Richard Crate, the police chief from Enfield who's seen the blood and smelled the death, rolled his eyes. Laura Horning, a woman from Milford who nearly died in a car crash six years ago, shook her head and laughed at words she did not find funny.

Their body language as they listened to the other side of the seat belt issue yesterday at the State House, so emphatic, so revealing, told you what was happening inside them.

What's going on here? Why don't people understand this simple concept, that seatbelts save lives? What's so hard to grasp?

Why are we the only state left in the country without a law looking out for our safety? Live Free or Die? Are you serious? How about Live Arrogantly, Then Maybe Die?

"I carry each one of these events in my heart and mind," said Crate, a cop for 21 years who's seen it all. "All traffic laws are obtrusive with far less impact on saving lives and preventing injuries. You can be pulled over for having a headlight out. It's not about penalties, nor about Live Free or Die. This law is about public safety on our roads and highways."

One by one, people stepped up to the plate, or in this case the microphone, in Representatives Hall and lobbied for sanity. Surgeons. Cops. Crash victims who were seriously injured.

Horning was one of those victims. She was buckled in, but her car, a 23-year-old Trans Am, had useless belts, the old kind that have since been strengthened. Her belt broke. She flew 50 feet through the air. She suffered severe brain trauma. She's still not right. Her husband cared for her, full time, for 3½ years.

"We have rules in our school systems that teach our children about dress codes and personal responsibility toward one another," Horning said, her voice quivering. "These are just a few examples of common-sense laws and rules that protect the greater good."

We've been down this road before. Two years ago, in fact, when House Bill 802 was defeated in the Senate. Once again, our 1.3 million residents, it was decided, needed no law, while more than 300 million Americans, in every other state, disagreed.

The issue resurfaced yesterday in the form of House Bill 383, the first step in a long process. The House Transportation Committee will one day make its recommendation, then the House will vote. With a majority there, the Senate will add its two cents before voting.

Lynch then makes his decision. We have no idea what he thinks. Too early for him to make a commitment when he may never have to.

The issue brings out passion every time it swings by Concord. Nearly 30 people gave their opinion to the committee. Seven spoke out against it. That was before time ran out and everyone had to move through the tunnel to the Legislative Office Building to finish.

Opponents said seatbelts give drivers a false sense of security, leading to carelessness. They expressed fears that we'd become a nanny state, that government was already too involved in our lives, that seatbelts can do more harm than good. And they spoke about personal liberty and personal choice.

"We're the greatest country in the history of the earth because we're the most free," Spec Bowers of Sunapee said. "And it's not because we have a benevolent government always making decisions for us. And we're the best, partly because we're more free than other states. I hope we are still the Live Free or Die state . . . and (I hope we don't) come . . . to where government is continuously telling us what to do and what not to do."

Will Buchanan of Henniker allied himself with Bowers. "One of the primary reasons we chose to move to New Hampshire is because of the freedom people enjoy compared to other states," Buchanan said. "I would argue that New Hampshire is the freest state in the country, and in fact I think one indication that the government respects its residents' personal liberties more than other states is the fact that it's the only state in the country that doesn't have a seatbelt law."

Single page