Vancouver WA Passes All Ages Helmet Law

[randya]

http://bikeportland.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/vancouver-city-council-passes-helmet-law-1.jpg

...given the emotional positions of a majority of Councilmembers, including Mayor Royce Pollard, it seems no amount of opposition could have derailed this from passing.

Mayor Pollard said that Vancouver used to not need a helmet law, but that the “this is a much larger city now.” He added that, “If we can save one child because of this ordinance, or if we can save adult by this ordinance, than the statistics be damned. I support this.”

Pollard, with his own helmet in front of him as a prop, recounted a bad fall he took while riding in Esther Short Park. He told the crowd how he bruised his hip and scraped his shoulder; but because he was wearing his helmet his head was fine.

He concluded his testimony by saying that, “We will do everything we can to see that every child who can’t afford a helmet will get a helmet, the rest of you are on your own.”

Councilmember Jeanne Harris also had a personal story to share; she hit a man on a bike when she was 21 while pulling out of a fast food restaurant. But, because he was wearing a helmet, “He walked away from it,” she recalled, “I can’t tell you how it affected me that I could have hurt somebody…You can’t plan not to have an accident and that is what this is about. I don’t know if it’s going to help, but I don’t think it can hurt. It’s the responsible thing for the city to do.”

Councilmember Pat Jollota also told of a “life-changing experience” she had that helped form her opinion on this issue: A visit to a brain injury ward. Her justification for supporting the law is that brain injuries lead to a financial burden on the state. “It’s not that I have the right to go out without a helmet and if I hurt myself it’s my problem, it’s not, it’s society’s problem, because we’re the ones that have to take care of you when it’s over with. It’s not you that you have to worry about, it’s everyone else who has to worry about you.”

A similar sentiment was shared by Councilmembers Larry Smith and Tim Leavitt.

Smith said for him, it comes down to his personal principals and values. “It comes back to who I am, and my value systems and what I believe in…The most important thing I do, is provide safety for the community. If I can save a life or an injury, how much does that cost…to a family?”

He added, “This is the right thing to do, I believe and support helmets for all ages. Why not?”

full story (http://bikeportland.org/2008/02/25/vancouver-passes-all-ages-helmet-law/)

[bizzz111]

Mayor Pollard said that Vancouver used to not need a helmet law, but that the “this is a much larger city now.” He added that, “If we can save one child because of this ordinance, or if we can save adult by this ordinance, than the statistics be damned. I support this.”


Ahh good to see the nanny state alive and well. Wonder when he'll demand that the speed limit be changed to 10mph throughout his city? That act alone would save more than just one life. Or ban prescription drugs? Or toasters, ladders, bb guns, etc. Thank god we have such benevolent people serving in our highest offices, otherwise we might have to think for ourselves, and we all know what kind of trouble that leads to.

[closetbiker]

I wonder if Mayor Pollard knows if or how many lives are lost each year and if he does what he will say when the number doesn't change.

I pulled out an old newspaper clipping from before we passed our MHL and the columnist said essentially the same thing. Funny thing was, was that were more deaths in the 3 years after the law was passed than the 3 years before the law was passed. Averaged out over 10 years before and after the law passed shows the same number of deaths.

I also kept a different clipping from the same time by the "commuting cyclist" columnist. He was much more realistic over the legislation and pointed out an example of a cyclist dying from head injury presented by the coroner but pointed out that coroner didn't mention that the dead cyclist was riding at night on the wrong side of the road with no lighting in the pouring rain. Was the helmet the issue there?

Helmet laws can be passed for any number of reasons, but saving lives can never be used truthfully for one of them.

The best you can say is that if the MHL keeps people from riding bikes, they reduce injury and deaths of people on bikes because the people are keeping off the bikes.

[linux_author]

- can you drive and use a cell phone at the same time in vancouver?

[Blue Order]

- can you drive and use a cell phone at the same time in vancouver?No...and yes. (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9019323)

[Zorba]

Ahh good to see the nanny state alive and well. Wonder when he'll demand that the speed limit be changed to 10mph throughout his city? That act alone would save more than just one life. Or ban prescription drugs? Or toasters, ladders, bb guns, etc. Thank god we have such benevolent people serving in our highest offices, otherwise we might have to think for ourselves, and we all know what kind of trouble that leads to.

+1

Only in America - although this crap is spreading worldwide - just like Politically Correct NewSpeak is...

[closetbiker]

Ahhh... I get it. The motivation for this law probably came from this story from 1 year ago

http://www.kgw.com/neighborhood/vancouver/stories/kgw_040107_news_girl_killed.21bba6b2.html

where a five-year-old Vancouver girl was killed after she was hit by a neighbor's pickup truck. She died at SW Washington Medical Center from severe head trauma and was not wearing a helmet when she was hit.

After watching the council meeting giving the public a hearing on the proposed law, I was amazed at the naïveté of the folks there.

[-=£em in Pa=-]

The irony is choking me !!!!!
A councilwomen hits a cyclist and then makes a helmet law.....huh !?!?!?
Hey @$$hat, how about a law that raises standards for people prone to
running their car into other people ??

[SpaceNerd]

I think this is great! Not necessarily because I think that the government (city, state, any) should force people to wear helmets but because if the law is actually enforced as a legit law then hopefully we will have some data that at least suggests that wearing helmets provides more (more, not the be all that ends all solution, just more) safety than not wearing helmets.

[randya]

they didn't collect or analyze any data in support of passing this misguided ordinance, what makes you think they will collect any data afterwards?

my prediction: cyclists will continue to die on the unfriendly streets of Vantucky

[TRaffic Jammer]

Councilmember Jeanne Harris also had a personal story to share; she hit a man on a bike when she was 21 while pulling out of a fast food restaurant. But, because he was wearing a helmet, “He walked away from it,” she recalled, “I can’t tell you how it affected me that I could have hurt somebody…You can’t plan not to have an accident and that is what this is about. I don’t know if it’s going to help, but I don’t think it can hurt. It’s the responsible thing for the city to do.”

:lol: What a freak! Could have hurt? She's soooo clueless. Could have killed is more like it. It blows me away to read that she doesn't take any responsibility for the fact she hit this guy. Lady... had you been looking left and right before entering the roadway you wouldn;t have hit this guy at all. I'm so glad this terrible experience put you on the right path. Frikken motorist politicians.

I'm all for minors in helmets, but quite frankly the cost of trying to enforce an all ages helmet law? Many of the kids (and by logical extension?...parents) around here ignore the helmet law as well.

So when do the motorists start wearing helmets, b/c you know.. if you can just one life...

[Helmet Head]

Councilmember Jeanne Harris also had a personal story to share; she hit a man on a bike when she was 21 while pulling out of a fast food restaurant. But, because he was wearing a helmet, “He walked away from it,” she recalled, “I can’t tell you how it affected me that I could have hurt somebody…You can’t plan not to have an accident and that is what this is about. I don’t know if it’s going to help, but I don’t think it can hurt. It’s the responsible thing for the city to do.”

:lol: What a freak! Could have hurt? She's soooo clueless. Could have killed is more like it. It blows me away to read that she doesn't take any responsibility for the fact she hit this guy. Lady... had you been looking left and right before entering the roadway you wouldn;t have hit this guy at all. I'm so glad this terrible experience put you on the right path. Frikken motorist politicians.

I'm all for minors in helmets, but quite frankly the cost of trying to enforce an all ages helmet law? Many of the kids (and by logical extension?...parents) around here ignore the helmet law as well.

So when do the motorists start wearing helmets, b/c you know.. if you can just one life...
I think you're putting more faith into looking than it warrants. Looking is not the same as noticing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for looking both ways, but if you think that doing so guarantees you will not overlook a cyclist, or even a car or a bus, you're deluding yourself. That's why it's important for everyone to be paying attention, and not assuming that the right of way will be properly granted to you.

But, as a cyclist, it helps to know what the right of way rules are, and what behavior is consistent with yielding right of way to you, and what behavior is not. Further, it's helpful to know what to do to reduce your chances of being overlooked (starting with not riding where motorists don't drive, and generally don't pay much attention).

[closetbiker]

so, what's your take HH? yes or no to the MHL?

[CB HI]

I think this is great! Not necessarily because I think that the government (city, state, any) should force people to wear helmets but because if the law is actually enforced as a legit law then hopefully we will have some data that at least suggests that wearing helmets provides more (more, not the be all that ends all solution, just more) safety than not wearing helmets.Will your data also show how many more heart attacks and stokes occur because people stop cycling as a result of the mandatory helmet law?

[StrangeWill]

Wonder when he'll demand that the speed limit be changed to 10mph throughout his city? That act alone would save more than just one life.

I wouldn't be surprised if cyclists here would rally for a 25mph speed limit. ;)

[closetbiker]

I wouldn't be surprised if cyclists here would rally for a 25mph speed limit. ;)

but you're forgetting. It doesn't matter what the cyclists think, it matters what the motorists think.

If cyclists wear helmets, they don't have to drive any safer.

[SpaceNerd]

they didn't collect or analyze any data in support of passing this misguided ordinance, what makes you think they will collect any data afterwards?

my prediction: cyclists will continue to die on the unfriendly streets of Vantucky

Seeing as they'll probably have a lot of angry citizens they'll probably be collecting data that they figure will support their decision. That's the way most people try to defend themselves.

[closetbiker]

out of a town of 150,000 they probably have less than 500 cyclists who don't like this.

(I'm guessing 1% of people ride regularly, half already wear helmets, a portion of the non-wearers will put one on, another portion will just stop riding, leaving maybe 500 cyclists bothered - If I remember right, there was only 1 cyclist out of 8 who spoke out against the legislation in the council meeting)

The rest of the people in town won't care and will probably look at anyone against the legislation as a kooky nut (after all, it's for their own good)!

And besides, this gives the police a legitimate reason for an otherwise illegal search and seizure if they spot a rubby looking individual riding a bike without a helmet. No telling what they may find on a person like that. (There's a war on drugs dontcha know)

Get ready for the "helmet saved his life" stories in local media now that council has passed this.

[gpsblake]

And besides, this gives the police a legitimate reason for an otherwise illegal search and seizure if they spot a rubby looking individual riding a bike without a helmet. No telling what they may find on a person like that. (There's a war on drugs dontcha know).

+1 - That's the only time it will be enforced.

Now if they really want to save a bunch of lives, they should require all motorist to wear a motorcycle helmet, that would cut down the deaths in vehicle accidents by half.

[John E]

I wouldn't be surprised if cyclists here would rally for a 25mph speed limit. ;)

Don't knock it. I am actively participating in a citizens' group which wants to calm traffic from 40mph / 65kph to 25-30mph / 40-50kph on Coast Highway 101 through the Leucadia business district. The current speed limit is too high for a street with storefronts, on-street parking, and numerous intersections and driveway cuts. We already provide a network of high-speed streets for the exclusive use of motorists -- why not slow traffic a bit on the rest of the road system?

[closetbiker]

Don't knock it. I am actively participating in a citizens' group which wants to calm traffic from 40mph / 65kph to 25-30mph / 40-50kph on Coast Highway 101 through the Leucadia business district. The current speed limit is too high for a street with storefronts, on-street parking, and numerous intersections and driveway cuts. We already provide a network of high-speed streets for the exclusive use of motorists -- why not slow traffic a bit on the rest of the road system?

Good work. That's a much more effective form of cycling advocacy and safety than a MHL. Drivers have to accept some responsibility and alter proven dangerous behavior for things to be safer for cyclists.

[WaltPoutine]

Don't knock it. I am actively participating in a citizens' group which wants to calm traffic from 40mph / 65kph to 25-30mph / 40-50kph on Coast Highway 101 through the Leucadia business district. The current speed limit is too high for a street with storefronts, on-street parking, and numerous intersections and driveway cuts. We already provide a network of high-speed streets for the exclusive use of motorists -- why not slow traffic a bit on the rest of the road system?

Good work.I'm doing the same in my neighborhood in attempting to turn a one-way street back into a two-way street with lower speed limits. There's a lot of opposition except from people that live there. I think the business angle which you mention, of the speed being too high for stores, is a good one to push.

[Hobartlemagne]

"statistics be damned"

Get rid of any politician who says this.

[donnamb]

The only thing I'll buy in Vancouver, WA now is Zyrtec D.