Jindal would eliminate mandatory helmet laws.
Jun 29th, 2007 by Daniel Z.
I’m sure that many people would view this fact as a good thing. However, I had heard that he was going to many biker events and gaining support of bikers by letting them know that they would have a friend in the Governor’s office when it comes to that issue.
These links …
http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=1500892&nav=EyAzImXg
http://pub2.bravenet.com/guestbook/show.php?usernum=156904918&cpv=1
… verify Jindal’s support for the repeal of the helmet law.
At its surface I can see the argument that some try and make about this being an individual liberty issue. I am a strong supporter of limited government interference in our lives. So at the surface it is a good question to ask why government should force people to wear helmets who don’t want to. There is also the concept that if someone wants to take the risk of not wearing a helmet, then why should I stop them from doing so? Darwin would probably have something to say about it as well. Ironic that Jindal would agree with Darwin on something, don’t you think?
The answer is because the issues go far beyond the surface. Helmet laws do not just affect the people who ride. Helmet laws affect insurance rates and health costs, just as seatbelt laws do. Would Congressman Jindal also support repealing mandatory seatbelt laws? If he wouldn’t then he is a hypocrite. If one should have the choice in one then it makes no logical sense to not allow someone to have a choice in the other. And if the effect of repealing the laws have negative effects on other people, then it really isn’t an individual liberty issue after all.
So I come down on the issue as this. If I could be guaranteed that I would incur no additional costs because of a biker’s choice to ride helmet free, then I would have no problem with them eliminating the ban. This would probably require that insurance companies cannot be held liable for additional injury or trauma that would incur because of the lack of helmet. It would also require that hospitals be able to reject a person who wears a helmet that does not have proof of insurance. Since such exceptions are unlikely to pass, I cannot see myself as likely of supporting the repeal. And I think it would be reckless for Jindal to push for a change without protecting the other people of the state who would be affected by such a policy change.
(6 votes, average: 4.33 out of 5)
Loading ...
Loading ...
Why should my taxes pay for their hospital and ambulance bills?
If they want to go without an helmet let them build a private road and waive all public health care benefits for being stupid with their own lives.
That is pretty much what I said.
So this is hear say, Right ?
Has Congressman Jindal or anyone else, actually in spoken or in written word said anything about eliminate mandatory helmet laws.
No one has actually quoted or heard Mr. Jindal in actually saying he wanting to elimate the that law.
Democrat Texas Governor Ann Richards and the Texas legislature eliminate mandatory helmet laws back in 1994.
And the 25 million residents of Texas, didn’t get upset then.
And no one, Democrat nor Republican has presented to bill the reverse that decision and emplement a mandatory helmut law.
Listen I have talked to alot of my friends that would love to not have too wear a helment while riding on a motorbike or motorcycle. You guys come up with the most stupid stuff on this damn fucking website you know that!!!
Ron: I know a lot of people who would love to not wear a helmet when riding a motercycle. Those people do not care about how their decisions affect others. If it was simply a matter of personal choice then they can wear as little protection as possible on the road.
However, it is not as simple as that Ron. Them not wearing helmets will increase the costs for other drivers/riders. We will wind up paying for medical costs (which means higher insurantes rates for us, both health and auto).
Where either in spoken or written words did Bobby Jindal say he would eliminate the helmet law. Bobby Jindal wouldn’t have that authority.
“Jindal would eliminate mandatory helmet laws.”
Keep trying.
We have this stupid brother in law that is fun to have around at family gatherings but you have to keep an eye on him when he is near the fish tank. He is always doing reckless things and putting other people out of their way to bail him out of trouble. I am sure he would love to ride without an helmet. Or a seatbelt for that matter.
New Hampshire does not have a helmet law. The people there are a lot smarter than the Louisiana’s though. But I wonder how much it cost them to keep a bunch of knuckleheads on life support all the time?
One would think that the “healthcare expect” Jindal would understand the impact that repealing the helmet law will have on the health system.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1448295
“This study finds that the current age-restricted version of Florida’s motorcycle helmet law resulted in more motorcyclist deaths even after adjustment for concurrent increases in motorcycle registrations or miles traveled. Exempting adult motorcycle riders from wearing motorcycle helmets is counterproductive for motorcyclists’ health and unnecessarily increases insurance and medical care expenses.”
http://www.prleap.com/pr/16843/
“It was found out that the motorcyclist fatality rate dropped from 10.3 per 10,000 registered motorcycles prelaw to 4.5 postlaw despite almost identical numbers of registered motorcycles. Another finding established was that the motorcyclists wearing helmets had a lower risk of traumatic brain injury than those not wearing helmets. ”
If Jindal is willing to put winning an election before safety, he has no business being our next governor.
Personally, I believe seatbelts and helments should be mandatory for anyone under 18. Any adult (18 or older) who is driving a vehicle where someone under 18 is not wearing a seatbelt should receive a fine as high as $500 1st offense.
As for insurance rates and healthcare costs, anyone injured in an accident who isn’t wearing a helment or seatbelt should have to receive their care soley on their insurance. No insurance, too bad. You chose to ride without recomended safety measures.
Let try this again.
Where either in spoken or written words did Bobby Jindal say he would eliminate the helmet law. Bobby Jindal wouldn’t have that authority.
“Jindal would eliminate mandatory helmet laws.”
Nick: In a vacuum, I agree. However, when you make such a law like this it makes it difficult. Let’s say that you do have insurance but the card was lost in the accident and the person who crashes needs to be rushed to the hospital. Do you not take them to the hospital and then risk finding out that they did actually have insurance? No. You cannot do that. So you have to treat the emergency. Which means that uninsured people would be treated in an emergency and if thye cannot pay for it then we get stuck with the costs.
Roadrunner: I believe I linked to a news story that reported Jindal’s stance on helmet laws. Of course, in order for Jindal to accomplish removing the helmet law, he would need the support of the Legislature. But the fact that he does support the repeal is disturbing.
I am 51 yrs old ! look at Arkansas -no helmet law ! Texas no helmet law! Look at all the rally’s that bring mega money to there states.
Florida , Daytona–millions of dollars spent by bikers
S.Dakota,Sturges–millions & millions of biker money spent there..
New Orleans could be the next place for millions of dollars to be spent by bikers !
you do know that when i say “Bikers” I mean doctors , lawyers,police officers,judges, all kinds of people ! not just a bunch of biker gangs–but everyday people !!!
BOBBY JINDAL IS GOOD FOR LOUISIANA !
WE SHOULD HAVE VOTED HIM IN & NOT blanco !!!!!!!!
Battaglia: Should we eliminate seatbelt laws as well? Why or why not?
And the idea that Jindal would have done better than Blanco is flawed. What proof do you give that Jindal would have done a better job? (And notice I said proof, not speculation).
Yea!!! Sweeping victory for Jindal !!!!
No More helmets !!!!!
Well, we shall see if he keeps that promise to Louisiana’s bikers.
I think the law should stay where you have to wear helments to ride motorbikes. I also think the seatbelt law should stay also and I think both laws will stay bigtime.
I agree with you Ron, both the helmet law and the seatbelt law should be on the books.
**Comments removed because of profanity**