In article >, Michael Fierro wrote:
>> idea of rugged individualism and personal choice counter's Society's
>> views including that driving is a privilege, not a right annd Society
>
> That's exactly right. Driving is a privilege, not a right. When you get
> behind the wheel of a car, you effect not just yourself but others on the
> road with you. If you have your own private road that no one else drives
> on, then feel free to drive however you want on it. But if you're on the
> same road that other people are on, then you'd damned well better follow
> the rules of the road.

Privilege not a right has been used to basically suspend the bill of
rights if we use a motor vehicle. Not to mention any sort of public or
private transportation. Because people have become so accustomed to
giving up their rights while using motorized transporation, it is slowly
be extended to walking as well. Thusly IMO is is a very poor arguement to
use for seatbelt laws.

Seatbelt use should simply be the same as the use of any other piece of
equipment required on a motor vehicle. Using headlamps at night, using
wipers when needed, using mirrors before changing lanes. It's an
equipment issue. Nothing more or less. It's a piece of equipment to keep
occupants in their place and that's the reason it should be used. Not
because our right of choice becomes suspended whenever some possible
impact on others can be drawn.