The words of 18th-century British statesman and philosopher Edmund Burke sum up my opinion of LD 112, a bill introduced by State Sen. Eric Brakey (R-Auburn) which would repeal the law imposing fines on adults over the age of 17 who fail to wear seat belts in Maine while driving or riding in any vehicle required by the federal government to be equipped with belts. The bill has been referred to the Committee on Transportation.

Burke, the godfather of modern-day political conservatism and a critic of unnecessary government regulation, advocated for individual liberty. He wrote, “Whatever each man can separately do, without trespassing upon others, he has a right to do for himself.”

But Burke also recognized that unbridled liberty can be destructive to society and its members.

“Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere,” he wrote, “and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without.” For Burke, the bloody French Revolution of 1789 represented the ultimate example of what happens when individual freedom is allowed to run amuck, harm others and tear apart the collective fabric.

Striking the right balance between individual rights and government controls is the most critical and tricky issue in American politics today, just as it’s been since the nation’s founding. However, LD 112 isn’t even a close call. If Burke were alive today, it would probably make him gag.

Brakey acknowledges that seat belts save lives but has criticized the current seatbelt law as an infringement on personal freedom, asserting, “Individuals who choose not to wear seat belts should not face consequences from our government.”

This is akin to the argument that the government shouldn’t be able to force parents to have their children vaccinated against certain communicable diseases in order to attend school. The inevitable impact on public health of failure to vaccinate is dramatically demonstrated by the recent multi-state outbreak of measles, a childhood disease which had all but disappeared thanks to routine vaccinations.

Consider the societal ramifications of the simple decision not to buckle up.

When an accident occurs, as we all know, police and often emergency rescue and firefighters are called to the scene. If severe injury or death is involved, the number of first responders tends to increase significantly.

In major accidents, scientific analyses are performed by the State of Maine Crash Reconstruction Unit, a cadre of specially trained state, county and municipal law enforcement officers, to determine the factors that led to the crash.

Criminal felony prosecutions may be initiated by the state if driver negligence or recklessness is found to have caused serious injury or death. (While this can also happen in noninjury or minor-injury accidents, felony charges are far less likely to be pursued).

All these public efforts entail costs we bear as taxpayers, most of which can be avoided or minimized through the use of seatbelts that limit the severity of injuries or prevent death.

But that’s not all.

Severely injured, nonbelted drivers will routinely be transported to the nearest emergency room, where the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA) requires they be treated and stabilized before they are discharged, regardless of their ability to pay. If they’re not covered by insurance or otherwise able to pay, the hospital will end up absorbing the costs of their treatment and try to pass them along to other patients through higher charges. If they’re covered by MaineCare, Medicare, VA insurance or other government-subsidized healthcare programs, the taxpayer will pick up part or all of the tab. Even if they are privately insured, the emergency and follow-up care will raise the costs of coverage to their health carrier and ultimately affect the premiums that all customers of the insurance company pay.

Suppose an unbelted driver or passenger who is the parent of minor children is killed in a crash and there are no other family members to take over the children’s care. DHHS will become the children’s custodian and seek foster and adoptive families to assume the parental role. Unless and until they are adopted, the children’s support and medical care will be paid by the state. Traumatized by the loss of a parent, even children taken in by members of their own family will be at increased risk of suffering psychological distress and disorder. It’s a tragedy for the kids, but it can also become an expense for the taxpayer if resulting mental health problems cause these children to engage in self-destructive behaviors, such as criminality, alcohol and drug abuse, promiscuous sexuality or teenage pregnancy.

And, of course, every driver pays the added cost of rising insurance rates from liability claims and lawsuits which result from accidents involving death or serious injury. Just think about those ubiquitous television ads featuring personal injury attorneys promising to fight for you.

The U.S. has come a long way since Ralph Nader’s groundbreaking 1965 book, “Unsafe at Any Speed,” first criticized American car makers for resisting the introduction of routine safety equipment such as seatbelts. A federal law took effect in 1968, which required that all vehicles, other than buses, be fitted with seatbelts in designated seating positions. Every state, except New Hampshire, has laws which require the use of seatbelts by adults either in all seats or just in front seats and which levy fines for violations.

Seatbelts and other safety devices, as well as laws mandating their use, have helped significantly reduce fatal crashes in the U.S. over the past two decades, despite increases in the number of registered vehicles and miles traveled.

In Maine, violations of the seatbelt law are civil infractions, carrying relatively low fines of $50 for the first offense, $125 for the second and $250 for the third.

These penalties aren’t enough to deter the stupidest people from traveling unbelted, but they at least have the potential to make those with the sense God gave little green apples think twice before they choose not to buckle up.

I don’t object to allowing individuals to act stupidly when the consequences of their behavior harm only themselves. Where that behavior has the potential to harm others, however, I draw the line.

That’s when Burke’s “controlling power upon will and appetite” becomes necessary, and government has to step in.