I think that the law is fine the way it is. Trying to change us to a Primary enforcement law strips away the very precedent this state has for independent thinking. I'm not a big proponent of laws to mandate behavior if you don't need them. Everyone knows they should wear a seat belt.
I agree that New Hampshire is founded on independent thinking and personal freedom. However, a seatbelt law would not be the first law implemented to force safety on New Hampshire's citizens. One could argue that the minimum drinking age is along the same vein. Furthermore, in lieu of the staggering statistics concerning NH drivers' knowledge and the promised grant money, I find it hard to argue against a seat belt law.
Of course a seatbelt law would not be the first act to limit independence in New Hampshire. However such a law would give police officers one more violation to look for to pull drivers over and hand out citations. I would not be adamently opposed to a secondary enforcement law (as opposed to primary enforcement, which Jamila is talking about, where you can be pulled over for the offense), however that would not even get NH the federal funds that it is currently missing out on. If I choose not to buckle my seat belt to drive two minutes down the road for a gallon of milk, driving safely and not violating any other laws, I do not see who I am hurting or why I should be pulled over and fined.
Also, what are these staggering statistics concerning NH drivers? That they wear a seat belt slightly less often than people who are required to by law? I think that statistic shows that a law is not necessary, as nearly 3/4 of adult drivers wear seat belts anyway.
Alex, those rankings are regarding the knowledge of drivers who took a written test, not how safe they drive. I am not sure that having a seatbelt law would make drivers in NH more knowledgable.