We live in a great country. As U.S. citizens, we enjoy freedoms and independence envied by most nations of the world.

Today, those rights feel more precious than ever as brave men and women fight a world away to protect them.

But there are times when even we free-wheeling Americans need limits. Like all members of the human race, we don’t always exercise the best judgment when it comes to policing our own actions.

Libertarians and other live-and-let-live Americans argue that the government should not enact laws that restrict individual freedoms.

But ask any mom if the no-rules style of living works in real life and she’ll tell you to stop clowning around and clean your room.

We don’t like being told what we can and can’t do. From a young age, we rebel against any curtailment of our liberties, from potty training to playing nice, from chores to curfews.

Truth be told, we need laws that protect us, even if it’s to protect us from ourselves. We need restrictions. We need to be reminded that not everyone thinks or acts like we do; that we don’t live in a vacuum. And that sometimes exercising our “right” to hurt ourselves can hurt others, too.

Recent news reports on those kind of personal-liberty laws brought that point home perfectly.

First were two studies that showed Pennsylvania’s 2003 repeal of its motorcycle helmet law has resulted in more head-injury deaths and hospitalizations. One, by the University of Pittsburgh, indicated that in the two years after the repeal, head-injury deaths jumped by 32 percent and head-injury hospitalizations spiked by 42 percent.

Second was a new law in California banning drivers from talking on cell phones unless they use hands-free devices. Drivers 18 years and younger are prohibited from using cell phones altogether.

The two laws – one repealed, the other newly minted – have one goal in common: protecting us from ourselves. Lawmakers had hoped that requiring head protection for motorcyclists, and now banning a dangerous roadway distraction, would keep more Americans alive.

Opponents of helmet requirements and cell phone bans argue those laws infringe too much on their individual freedoms. They want to preserve their rights to use their cell phones unencumbered and ride their motorcycles with the wind in their hair.

But those arguments neglect the fact that the young driver chatting away on her cell phone while driving two tons of metal at 65 mph isn’t just endangering her own life. She’s the pilot of a lethal weapon. And it could be me or my kids she hits and kills.

Even motorcyclists riding without a helmet can impact all of us. True, they’re the ones who will be paralyzed in a hospital bed. But guess who pays the bill for that lifelong intensive treatment? You and I do, through higher health-care costs and insurance premiums.

All laws restrict our independence to some degree. Red lights and speed limits slow us down. Child-safety seats are cumbersome. Car insurance is expensive.

I remember covering rallies on the Capitol steps years ago when motorcyclists protested Pennsylvania’s mandatory helmet law. Their arguments were compelling. Helmets are a pain. But figures don’t lie: In the years since the helmet repeal, more motorcyclists have died and been seriously injured. That’s a fact we can’t ignore.

Good laws save lives. And that’s what freedom and independence are really all about: living to enjoy them.

Anne McGraw Reeves writes for The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pa. E-mail: [email protected].