Restraining motorists, freedom

To the editor:

So we are one step closer to a primary seat belt law allowing the police to stop and ticket drivers for the heinous offense of not wearing a seat belt (Wednesday Review-Journal).

Once again, Big Brother feels compelled to step in and govern the decisions individuals make over how they conduct their lives on an issue that can harm no one else.

Yes, wearing a seat belt is a good idea, but so is personal freedom to make your own decisions. And few decisions could have less of an impact on other people than this one.

Claims that other people are affected because the government has to pay for medical costs are simply deceptive. The government does not have to pay for anybody's medical care. They certainly have never paid for mine. And if the government does choose to pay for people's medical care, its something of a bootstrapping argument to then claim that they can now control all personal decision-making because the outcome of a person's decision may cause medical care to be necessary.

If I wanted to live in California, I would have moved there. Let's keep Nevada free.

Peter Sanders

LAS VEGAS

No longer free

To the editor:

Daniel Johnston's letter in Wednesday's Review-Journal, "Tougher seat belt law invites abuse," was exactly right. The proposed new seat belt law is absolutely an invitation for law enforcement abuse of Nevada citizens. But why would that stop the passage of this law by our representatives in Carson City?

Unfortunately, our politicians just can't seem to pass enough laws to assure the safety and long, healthy life of our entire weak-minded community. Every time a group of concerned citizens presents an emotional appeal to our lawmakers to restrict the freedom of others for their own good, new laws seem to fly through the Legislature without any apparent consideration of unintended consequences.

For example, the child safety seat law requiring children to be restrained in the back seat of vehicles has led to the death of several babies every year in our summer heat.

Yes, based on the information we've been given, in most cases seat belts make sense, and children probably are safer in the back seat. But with the endless flow of new laws against our actions, at what point do we consider our society a police state, and no longer free?

Jim Brown

NORTH LAS VEGAS

Dumb move

To the editor:

The changing of the law making the wearing seat belts a primary violation is not about safety -- it's about generating revenue for government coffers. The most immediate effect will be all teen, 20-year-old and nonwhite drivers will be stopped under the guise of not wearing seat belts.

It will go like this: "I stopped you for not wearing your seat belt, but I see you have your belt on. My mistake. Let me see your driver's license, registration and insurance, and by the way, have you been drinking? And can I search your car?"

This is more nonsense from a government with too much time on its hands. State services and programs are close to collapsing because of finances. The Nevada Legislature spends its precious time holding hearings to strengthen a law that 92 percent of people already obey?

Another dumb move by our elected officials.

Michael A. Rotello

HENDERSON