BIKE: Re: Helmet law was not repealed

[Michael Bluejay]

>> (1) It's still a problem that the law exists for
>> kids, since the last
>> time anyone checked, over 90% of the no-helmet
>> tickets which went to
>> kids, went to black and Hispanic kids.  I also ran a
>> story a while back
>> about a nine-year-old boy in Florida who was
>> arrested and handcuffed
>> for not wearing a helmet.  The responsibility for
>> making sure kids wear
>> helmets should lie with the parents, not the police.

> Finally, where do you get these figures?
> "since the last time anyone checked, over 90% of the
> no-helmet tickets which went to kids, went to black
> and Hispanic kids."


(groan)

The obvious place.  You know, that website where you signed up for this 
list, whose address is listed at the bottom of every message sent to 
the list, and which I REFERENCED WITH A DIRECT LINK TO THE ARTICLE IN 
QUESTION IN THE LAST LINE OF MY POST.

> 	http://BicycleAustin.info/laws/helmet-laws.html

-MBJ-

P.S.

>  I believe that sometimes we need to be
> protected from ourselves and also since we all pay
> when someone is injured or killed (our insurance rates
>  or taxes increase to cover this) we have a
> responsibility to implement laws that will ultimately
> protect us all.

Really?  Then why support legislation that saves, on average, ZERO 
lives per year?  Why not support laws that prohibit smoking, drinking, 
or eating meat?  Those activities are much more harmful.  Hell, way 
more pedestrians and motorists die every year in Austin than cyclists.  
Why not make them wear helmets?  Or at least wear full body armor?  If 
you really believe we need to be protected from ourselves (which is 
itself a nauseating idea), why are you picking the way that has the 
*least* impact on saving lives?  Do we need to be protected from 
ourselves or don't we?  If we do, then where's your laundry list of 
other restrictions that need to be in place for our own good?