The small Dutch town of Drachten used to face an all-too-common problem — traffic accidents. The small town had one road death every three years, according to a November 2006 article in The Telegraph.But instead of responding with more rules and regulations, Drachten’s city planners did something rare — they stopped planning.In 2003, traffic lights were removed, divisions between sidewalks and roads were blurred and commuters were left to their own wits.There hasn’t been one traffic fatality since, and the town’s center — which used to average eight traffic accidents a year — has had only minor fender-benders since.Because of the way humans react to risk, the effects of legislating and liberalizing safety measures are often counterintuitive.Significant evidence suggests clicking your seat belt — advice often given by governing mothers and mandated by mothering governments — might make you more likely to suffer in an accident.Everyone has a firm grasp of the sentimental seat belt view.All else held equal, seat belts will make you safer if you are in a car accident.They save around 15,000 lives every year in the U.S., according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.But all else is not held equal. For good reasons, seat belts give drivers a sense of security.All else held equal, when drivers feel safer, they become more reckless.I’m not allowed to tell you that you should unbuckle, but I recommend you consider it the next time you are barreling down the Port Allen side of the Mississippi River bridge. I tried it, and I quickly felt demons of terror simmering in my stomach, and my foot reached instinctively for the brakes.A little danger goes a long way.Seat belts decrease the cost of bad driving. As an economics undergraduate, I’m fully qualified to tell you this will increase bad driving. Incentives matter.So there are two opposing forces pulling on the highway death statistics. From the armchair, we don’t know if the benefits — safer accidents — outweigh the costs — more frequent accidents.When seat belts were first being instituted worldwide, John Adams of London University College did an expansive study on 80 percent of the world’s drivers. He found most countries with seat belt laws fared no better than countries without them and some countries fared far, far worse.Although it remained confidential during the UK seat belt debate, the later-leaked “Isles Report” predicted a UK seat belt law would result in a 2.3 percent increase in traffic fatalities. When the law passed, it was followed by no statistically significant decreases in traffic fatalities. However, the freshly belted drivers were 7 to 8 percent more likely to hit cyclists and 11 to 13 percent more likely to hit pedestrians — who both stand outside the safety arms race.To be fair, there aren’t many recent studies on the topic. There’s a chance modern drivers are more acclimated to seat belts, and the effect has diminished.But if you think those people who call themselves “the state” should be in the “forcing people to buckle up” business, then let’s take the incentives lesson all the way and really save some lives.Rip out the seat belts, remove the air bags and require all cars be fitted with unforgiving, gargantuan spikes poised inches above the still-beating hearts of the drivers and passengers.If the occupants were thrust forward, the skewers would penetrate their lungs. Heck, even stopping too quickly would leave their hearts squirting fluid all over the dashboard.Each stop, start and lane-change would be an adrenaline-fueled adventure.Through a combination of incentives and natural selection, it wouldn’t be long before accidents were virtually unheard of!Or, perhaps, we should take a lesson from Drachten and leave drivers to their own devices.If seat belts were optional, more cautious drivers would be more likely to buckle up, and risk-seeking bareback drivers would get a much-needed connection to the dangerous situation they have placed themselves in.Drachten “works well because it is dangerous, which is exactly what we want,” Dr. Hans Monderman — originator of the city’s unique design — told The Telegraph. “It shifts the emphasis away from the Government taking the risk, to the driver being responsible for his or her own risk.”I’m comfortable with that setup. After all, I share the road with drivers, not “the Government.” Daniel Morgan is a 21-year-old economics senior from Baton Rouge. Follow him on Twitter @TDR_dmorgan.– – – -Contact Daniel Morgan at [email protected]