Most jurisdictions have laws on the books requiring the use of seatbelts while operating or riding in a motor vehicle. In fact, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recently launched a nationwide campaign to "crack down" on those who don't wear seatbelts: Click It or Ticket [1].  In many cases, legislation is also in place that requires the use of helmets while riding motorcycles.  All of these such laws are inappropriate, and are excessive abuses of governmental power.

The justification usually cited for seatbelt and helmet laws is that they supposedly increase the number of people utilizing protective gear (due to their fear of being ticketed), and thus lives are saved that would otherwise be lost.  I will certainly agree that seatbelts and helmets save lives.  I will also agree that ticketing people will probably cause more people to utilize them.

The problem, however, is that it simply isn't the government's job to protect you from yourself.  Saving lives by force is generally frowned upon in other areas, yet people seem to have no problem with this particular use of inappropriate force.  Sure, you can say that people who don't wear their seatbelts have a much higher likelihood of being killed in an accident than those that do not.  However you could also demonstrate that people who drive have a much higher likelihood of being killed in an accident than those who take public transportation.  Yet no reasonable person would suggest that we make all private vehicle traffic illegal in an attempt to save lives.

In tort law, the concept of assuming the risk [2] often comes up in negligence suits.  It seems apparent to me that the same concept should apply to using motor vehicles. It isn't unreasonable to require auto manufacturers to include seatbelts, but it is unreasonable to force people to use them.  When someone operates, or rides in a vehicle, they can reasonably foresee that there is a risk of injury from a traffic accident.  Anyone with a third grade education should also know that wearing a seatbelt greatly reduces your risk of injury in such an event.  Therefore anyone who decides to ride in a vehicle without wearing a seatbelt is assuming the risk of injury, and is responsible for the results of their choices.

I often hear people argue that seatbelt and helmet laws are also important to keep health care costs lower.  Their logic is that someone uninsured is in an accident and is injured because they weren't wearing their seatbelt, then the costs of treating them must be absorbed by the hospital of physician since they can't afford to pay.  My response: giving free emergency care to those without insurance is fine, as long as their injuries aren't obviously their own fault. Injuries obtained due to not using protective gear while operating a vehicle are clearly partially the fault of the irresponsible person who made a choice not to use the seatbelt or helmet.  I believe that people have the right to fly through windshields or crack open their heads open on pavement if that's what they want. But I don't think the rest of us should have to pay for it.  So we should still treat the moron who broke his spine when he didn't wear his seatbelt, but when we're done, he should get sent a bill.  Can't pay it?  Too bad for you.  You had your chance to be responsible.  Now you can enjoy your bad credit, foreclosed home, and repossessed car (what's left of it).  Tell me again about how wearing your seatbelt is such a burden as you sleep under a bridge.

While I'm being overly harsh here to prove a point, it is important that everyone realize that personal responsibility is...you guessed it...the responsibility of each person.  Not the police, not the government, and not your local hospital.  So even if forcing people to wear seatbelts and helmets really does save lives, it's still not okay.  The government's job isn't to look after you, or make sure you don't make dumb mistakes.  No one expects the government to stop them from sticking their hand in a garbage disposal.  So why is it that people seem to think that it's okay for the government to stop us from making certain bad decisions, but not others?