It’s not unusual for a tide of bills to surge across the nation trying to change mandatory motorcycle helmet laws as State governments settle into their new sessions.
Joining the State of Michigan, Oregon legislators are considering a proposal that would only require riders under 21 years of age to wear motorcycle helmet while riding on or operating motorcycle.
Under the proposed law, other riders who choose not to wear a helmet would have to carry $25,000 in personal injury protection in their vehicle insurance policy.
Oregon is one of 20 states that require all motorcycle riders to wear a helmet. Twenty-seven states have motorcycle helmet laws that only require younger riders to do so, and three others do not have any helmet laws.
Known as House Bill 3141, the legislation started its road trip with a public hearing earlier this week with the roles of opponents and proponents filled by familiar walks of society and rhetoric.Even the political makeup of the early supporters of the bill falls in a political rut claiming 18 Republicans and two Democrats.
The bill’s sponsor, Representative Tim Freeman (R) used what could be considered the default argument over mandatory helmet requirements to justify the introduction of the legislation.
“Some helmets limit motorcyclists’ vision and almost all limit their ability to hear,” Freeman said, noting his belief that helmets aren’t always as safe as they are presented to be.
Some motorcycle enthusiasts who attended argued for the legislation riding down a well-known road of personal freedoms and a presumed right of choice.
“I don’t like the fact that the right to choose has been taken away from U.S. citizens,” Melvin Yaeger, a member of BikePAC, a motorcycle advocacy group told The Register Guard.
As in the riding world, there were bikers who opposed the legislation and supported the required use of helmets.
“Please don’t let a vocal minority weaken a law that an overwhelming majority of Oregonians believe in and count on to protect the lives of their loved ones and acquaintances,” Steve Walker of Eugene testified.
During his testimony, Walker observed that every state that has allowed motorcycle helmets to be optional has seen a dramatic increase in deaths and serious injuries resulting from head trauma.
Bringing an authoritative opposition were health officials such as Jim Anderson of the American College of Emergency Physicians, a professional organization.
“Everyone is one step away from a medical emergency, and it is our experience that helmets work,” Anderson said.
“Motorcycle helmets prevent brain injuries, save lives and result in extensive (medical) cost savings to our system,” said Dr. John Mayberry of the Oregon Medical Association.
Some of the sponsors believe the caveat that might help the bill gain support is an allowance for the law to sunset after 18 months, at which point the state Department of Transportation would file a report for the Legislature detailing what effects the change had had.
“We hear about costs, about health care and impacts … and yet nobody comes forward with the stats to say this many lives are lost every year,” Representative Greg Matthews said at the hearing, promoting the bill’s ‘reasonable approach’ with its window of opportunity to review the effects of the legislation.
Once again we at Krazy Biker Katz must reiterate that in the State of Florida, where there is no mandatory helmet law, 53% of all motorcycle deaths are to riders who WORE helmets. There is no proof that helmets save lives. In fact, riders who DON’T wear helmets seem to ride safer and have been proven to have less fatalities than helmeted riders.
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.