Do you remember the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977? Designed by the “beltway” no-goodnics which encouraged leaned on financial institutions to lend dollars to people with lower-incomes. And then under the Clinton administration it was toughened-up with legislation to force Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to give out mortgages to people who would clearly have difficulty paying them – obviously not all federal legislation has the desired effect as witnessed by the current housing and financial crisis.
So being a bit of a skeptic along comes the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration proposal (NHTSA-2008-0157 (.pdf)) for a national helmet law. Certainly the issue of motorcycle safety surrounds the Helmet Debate. This debate (often heated and emotional!) revolves around whether federal law should require motorcyclists to wear helmets at all times when riding, or whether the decision to wear or not to wear a helmet should be left up to the individual rider. We’ve all heard the paternalistic arguments and how the federal government is attempting to regulate an area that should be left to personal choice or left to the states to decide. On the other hand, helmet law proponents argue that helmets save lives and reduce the risk of injury.
It’s important to note that in 1975, 47 states required all motorcycle riders to wear helmets; now only 20 do. Today it’s a real patch-work of helmet laws intermixed with a wide variety of licensing requirements, training courses and safety measures different in every state across the U.S. It’s a bit of a mess and a motorcycle safety “state-of-the-state” is available HERE (.pdf). The NHTSA has produced studies showing that death rates jump when helmet laws are repealed, but the laws are state statutes, and the agency is barred by Congress from lobbying states on safety issues. Likely explains the attempt at a federal mandate. In addition, there are groups like the Alliance of Bikers Aimed Towards Education (ABATE) who do great work advocating motorcycle education and training, but in some states they have persuaded legislatures to relax helmet laws.
I’m not on a mission to try and restrict the freedom of free-wheeling spirits who argue that it’s their heads at risk and their choice to make. This topic is a challenging area to navigate through and difficult to measure the greater value: a small sacrifice of choice, or the lives saved? My intent is to make you aware of the proposal, provide links and information for you to make an informed decision on whether to support or oppose the national helmet law. Supply any comments on the proposal HERE.
Chart courtesy of NHTSA.
When you break it down to the basics Mac, it is not about helmets. It is about personal choice and freedom. Thats it.
The founding fathers did not envision a nanny state that passed laws to protect it’s citizens. It relied on peoples common sense and good judgement to protect themselves.
Today it is helmets Mac, tomorrow it’s?………………Your guess is as good as mine. But, I have found that those that don’t care about the helmet law will whine when it is something they care about.
Ironic, the same group that do not want to give bikers the freedom to make their own choices are quite often the same one’s that defend a womans right to choose……….to end a life.
Remember, any government big enough to give you anything you want, is big enough to take it all away.
Personally, I just really don’t care anymore. Fight has been taken out of me. People don’t like the laws that are getting passed on them perhaps they should have gotten off their asses sooner. I’m tired. After doing this for 16 years, I’m worn out on trying to convince people it is in their best interest to get involved, and trying to get things accomplished with minimal help.
The group of people willing to spend the time, money and effort to prevent bad laws and change one’s already on the books is shrinking every year. You can only bang your head against the wall so many times before you raise a lump and decide the outcomes are not worth the effort.
WJ