Let's Beat this Idea to Death

The other day while listening to my favorite morning show on the way to work I heard about a new House Bill here in the great of state of procreation.
It says that if you're only driving less then 4 miles from your home and you're not going to be driving faster than 45 miles an hour, You really don't have to put your kids in booster seats.
The phone calls started to pour in. People were either livid about it, or wanted to argue for it.
Apparently the idea behind it, is really for parents who are car pooling. The bill was introduced by a man from Provo with 8 kids. Eight. I'm sure the only way all of his kids in the boosters fit any vehicle is if he's driving a 15 passenger van, but um, don't you kind figure that out before you have 8 kids? I don't have 8 kids and I'm aware of that.
The next day the morning show had a nurse from primary children's on the show to talk about how many kids went to the ER for vehicle related accidents now versus how many had to go to the ER after and accident before the child restraint thing came into effect for those under 8. Apparently statistics (which I am totally studying!) show that serious injuries have fallen by 50%. That's a pretty good precedent.
I get that when you're carpooling you are driving a hand full of kids a few blocks or miles, and most are probably not even your kids. It seems like common sense to me, that if you only have 3 seats in the back but want to be part of a carpool that has more than 2 other kids, you kind of can't because you can't fit that many kids into your car. Well same goes for kids in car seats, if you can't accommodate for the booster seats in your car, you need to find another car pool.
Then comes another aspect of the bill. As long as you're driving less that 45 miles per hour? Um, because it's at 46 miles an hour when those booster seats make a difference for kids?
Lots of people called in to say what lap belts could do to a kid even at slower speeds. I'll spare you the details, but you wouldn't want them to happen to your child.
The radio DJ made a great observation, that how do you enforce that? The policeman pulls you over and your kid isn't in a booster, so you say: "Well I'm only driving 3 miles from home officer." And they just have to let you go? That doesn't seem very intuitive. The only way you can enforce this is after there's an accident. How far are you from your home and how fast were you going, otherwise it's completely unenforceable.
I take my daughter 3.5 miles to preschool, I drive on roads with a speed limit of 45 miles and less, therefore I would have my choice whether I want to put her in a booster seat. I cannot imagine how badly that would turn out for her if I was in an accident. And doesn't it stand to reason, if these are your kids that you should already have booster seats for them??? What if you have to drive more than 4 miles away? Pick your favorite kid I guess.
And also, don't most accidents happen within 5 or 6 miles of your home? So I guess we're hoping it's that extra mile or 2 where the accident is going to happen, not inside our protective 4 mile radius.
Anyway, it seems like laziness put into law. I don't think I'm a car seat nazi, but even to drive my daughter one block from one grandparents to the next, she is buckled into her seat, because we cross a slightly busy street and all it takes is once to change both our lives forever. it's my responsibility to be her advocate, because she's too young to decide right now. That's my job as a parent. Are booster seats inconvenient? yes? Doesn't it seem like a 6 or 8 year old is big enough that they should be fine with a regular seat belt? Sometimes it does, but evidence proves otherwise and I'm not smarter then those people, so I'll make sure that with that evidence I'm doing the best I can to make sure my child is protected. Even if I'm only driving 3.5 miles away.
Utah house Bill 113