Helmet Law Part II
Austin passed a helmet law in 1996. Due to public opposition, Council acted a year later to change the law to apply only to minors and reduce fines for violation.
Well, it's not over yet. The current Council is going to look into passing a all-ages helmet law on August 24th. Why? Former mayor Bruce Todd, who just so happens was mayor in 1996, was involved in a bicycling accident earlier this year while on a ride with the Austin Cycling Association and is using his incident to reignite the debate.
Top three reasons why I don't support a helmet law for bicyclists:
1) It's a "Nanny Law." Nanny Laws are aptly named for their aim to protect citizens against themselves. I strongly believe in the principle of "your rights end where the other guy's nose begins" and I find it insulting that someone else would fine me for not doing what they think is best for me. Please, if you think I should change my behavior, tell me! try to convince me! But whatever you do, leave the final decision up to me.
2) Contrary to popular belief, bicycle helmets are NOT designed to protect bicyclists against vehicle collisions. The standardized tests helmets are subjected to ensure protection against falling.. like if you were walking and fell over. See "Heads Up," an article written by a helmet tester for more info.
3) If we're looking to improve bicycle safety, great! There are sooo many ways Austin can improve. We could enforce car-free bike lanes, ensure safe and adequate access across major roads (i.e. I'd like to be able to bike to the Arboretum to see a movie without fearing for my life), etc.. Why not focus on solutions that will actually help?
Where/when: City Hall on August 24th at 6pm. The more people show up, the more likely we'll be heard. :)
posted by Spakalina @ 12:26 PM
3 Comments:
What about for motorcyclists? What are your thoughts on that?
While I do not think that a helmet law for adults is neccesary, I DO think that having helmet laws for children under 16 (or 18) should be passed in all cities and enforced. Maybe this is just b/c when I was a kid I got made fun of b/c my parents made me wear a helmet and nobody else's did...if it was the law, then maybe it would have been cool....or at least just slightly less dorky. yes, i was scarred for life.
The motorcycle helmets are made to much stricter standards than bicycle helmets, and so they actually do something in a vehicle collision. I wouldn't be caught dead on a motorcycle without a helmet, but I wouldn't tell others they MUST wear one.
Children can be a more difficult issue, because many of them are bound to consider the "coolness" factor above any health concerns. Plus, they are more likely to fall off their bike (well, really young children at least) than adults.
However, I would leave the decision up to the parent to enforce if they wish to. I worry that a helmet law for children does nothing more than reduce the number of children cyclists, making them less likely to become adult transportation cyclists.
I know what you're saying though about how a law would make you feel less dorky, but you turned out ok, right? :)
Yes, the idea of a helmet law is absurd. Check out why at nohelmetlaw.org. We had a great rally last night with a bicycle helmet fashion show. Bruce
Todd, the key promoter of the law and former mayor, told Fox 7 TV news that we should be ashamed of ourselves for mocking helmets. We actually
spent most of the time praising helmets. Helmets Good. Helmet Law bad. Public hearing on this ill-conceived idea is still on for Thursday, Aug. 24 at 6 p.m. at City Hall, even though they don't even have a draft of the ordinance change public yet!
Post a Comment
<< Home