Opinion: Seatbelts, helmet laws bring support for government intervention

Mostly, I’m opposed to laws enacted to protect us from ourselves. Rarely would I have any use for government efforts to do just that. I confess, I’m truly contradicted about laws mandating using seatbelts and wearing motorcycle helmets. On one level, it should be no one else’s business whether both safety devices are used. A part of me agrees with this sentiment. How we protect ourselves while traveling should be of no concern to any level of government.

Conversely, either of these two situations can lead to such drastic consequences that I reluctantly lift my embargo on these instances of social engineering. Motorcycle helmet laws affect far fewer people. A whole lot more people travel in cars than ride motorcycles. The pressure to buckle up is greater than to strap on motorcycle helmets.

The motorcycle-car accident that injured Ben Roethlisberger, young football quarterback of the Super Bowl champion Pittsburgh Steelers, put the spotlight on motorcycle riding without helmets. Pennsylvania has a helmet law. Not only was Roethlisberger not wearing one, he had no motorcycle license. For these offenses he paid fines totaling $388.

Photos of the crumpled cycle showed how close he came to death or career-ending injuries. In my mind’s eye, I envision what may have passed through his mind as he was hurled through the air en route to the pavement. Among those images may have been the millions of dollars he might never earn. Remarkably, his injuries were reportedly not serious enough to turn off the spigot pouring out future millions. He did say that if he rides a motorcycle again, he will wear a helmet. Good move, Ben.

It seems to me foolhardy to ride a bicycle without a helmet, let alone a motorcycle. What would amount to a fender bender for two cars bumping each other could prove serious for cycle riders. Certainly motorcycles are more vulnerable when they are among the crowded traffic mix on major highways where bicycles dare not venture.

In what seems another lifetime, my wife and I once rode motorcycles. We never considered for a millisecond claiming a constitutional right to ride without a helmet. We took a couple of motorcycle touring vacations and we vividly remember being caught in rush-hour traffic on crowded city throughways. White-knuckle time, indeed.

As much as it may go against my opposition to government control of personal behavior, it makes too much sense to wear a helmet. I am happy to say that Ben Roethlisberger agrees and wouldn’t leave home again without one. I’m not quite as conflicted with seatbelt laws. No offense to super-rabid opponents of government interference, but I see no rational reason for opposing seatbelt laws.

I don’t necessarily live my life by statistics. I know if you stand with one foot in a bucket of freezing water and the other in scalding water, statistically, you are comfortable. That said, the statistics overwhelmingly point out the safety factor of wearing seatbelts. News media are beginning to report whether drivers and passengers in auto accidents wore seatbelts. In far too many cases, reports say in one-car accidents, where speed was the culprit, victims weren’t wearing seatbelts. As additional airbags are added to cars enabling drivers and passengers to be in safety cocoons, seatbelts need to be in place to enable the airbags to do their safety job.

Unfortunately, no restraint is available to keep motorcycle riders involved in a mishap from becoming airborne. It is sheer folly to refuse protection in preparation for the landing.

The same sort of logic applies to avoiding becoming airborne in an automobile. I have grown fond of Rusty Saber readers. However you may travel, stay safe!

Joe McAdoo is former chairman of the communication department at Drury University.