Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!im4u!ut-sally!pyramid!hplabs!oracle!donn
From: donn@oracle.UUCP (Kevin Donn)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.cycle,net.auto
Subject: Re: Seat belts, Helmets and Freedom of Choice
Message-ID: <461@oracle.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 28-Jul-86 18:19:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: oracle.461
Posted: Mon Jul 28 18:19:55 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 30-Jul-86 03:47:09 EDT
References: <5348@sun.uucp>
Reply-To: donn@oracle.UUCP (Kevin Donn)
Distribution: net
Organization: Oracle, Belmont Ca
Lines: 41
Xref: watmath net.politics:17815 net.cycle:1865 net.auto:11951

In article <5348@sun.uucp> mwicks@sun.uucp (Michael Wicks) writes:
>
>  I find it interesting that Californians have a MANDATORY
>  seat belt law in effect that no one in particular seems to object to,
>  and, I would gather, that most people adhere to. It appears to me that
>  sane motorists have accepted the fact that seat belts save lives and
>  it isn't that big of a deal and their choice is to comply with the law.
>  Motorcyclists have no such restrictions placed upon them, even though
>  their vehicles are far more dangerous to them than if they were in an
>  enclosed 4 wheel vehicle. Why is this? Is there a lobby that bikers
>  have that speaks up whenever a helmet law is mentioned? Why would the
>  persons who wrote and voted for the seat belt law NOT consider a
>  helmet law?

First of all, there are plenty of people who object (and objected) to
the passing of a seat belt law.  The fact that it got passed anyway is
not at all indicative of the people's will.  What happened was one of
the "those who know what's best for us" groups decided we needed to have
air bags in our cars a couple years ago and pushed an airbag law through
congress.  Now the car manufacturers weren't too carried away with this
because it would cost them money to develop and implement airbags, so 
they employed their own lobby to have the final draft of the bill say
that airbags would be mandatory if by mmddyy, xx% of the driving populace
weren't wearing seatbelts.  This served to buy them time to start putting
pressure on state legislatures to pass seat belt laws.  California 
represented a lot of drivers so it got hit early on and was eventually
won over, a victory for big business.  But who got their rights walked
all over?  You got it, the only group without a lobby, the Joe "head up
his hiney" American group, the voters (who never really got to vote on
the whole deal).  So don't think for a minute that the seat belt law
(whether or not it can be considered a good thing) was called for by
the people.  As for helmet laws, you're absolutely right that there
are lobbies of cyclists who are willing to defend their right to splatter
their head all over the pavement.  I personally am a helmet advocate,
but I recognize that it should be the individual's decision to wear
or not wear a helmet while riding a bike, to wear or not wear goggles
while operating a circular saw, to wear or not wear a coat on a winter
day.


Kevin Donn