, in someone you love?

S. --former NY State Emergency Medical Technician, Critical Care, car accident survivor who ALWAYS wears her seatbelt!

[diskman111]

New Hampshire already has a seatbelt law covering children under the age of 18, and a car seat law for small children. The issue is whether an adult over the age of 18 shouldn't be able to make the decision for themselves.

[lorinkundert]

It's sad to see that New Hampshire is the only state in the union where the people and the Government are willing to fight to keep their freedoms, every other state should seriously take a long hard look at what is happening to our country.

[mitch0927]

I always thought Oklahoma was the last to do or get anything. We have only had the lottery for just over a year, and we just made it mandatory for seat blets for about five years. We went through the same thing, people saying, "I do what I want to do". I truly believe it is something that needs to be looked at logically. Seat belts were put there for a reason, not just a conversation piece. Go back a few decades and see what people were saying about safety glass for windshields. Do you adults want your children to grow up with foster parents or grand parents? I would hope not. It's the wide picture of what COULD happen......

[dan9111]

This is actually about a forced mandate, not the wisdom of seat belts. Use some logic. It is nonsensical to threaten violence against a person because they don't agree with you. But that is the truth of this so-called law. It is a threat violence for being unsafe, promoted I bet by those raised in violent families. Thus, a badge excuses all immoral behavior.

It is funny that some Americans will "defend freedom" by destroying it. Those who favor such behavior are as unthinking as those not wearing seat belts. No difference at all. I have little sympathy for those who will suffer and die (safely buckled mind you), after having deliberately sacrificed the freedom of others. They are no more entitled to dictate seatbelts than I am to steal their car. The morality of using violent coercion is exactly the same.

[rohink-2009]

All those road blocks to check for seat belts is to protect lives? Bull-sh*t, there's money to be made. I wear a seat belt because I choose to. So much for the land of the free. Keep believing that the government puts all these laws in effect for our own good.

[gunnerv1]

Just wait until the DemocRats completly take over. They will be passing laws right and left so that the "Benovlent" Government can "Protect you from yourself"

[naturaltwo]

Enough of these idiot so called do gooders who are really control freaks in disguise.

Obviously none of them believe in the law of natural selection. Protect people from themselves. Pure nonsense.

So is Lloyd Garver.

[thgdriver]

First off I want to state I wear my seat belt. But it should be up to the adult to make this decision and not BIG BROTHER GOVERNMENT (or the insurance company's) with a fine in place to fill the state money coffers with. When I see a person on a motor Cycle going down the road at sixty five or more, I laugh That there is a law forcing auto and truck drivers to wear seat belts!!

You state that it winds up costing millions, so what? Folks out there cost us millions every year by doing things like mountain climbing, sky diving, cliff and bridge bungee jumping, all sports, well, the list goes on and on. And what about their family's when they seriously hurt or kill themselves? Big Brother Government has got to mind his own business or put laws against all dangerous risks. Lets see them try that!!

[thee0racle]

It's about the MONEY and not SAFETY. Why stop there? Let's outlaw SMOKING, and TRAMPOLINES and PIT BULLS and OVEREATING

[edjohn66]

Driving an automobile is not a right. Everything about them are regulated by the government. So why not seat belt use?

I suppose all you knee-jerk libertarians who are against a law requiring seat-belt use all don't drive, either. You know, seeing as how there are a plethora of government regulations about the building, sale, registration, licensing, and operation of motor vehicles. At the very least, I'm sure you all think its abhorrent to be required to actually get a driver's license to drive.

Otherwise, you are just hypocritical whiners. Suck it up and deal with the fact that society is better off with seat-belt laws.

[ladydiane63]

As someone who has survived a roll over car accident because I was wearing my seat belt. I would like to impress upon the people of New Hampshire the importance of wearing them at all times. I was less than a mile from home when my accident occurred and if I had not had it on, I would not be hear today.

[limited94]

Why is that we can ride motorcycles? You don't have to wear a seatbelt, and rightfully so. But if the argument is that you must wear a seatbelt so that if you get in an accident, you will be safer, then how can you argue that it is ok to ride a motorcycle? If you get in a wreck, you will very likely be seriously hurt, so what is the safeguard? (and don't say helmet, that does'nt protect you from breaking a leg or neck)

I just don't understand how you can FORCE someone to wear a seatbelt, and then let a guy who wants to ride a motorcycle just fly on by.

[mystixa]

Its obvious that the author doesnt have the vaguest idea what the whole notion of 'live free or die' means. That a law seems like 'common sense' is not enough. The idea of freedom, and a right to a lack of restriction is justification enough in itself.

These arguments about who we 'eave behind' are immaterial. Common sense to americans used to be that we live in the land of the free, not the land of the regulated.

Wed all be safer if noone drove cars, if we all telecommuted. Wed be safer if there is safety tape in all our showers and no aspirin in the medicine cabinet, and if our government was chosen for us. It doesnt mean there should be laws to that effect.

[diskman111]

Most of government regulations about the building, sale, registration, licensing, and operation of motor vehicles don't just affect the safety of the operator, they are designed for the safety of passengers and others on the road as well. Not wearing a seatbelt does not put a passenger or other drivers at risk. The responsibility lies with the risk taker alone.

The EMT from NY sited what I can only guess as tragedies he/she witnessed, and yet NY has a seatbelt law, so it doesn't fix the problem. Just like there are laws against suicide, does that prevent them? No. It might make society feel better, but it doesn't fix/prevent the problem.

As I stated earlier, I use my seatbelt all the time, and require all passengers in my vehicle to use them...but it's my choice. There's a point where you ask yourself where does it stop. What will be regulated next? It's not a knee jerk reaction, it's a reaction of having even common sense issues being dictated by laws. It's common sense not to jump out of an airplane, but do you deny the right of someone who enjoys it, to do it?

[nh4ronpaul]

UGH sorry...best slogan, best state, currently being ruined by Democrats!

NO SEATBELTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[toddpw01]

Seatbelt education makes a lot of sense as a public service advertisement. Making it a law just seems like a great revenue stream for local law enforcement.

I've had my life saved twice by seatbelts but there are also times when I think it's idiotic that I am required by law to wear one. Are you going to ticket me for moving my car to a better space in an emptied parking lot without using my seat belt?

Natural selection will eliminate the people who weren't wearing seatbelts when they really should have. I find it stupid that some people preach individual responsibility while at the same time demanding that we be protected from our own bad judgement.

[vampire1288]

MY STATE INDIANA JUST CHANGED THE LAW TO ADD TRUCKS TO THE SEAT BELT LAW.. WHILE STILL ALLOWING MOTORCYCLES TO BE RIDEN WITHOUT A HELMET...WHEN THE PAPER PUBLISHES THE TRAFFIC TICKETS/ARRESTS FOR THE MONTH MOST OF THEM ARE SEAT BELT TICKETS... SOME POLICE SAY THE SEAT BELT LAW IS THE GREATEST AS THERE IS ALMOST NO DEFENSE AGAINST IT..AND IT IS A PAYABLE TICKET SO 0NE DOESEN'T LOSE A DAYS WORK TO GO TO COURT..AND THE MONEY COMES ROLLING IN...

[vampire1288]

MY STATE INDIANA JUST CHANGED THE LAW TO ADD TRUCKS TO THE SEAT BELT LAW.. WHILE STILL ALLOWING MOTORCYCLES TO BE RIDEN WITHOUT A HELMET...WHEN THE PAPER PUBLISHES THE TRAFFIC TICKETS/ARRESTS FOR THE MONTH MOST OF THEM ARE SEAT BELT TICKETS... SOME POLICE SAY THE SEAT BELT LAW IS THE GREATEST AS THERE IS ALMOST NO DEFENSE AGAINST IT..AND IT IS A PAYABLE TICKET SO 0NE DOESEN'T LOSE A DAYS WORK TO GO TO COURT..AND THE MONEY COMES ROLLING IN...

[vampire1288]

MY STATE INDIANA JUST CHANGED THE LAW TO ADD TRUCKS TO THE SEAT BELT LAW.. WHILE STILL ALLOWING MOTORCYCLES TO BE RIDEN WITHOUT A HELMET...WHEN THE PAPER PUBLISHES THE TRAFFIC TICKETS/ARRESTS FOR THE MONTH MOST OF THEM ARE SEAT BELT TICKETS... SOME POLICE SAY THE SEAT BELT LAW IS THE GREATEST AS THERE IS ALMOST NO DEFENSE AGAINST IT..AND IT IS A PAYABLE TICKET SO 0NE DOESEN'T LOSE A DAYS WORK TO GO TO COURT..AND THE MONEY COMES ROLLING IN...

[perimogi]

Seat belts save lives, having said that, how far should a government go to protect people from themselves. So far, no governmental entity has banned the sale of cigarettes in there jurisdiction, yet, that would save millions of lives and millions of dollars. When the government is willing to stop the sale of cigarettes (although they can not afford the loss of the tax revenue), they can order people to wear seat belts. Until then stay out of it.

[michellem99-2009]

I am a Mainer and I live in the west but my heart is all Maine-New England. I know being out here everybudy is nosy /a busy body. I hate seat belts but will wear them if in a car. WA state it is 101 dollar ticket. I am an outsider here. I say wear the seats but I don't like the nanny govt and the nanny is GW Bush for starters. While I see the common sense in donning seat belt for safety reasons. I also feel drivers need to realise there are persons on foot. They need to look out for us. I am a legally blind person and I ask that you be aware of others. Also I have family in New England. As a Maine born and raised person,Plese use your seat belt as I have lived in NH and by now they would be wearing seat belts. My Dad hates them but in ME he must. NH must too.