Legislation Forum

LEGISLATION FORUM

"INALIENABLE RIGHTS"

Readers might be interested in the enclosed clipping. From recent events here, one can only hope and expect the other Helmet Law States will take note and follow suit. Kalamazoo Gazette “To Wear A Helmet Or Not?

—It's Up To Cyclists NOW’’

The option of wearing a helmet was left up to the motorcyclist today, following a ruling Wednesday by the State Court of Appeals. The court declared unconstitutional a 1966 state law requiring cyclists to wear helmets.

A spokesman in the Attorney General’s office told the Gazette that the Appeals Court opinion will be studied carefully before a decision is reached on whether to appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court.

In a review of the statute, the State Court of Appeals declared the law unconstitutional because it could find no direct relationship between wearing helmets and public health, safety and welfare. And one of the court members noted that suicide is not against Michigan law.

The court said, “This statute has a relationship to the protection of the individual motorcyclist from himself, but not to the public health, safety and welfare. ’’

The court rejected Atty. Gen. Frank J. Kelley’s argument that the state has an interest in the “viability ” of its citizens and can legislate to keep them healthy and selfsupporting. “This logic could lead to unlimited paternalism, ” the three-member court panel said.

Circuit judge Allan C. Miller, (Alcona County), sitting as a member of the Appeals Court, wrote the opinion. He noted that according to State Police figures, the fatality rate among cyclists is more than twice as high as that for all motor vehicles. But, Miller noted, suicide is not against the state law.

The two other members of the court were John II. Gillis (Grosse Pointe) and Louis D. McGregor (Flint).

The court further added that there is no doubt that the state has a substantial interest in highway safety, but stated,“the difficulty with adopting this as a basis for decision is that it would also justify a requirement that automobile drivers wear helmets or buckle their seat belts for their own protection. ” Kalamazoo County Prosecuting Attorney Donald A. Burge said, “It is unfortunate we have to be placed in this position ” because he feels the helmet law was a valuable traffic safety measure. He added that his assistants will not move for dismissal of any pending cases until he receives notice of the decision.

Kalamazoo Municipal Judge Richard A. Enslen said he, too, will want to read the exact wording of the opinion, and will abide by it as it applies to cases pending in the court or to outstanding traffic tickets written under the law.

(Continued on page 50)

Portage Municipal Judge Kenneth A. Fricke said if the ruling’s meaning is as appears from early press reports, pending tickets or cases in his court will be dismissed.

George Stevens, director of the Michigan Department of State’s Office of Driver and Vehicle Services, said that convictions under the now-invalid law certified to the department already had been counted as two points against the driver's record.

Stevens said that since the law took effect March 30, 1967, his offices had handled approximately 50 certifications of helmet violation convictions per week, or about 3000 overall.

Secretary of State James Hare was in Detroit today, according to his office, and was not available for comment on what would happen to points against a driver's record accumulated from a violation of the statute.

The rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness are, according to our Declaration of Independance, inalienable rights, with, of course, the understanding that one’s actions do not interfere with the rights of others. Thus I see any helmet law as an encroachment on my personal liberty, granted by the basic principles of our United States.

However, as any intelligent motorcyclist. I realize and approve of the advantages of protective clothing, and do wear a helmet. This is now, in Michigan, a personal prerogative as it ought to be.

I am proud to be a resident of this state where the legislators are as open-minded and as constitutional as should be in this country.

JOSEPH HALSTED III Kalamazoo, Mich.

"HELMETS FOR NO VICES"

Enclosed is an article from a recent Industrial Safety Bulletin regarding motorcycle helmets and the apparent ratio of decreased fatalities as a result of their required use. Motorcycle Use Up-Deaths Down

Motorcycle deaths decreased during 1967, according to preliminary data announced by the National Safety Council.

The decrease, from 2050 deaths in 1966 to 1950 last year-the first reduction after six annual increases-was even more dramatic in the light of large continuing increases in motorcycle use. Motorcycle registrations after 1967 totaled 2.19 million-an increase of 43,800-during the year.

"The indicated 24 percent reduction in the death rate per 10,000 registered motorcycles during the year is the most encouraging traffic statistic I’ve seen in several years," said Howard Pyle, Council president.

"It seems very clear that the leadership of the National Highway Safety Bureau in setting standards for motorcycle equipment, motorcycle driver license tests and the wearing of safety helmets played a major part in this turn-around. Naturally, great credit also is due the governors and legislators who acted so promptly on the motorcycle problem. ’’

Pyle exphined that by the end of 1967 a total of at least 34 states has special laws regarding motorcycle safety. In the 30 states that require the wearing of helmets, deaths in 1967 decreased as much as 50 percent (in New York) from the previous year. On the other hand, California-which leads the nation in total motorcycle registrations, but has no protective helmet law-saw a 9 percent increase in motorcycle fatalities.

Eighteen states require a special licensing test; 16 demand special motorcycle safety equipment and 14 limit lane-of-traffic use and the number allowed to ride a motorcycle at once.

"Probably the special license test is especially important, "Pyle said, "since earlier studies showed that a large proportion of motorcycle accidents occur during the first one or two times an individual takes a machine out for a run. And the helmet is a direct antidote for the high frequency of head injuries-the number one cause of motorcycle deaths.

"Dr. William Had don, Jr., director of the National Highway Safety Bureau, has been confronted by many problems and challenges as he has worked to implement the important traffic safety legislation passed in 1966. The traffic problem is a difficult and complex one, and the solutions are not easy.

"It should be a great source of gratification to Dr. Hadd on and his associates to begin to see some payoff from the additional safety measures. Since there is mounting evidence that the collapsible steering columns are saving lives, we can now add the important encouragement of motorcycle legislation to continue the fight against traffic accidents. ’’

I feel that a law requiring separate licensing for motorcycles is in order. Or, after passing the test, a rider should have a restricted license requiring him to wear a helmet during his first year of riding. After that, it should be up to the individual whether or not he elects to wear a helmet.

DANA BEESLEY Burbank, Calif.

"POLICE THEMSELVES"

I saw Sgt. Heinz’ letter in the April Legislation Forum and thought I might have some information that could be helpful.

I spent 12 years in the Navy and saw quite a few bases where motorcycles were either banned or limited in horsepower. Upon arriving at a base in Maryland, I found that two-wheeled vehicles were allowedmotorscooters only. And the traffic officer’s definition of a motorscooter was vague indeed. A chief petty officer, who was an avid motorcyclist, investigated the matter and learned that no one in base security knew enough about motorcycles to properly hold safety inspections on them. I believe the security personnel didn’t want the added work of policing the wild element they were secretly afraid would be generated by having motorcycles on the base.

The Chief proposed the forming of a Navy motorcycle club to police themselves, hold safety inspections on members’ bikes, and insure that the bikes were properly registered and insured. The base commander, a reasonable man, consented and our club was bornAMA chartered, I might add.

The requirements were that the motorcycles were inspected twice yearly for mufflers, brakes, lights, and the like. Members were required to attend a specified number of meetings. (Missing more than the maximum number of meetings meant expulsion from the club and subsequent removal of base sticker by the security department.) We kept safety foremost and did not have an accident or an incident on the base while I was a member. Eventually, with a change of security officers, restrictions on two-wheelers were lifted altogether. 1 don’t know if our fine safety record had anything to do with it or not, but 1 like to think so.

(Continued on page 58)

I am living in Minnesota now and have found this state also is passing legislation on motorcycle safety. The first is a helmet law that is vague enough to allow a cyclist to wear his helmet on his arm or leg and fulfill the letter of the law. The second is a provision for motorcycle drivers’ licenses. I view these laws with mixed emotions. I’ve worn a helmet for years, but I don’t like to be told I have to wear one. However, that is what I would probably tell my son were he old enough to have a cycle. As for the licensing, I don’t like the idea of taking another driver’s test,but it seems that there are quite a few young people getting into trouble because of little or no previous training. However, I am going to find out who my representative in the state legislature is and try to do my part to prevent needless and fumbling laws.

PATRICK QUICK Prior Lake, Minn.

"THE CHOICE"

I have written many letters to my senators and representatives and have finally found out who is originating the motorcycling laws in Illinois. This is the Department of Public Safety. I wrote the department and received the enclosed letter. I feel that if this department is the originator of bills here, this also may be the case in other states. I wish to take this time to urge those who are writing to their senators and representatives to also write to their departments of public safety. 1 do not oppose wearing helmets, but I think that the choice should be up to the rider and not as a mandatory law.

Thank you for your recent letter suggesting changes in the motorcycle protective equipment laws.

Your statement. ‘7 do not like to be protected from myself. ” is the basis of all law from the beginning of time. Laws are passed for the protection of the majority. If the individual does not care to protect himself, society has the responsibility to enact laws to protect the individual from himself.

, The motorcycle laws are not. however, passed just to protect the motorcyclists; they are for protection of all members of the motoring public on the highways of the state of Illinois.

Thomas L. O’Connor Major-Special Services State of Illinois Department of Public Safety Springfield, Illinois STEVE ARTEMAN Heyworth, 111.

"ACTIVE INTEREST"

The compulsory helmet bill did not pass the Virginia General Assembly! A large number of motorcyclists in this state responded to our call for letters and voiced their opinions on this matter. Several delegates said they were amazed at the number of people who took an active interest in this piece of legislation. Mr. Bob Myers, a dealer from nearby Maryland, also did a great deal of work in our behalf.

Motorcyclists of Virginia owe a special vote of thanks to delegates Junie Bradshaw of Henrico County and the city of Richmond, and Wallace G. Dickson of Arlington County. Without their help our job would have been much more difficult-even impossible.

WILLIAM & JANET BLOOM Baileys Crossroads, Va.

"APPALLED"

I have just finished rereading for about the tenth time a letter from an “on-again, offagain” motorcyclist in New Mexico who has nothing but praise for proposed legislation in his state which would ban the sale of twowheeled motor vehicles with left foot brakes and right foot gear shifts. I was fascinated, and appalled, that any state legislature would take such an incredible position. It would be far better for them to propose regulations which would screen out license applicants who cannot tell their right foot from their left, before they have a chance to become “off-again” riders.

I’m sure that the worthy legislators of New Mexico can take little solace in knowing that they are supported by someone who, using his own fantastic brand of logic, would have motorcycle design regress to the era of the tank shift and the suicide foot clutch.

As you may have guessed, I happen to own one of those imports (British) with a left foot brake-right foot shift arrangement, and have never confused the two. Moreover, I believe that an habitual reaction by anyone to a “Stop” situation with only the right foot and without any capacity for variation is certainly grounds for questioning the physical, perhaps even the mental competence of such a person.

Please accept my gratitude for offering a magazine of sufficient scope to include a Legislation Forum where the misguided proposals of uninformed legislators can be aired.

R.T. ZIMMERMAN Glen Ridge, N.J.

"THE BOTTLE"

I must praise your campaign against restrictive motorcycle legislation, but I wonder how many senators, representatives or congressmen read your fine publication-one out of a thousand, maybe?

I think interested groups, clubs, and/or individuals should take up collections to send their senators subscriptions of CYCLE WORLD and any local publications on motorcycling. Through these channels I believe it would be easier to bottle unwanted legislation. The larger the number of people that contribute toward a subscription, the less the expense per person. Individual contributions for a one-year subscription could cost less than the price of one letter to a congressman, and probably do more good.

I don’t advocate stoppage of letters to congressmen, but this is another way of pushing our point home. You will find enclosed a check for a year’s subscription for my senator, the Honorable William B. Waters.

CHARLES CONWAY Warrewsbury, Miss.