Libertarians oppose seat belt checkpoints

"When the law was passed, we were promised that the money was going to be used to improve the roads, but the tax dollars were used to hire extra deputies and the money was lowered for officer grants and switched to paying their salaries for seat belt enforcements," said Jeff Ellington of the Monroe County Council.\nUnder the law, officers will receive overtime pay for pulling drivers over. Local police officers say they feel it is important to strictly enforce seat belt laws, because it saves lives.\n"The seat belt enforcement law is really like a traffic law, and laws are there to protect people," said Bloomington Police Department Capt. Mike Diekoff.\nBut Libertarians disagree.\n"We, as Libertarians, always commend government officials who turn down taxpayers' money," said Erin Hollinden, the coordinator of IU Libertarians. "We don't think seat belt enforcement is an official use of taxpayers' money."\nThe Libertarians said they want to reduce the number of laws with which citizens comply, reduce the cost of the government and depend on individual responsibility.\n"We are all about personal responsibility and limited government," said Rebecca Sink-Burris, the 2002 Secretary of State candidate for the Libertarian party, who is now the vice chair of the Libertarian Party. "Our tax money should go to real crime, not crimes that are hurting only the individual."\n"If we are paying officers to work overtime, then they should be working overtime on crimes like domestic terrorism," said Jim-Billings Lee, who ran for State Representative of Indiana last year. "We stand and support the brave men and women that fight real crime and would like to see our money go to law enforcements that fight that crime."\nSink-Burris said the Libertarian party is in favor of the U.S. Constitution and the seat belt law would be considered "unreasonable search."\n"The grant is providing more money for seat belt enforcement than for drunk driving and drunk drivers endanger the public, while deciding whether or not to wear a seat belt is an individual issue, not an issue the government should be forcing," said Sink-Burris.\nHollinden considers seat belt violation as a victimless crime because the only victims are the drivers, and they are not hurting anyone but themselves. \n"I believe that adults can make adult choices and support the Libertarians in commending the refusal of taking tax money to enforce seat belt laws," Margaret Fette, the vice chair of the Libertarian Party and the 9th district representative of the central committee for the state party.\nFette also agrees with the Libertarians that individuals take better care of themselves than the government in a local community setting.\n"Yes, we need them for the army and for interstate roads, but we don't need the government intruding in an everyday part of our life," Fette said.\nLibertarians feel they want to be responsible and not rely on the government for personal safety. They view the seatbelt enforcement law as proof of just how controlling the government has become.\n"Originally, the law was passed and was sold as a second infraction, not a primary offense when someone was pulled over for not wearing a seat belt," Billings-Lee said. "Yet, the government proved their insincerity when that wasn't true and started to pull people over."\nAccording to Captain Diekhoff though, the checkpoints are there to raise the awareness of seatbelt enforcement and it is true that the number of fatalities in Indiana have decreased because of these enforcements. \nThe Libertarians feel the enforcement checkpoints have been excessive and intrusive and appreciate the council members who voted against them. \n"If everything in this country that was stupid were illegal, then a third of us would be in jail, a third of us would be police officers and a third of us would be paying taxes for it," Hollinden said. \nAccording to Ellington, the sheriff is bringing forth a new plan next month at the county meeting that will have equal enforcement of all the laws.