Originally Posted by
MMACH 5
....I also oppose restricting lawful gvn ownership, but I don't own a gvn, nor do I want to. I don't smoke, but I hate that there are sin taxes on cigarettes. I'm not gay but I oppose laws keeping them from marrying.
My point in all of these is that none of them have any direct effect on me, but I do oppose them. From the same angle, I wear a helmet every time I ride a bicycle, so MHLs won't change how I go about my riding. However, laws making helmets mandatory are overreaching and counterproductive.
I've spoken out against MHLs at numerous bicycle committee and city council meetings. I rode my bicycle to each one and spoke with my helmet in my hand. I don't think my position is disingenuous or dishonest.
You and I are aligned on the political issues, and I don't think that speaking out against laws that don't affect you is hypocritical. However, when you speak out at public hearings with your helmet in view, there's the risk that the audience will respond to the the helmet more than your words. In their minds question may not be "will this law save lives?", but instead "do helmets save lives?" and they'll see your helmet as an affirmation of that.
The leap between the two questions is often too high for legislators who want to be on record as "doing the right thing". Despite Ben Franklin's warning, freedom has a poor win/lose record when up against safety.