JRA
I don't want to start another helmet debate (there are enough of those) but I'm wondering about the enforceability of local mandatory helmet laws.
The article:
City of St. Charles requires bike helmets for kids 15 and under (http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/1647C60866AA2C3186257190001CE57C?OpenDocument)
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH - 06/18/2006
got me wondering about the legality of local helmet laws that would seem to conflict with state law.
I'm especially wondering how a community can enforce a mandatory helmet law against an adult, especially an adult who doesn't live in that municipality.
From the article:
"At least 26 municipalities in St. Louis County have such laws. So does St. Louis County for its unincorporated areas..."
"Some communities, such as Town and Country, impose the requirements on adults as well. Town and Country also forgives its fine if a violator buys a helmet and shows the city a sales receipt."
How in Sam Hill can a city require someone passing through that city to have equipment not required by state law?
Missouri has no state helmet law for children or adults.
State law specifically gives municipalities the right establish some local traffic regulations (set speed limits on some roads, one way streets, etc.) but I don't see where it gives municipalities the right to add to vehicle equipment requirements.
How can that Town and Country law stand up in court?
Even the St. Charles law seem a little suspect:
"Police have yet to announce how it will be enforced..."
"Chief Tim Swope says... he expects that officers who encounter kids without helmets will simply contact parents to tell them about the new law."
I wonder what would happen if a parent challenged the fine.
And another thing:
The St. Charles law authorizes fines of as much as $50 for parents of children caught riding without helmets. How can that be when, if I'm reading it correctly, state laws sets a maximum fine for an equipment violation of $25?
Are these laws are enforceable or are these municipalities just blowing smoke?
The article:
City of St. Charles requires bike helmets for kids 15 and under (http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/1647C60866AA2C3186257190001CE57C?OpenDocument)
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH - 06/18/2006
got me wondering about the legality of local helmet laws that would seem to conflict with state law.
I'm especially wondering how a community can enforce a mandatory helmet law against an adult, especially an adult who doesn't live in that municipality.
From the article:
"At least 26 municipalities in St. Louis County have such laws. So does St. Louis County for its unincorporated areas..."
"Some communities, such as Town and Country, impose the requirements on adults as well. Town and Country also forgives its fine if a violator buys a helmet and shows the city a sales receipt."
How in Sam Hill can a city require someone passing through that city to have equipment not required by state law?
Missouri has no state helmet law for children or adults.
State law specifically gives municipalities the right establish some local traffic regulations (set speed limits on some roads, one way streets, etc.) but I don't see where it gives municipalities the right to add to vehicle equipment requirements.
How can that Town and Country law stand up in court?
Even the St. Charles law seem a little suspect:
"Police have yet to announce how it will be enforced..."
"Chief Tim Swope says... he expects that officers who encounter kids without helmets will simply contact parents to tell them about the new law."
I wonder what would happen if a parent challenged the fine.
And another thing:
The St. Charles law authorizes fines of as much as $50 for parents of children caught riding without helmets. How can that be when, if I'm reading it correctly, state laws sets a maximum fine for an equipment violation of $25?
Are these laws are enforceable or are these municipalities just blowing smoke?