This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Before I get to the point of explaining why I support HB79 (Safety Belt Law Amendments) I should disclose a few things.

First, the bill's sponsor is Rep. Lee B. Perry, R-Perry. Rep. Perry and I are friends. This despite his deplorable Utah Republicanism and my affiliation with the godless liberal media.

Second, Lee and I have law enforcement backgrounds. I used to be a cop. He's still a lieutenant (another fact I try not to hold against him) for the Utah Highway Patrol.

Finally — and this almost goes without saying — Lee and I agree that we like his wife Kathy better than we like each other.

Now that's out of the way, on to HB79. If made into law, this bill would make it legal for the police to stop us solely for not wearing our seat belts.

Currently cops have to stop us for something else before they can bring up the matter of not wearing our seat belts.

Some people don't like HB79 because — and I find this laughably idiotic — "We as a society are weakened every time we pass a law to tell someone what is common sense to do."

Note: That's a direct quote from a Republican legislator after a similar bill was gutted in 2003.

Ninety-nine percent of our laws are on the books because people naturally DON'T have common sense. Committing murder or sexual abuse, using illegal drugs, punching legislators, speeding on the highway, neglecting child safety, driving drunk — hell, it's common sense to not do all of those. Guess what. There are laws against them.

In support of HB79, I could relate some of the really ugly crashes I helped investigate as a cop, like when someone got her once-lovely face strained through a windshield because she wasn't buckled up, or a promising athlete whose legs no longer work because he thought it was better to be "thrown free" from a crash.

I could also quote statistics that support the argument that society as a whole is strengthened when everyone wears a seat belt. The fact that some of us require a law to convince us to wear them makes perfect sense to me.

I won't because it wouldn't do any good. If you oppose mandatory seat beat use, you're not going to change your mind about it until you're hip deep in the grille of someone else's vehicle, or the cops have to roll your truck over to find you.

You still have the "choice" not to wear a seat belt, there's just greater liability if you don't and the cops spot you not wearing one.

My reason for supporting HB79 is entirely selfish. While it's lamentable that it happens, I don't lose much sleep over people getting killed because they opted not to buckle up. Unless, of course, I knew and liked them. Then I'm mostly angry.

Your "right" to not buckle up is OK with me so long as it doesn't infringe on my right not to be held responsible for your negligence. If we don't pass HB79, then we need a law of shared liability.

For example, if I do something that caused what under every circumstance would be considered a minor traffic accident — but you got killed because you weren't buckled up (or wearing a helmet) — then I shouldn't be charged with negligent homicide.

I should be charged with something like improper lane change, but you should bear the responsibility of your own lack of common sense. Call it aggravated stupidity.

America's highways are dangerous places in the best of circumstances. Why? Because people are involved. The vast majority of Americans know that texting or otherwise using your cellphone is dangerous while driving, but the vast majority of us still do it.

If common sense can't fix the problem, then it's time to let the law try.

Robert Kirby can be reached at rkirby@sltrib.com or facebook.com/stillnotpatbagley.