Helmets optional, seatbelts mandatory with fines for non-compliance

So, I am on my way back to the office from lunch today. As I pull out of the parking lot the fasten your seatbelt buzzer goes off and is annoying the hell out me. In effect this electronic device has been imbedded against my wishes, in an automobile I bought with my own money. The intent is to goad me into fastening my seatbelt, otherwise it will simply keep buzzing obnoxiously.

Logic tells me the buzzer is "for my own good." Not only is it safer to wear a seatbelt, but if a cop pulls along side of me and glances over at me, I am sure to be issued a citation and be fined by the state for committing an act that is illegal.

No, they won't throw me in jail for failing to fasten my seatbelt, they will just fine the hell out of me. If I leave my belt unfastened while visiting Davey and Mary in California it will cost me $88 for the first offense and $190 for the second. In Oregon the cost to me is $90. In New Mexico the fine is $25 plus points on my driving record that could raise our insurance rates by hundreds of dollars every year.

Of course I fastened the seatbelt and soon pulled up to a traffic light. In front of me is a guy wearing a Harley Davidson t-shirt and a bandana. The reason why I know he was wearing a bandana is because he was not wearing a helmet. And by the way he wasn't wearing a seatbelt either. I guess if the bike manufacturers know you are dumb enough, oops I meant adventurous enough to drive a motorcycle, having a seatbelt for safety is not going to be a priority.

While we were sitting at the light another motorcycle rider went whizzing through the intersection just as the light changed. There was no helmet on him either.

I got to thinking. A duly elected legislature and a governor in every state (except New Hampshire) long ago decided to control the population's behaviors via seatbelt laws. They ostensibly expanded their level of control and reasons to fine citizens "for their own good."

My question is why aren't helmet laws still in force for motorcycle riders in New Mexico? At one time you had to wear a helmet. Surely wearing a helmet is for their own good? At least try to help them avoid a catastrophic brain injury when they get mangled.

There is another way to look at this situation. Why is government selectively using the, "It's for your own good excuse" to fine people who aren't necessarily interested in what is for their own good?

Clearly driving a motorcycle with or without a helmet is much more dangerous than being in any car with or without a seatbelt on.

Is it the motorcycle lobby so relentless and aggressive with campaign contributions that gets a different set of rules? Is it the lack of a large population segment to fine the reason why the greater good is ignored?

Some people may not mind being selectively controlled in a way that is inconsistent with common sense. I am not one of them. Fining good citizens for not wearing a seatbelt, while at the same time ignoring motorcycle riders who are flying around at the same speeds with no headgear, is just another perfectly good example of why government controls that fine people should have to be renewed instead of being permanent.