Motorists have a better chance of dying on a South Carolina highway than any other in the nation, according to a recent study released by a company that compares car insurance rates.

The study raises the question of whether the states libertarian approach to laws governing motorists could be at fault.

The website CarInsuranceComparison.com crunched data from government highway safety reports and the U.S. Census, among other sources. The five most dangerous highways are in the South.

According to the numbers, the Palmetto State has 44 interstate speeding fatalities per mile of highway, and 41 percent of motorists drive without wearing a seatbelt. And when it comes to making the bottom of the list, the state blew the rest away.

The dubious honor of State with the Most Dangerous Highways goes to South Carolina, the only state in our top ten to rank in the bottom half of every single category, wrote CarInsuranceComparison.com in its report. It wasnt even close.

South Carolina has always ranked at the bottom of studies like these, says Tom Crosby, vice president of communications for the American Automobile Association of the Carolinas. And Crosby has a theory as to why that is: the states libertarian approach to the laws governing motorists.

The state has one of the highest fatality rates per mile driven as well as one of the highest percentages of fatalities involving a drunk driver, he says. He adds that the Palmetto State was one of the last states to pass a law to outlaw driving with a .08 blood alcohol level and took a long time to mandate seatbelt use. Lawmakers passed a law allowing cops to stop drivers for not wearing seatbelts in 2005. It came after a battle at the State House framed around the dueling interests of individual liberty and big government.

Crosby also points out that South Carolina doesnt have a law against texting or talking on a cell phone while driving.

Its the whole culture that feels that we shouldnt be placing restrictions on people that are driving, he says. These things arent rights, theyre privileges, and you have to regulate public safety as much for everybody else as it is for the person that youre proposing the law upon.

A motorist who argues that he or she should have the individual right not to wear a seatbelt or a motorcycle helmet or be able to text and drive is all fine and good, Crosby says. But the public will be on the hook to pay for the police to come out and investigate an accident, pay the EMT crew or cover hospital costs, he says.

Original post:
Is Libertarianism to Blame for S.C.’s ‘Most Dangerous’ Highways?