Is there a sophomore jinx on blogs?

If there is, I will avoid it with my superior blogging skills. That, and my modesty.

I've got to tell you, I've about had it with this click it or ticket campaign. What a way to hemorrhage the taxpayers money. Ughh. Here's my take on it. (If you want to read another great piece on this subject - oh, there goes my modesty again - check out Walter Williams' take)

If you breathe, you are quite familiar with the phrase "Click it or Ticket". In case you're one of the hermits among us, the phrase refers to the Department of Transportation's safety initiative to encourage people to wear their seatbelts.

If you live near Cleveland, you've heard about the seatbelt law for a long time. It actually originated in Brooklyn, a suburb of Cleveland with a population of about 11,000 people. Brooklyn Mayor John Coyne introduced the law in 1966, and ever since, you can't drive into the city without seeing a "Welcome to Brooklyn, Ohio, home of the Seatbelt Law" sign. (Incidentally, Brooklyn was also the first city to enact a cell phone ban, which prohibits drivers from talking on their cell phones unless they have both hands on the wheel. For complete text, click here and scroll down to section 331.45)

Here's the problem with the seatbelt laws. It is hardly the government's place to get involved. A person is perfectly capable of making that decision for themselves.

I should stop here to note that I personally do wear my seatbelt, from the moment I turn the car on until I turn it off. Any monkey can look at the statistics and know that if you don't wear your seatbelt, you're a moron. And, frankly, though I may sometimes act like a birdbrain, I'm actually not.

That being said, it's my decision. If I decide to endanger my life by not wearing my seatbelt, that's up to me. I do not bring danger to others by not wearing my seatbelt. If I have a predilection for flying through windshields and other such exciting events, I can. The government should not be telling me not to. Frankly, it's rather communist of them to do so.

So, should we abandon the DUI and cell phone and other such traffic related laws? After all, it's a drunk's choice to drive and maybe kill himself. Right? Wrong. These laws are different. A drunk can (and they often have, sadly) hurt, maim and kill many others when he gets behind the wheel. An idiot who can't talk on a phone and drive at the same time could easily hit someone. (Which, incidentally, was the impetus for Brooklyn's cell phone law.)

However, I'm not going to be more likely to hit someone or cause an accident just because I don't wear my seat belt. I am more likely to hurt, maim, or kill myself. So what? My choice.

Do I tell my kids to wear their seatbelts, and in fact force them to? Absolutely. That's because it's my responsibility to protect my kids. Not because the government tells me to. The onus for keeping my children safe falls on my wife and me.

So shouldn't the government tell and force me to wear my seatbelt? Nope. The government is not responsible for my safety here. I don't and shouldn't have to or want to depend on the government for much more than defense (military/police). Not to tell me to wear my seatbelt. Not to support me. Not to school me or my kids.

The main problem here is the government mentality of lording over it's citizens is wrong. The government stems from the citizens, not the other way around. Any politician who thinks so is, admittedly, normal, but way off-base.

And again I say, ughhhh.