This argument is lacking nuance. Just because there are some instances of paternalism one is prepared to accept, doesn't mean that every possible paternalist policy is always okay. Being in favour of some instances but not all, is not a logical inconsistency. We can talk about each instance on a case by case basis.

Seatbelt laws have very limited impact outside vehicle safety. Nor does it open a slippery slope that leads to buses and trains and elevators and dining chairs and beds getting their own seatbelts.

Regulation on speech threatens the basis of democracy. The fact that the countries pushing them most successfully (UK, Australia) are also the ones with serious freedom of speech problems compared to their Western peers should also tell you that no, they will not stop at throwing you in jail for memes on twitter.

personally yes, that kind of choice should belong to the individual not the government. besides that though the laws are nonsensical why is a seatbelt required in a car not not in a bus, why are motorcycles even allowed at all?

Yes, I do. Its just another way that cops can pull you over for bullshit charges and revenue enhancement.

I remember in my state, it was initially only a citation that couldnt be pulled over on. Then they flipped that and started pulling over for it. Why? Pure fucking money grab.

Me not wearing a seatbelt means I risk getting splattered. Not you, or anyone else.