In article , Zebee Johnstone says...

Seatbelt laws and laws about driving drunk or while on the phone are
probably different in that way. Theoretically, someone without a
seatbelt hurts themselves only, someone who is impaired enough to be
very unlikely to be able to control a ton and a half of lethal weapon is
a danger to others.

I think that's the critical separation. The first catagory (helmet
and seatbelt laws - for *adults*, that is) are laws designed to
protect the individual from their own actions. The effect to
society is tertiary at best.

The second set of laws protect one driver from another driver's
actions. Because we all share public roadways, anyone who
drives impaired (drunk, or cell phone use) will *directly*
affect other road users. It's a primary effect, not teritiary.

I would argue that the first set of laws do citizens a real
dis-service. As has been said more eloquently by another poster,
those laws shield drivers from the effects of their own stupidity.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================