MANDATORY HELMET LAW

Submitted by stu8163 t3_121ya69 in Connecticut

MANDATORY HELMET LAW FOR ALL MOTORCYCLISTS, SPEED TRAP CAMERAS AND RED LIGHT CAMERAS THAT REQUIRE RIGHT TURN ON RED TO BE ILLEGAL. House bill 5917 has passed the transportation committee and is now headed to the House of Representatives. Section 3a mandates helmet use for all motorcyclists and passengers regardless of age, previously 18 and under only. This is a loss of our freedom of choice! Section 16 implements use of 10 mph over posted limit speed cameras and failure to wait for a green light camera which makes right turn on red illegal. Which in my town keep a lot of traffic moving. A list of Representatives, Senators and Congresspersons can be found @ www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/cgafind.asp Please contact your representatives and voice your opinion on theses issues. For another source of information search THECMRA.com. Thanks for reading.

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

OrneryVoice1 t1_jdobnts wrote

Not a fan of any electronic surveillance, and we already have far too much in this country. However, I do not have a problem with helmet laws as they are there for your own protection.

17

Smith-WessonPat t1_jdog1gx wrote

As a motorcycle rider, I think you are absolutely insane to not wear a helmet. However, as with most things, I don't see how this is the government's business!

As a side note, with the absolutely massive bugs and moths I have had to scrape off of my screen, how the hell do you non-helmet guys deal with it?

12

Neek_At_Nite t1_jdqz07g wrote

Was riding with my visor open and took a bumble bee just under the eye doing like 40-45, wasn’t not the most pleasant feeling while going down the road

2

No_Half_8468 t1_jdo0g5j wrote

I just want a stipulation that if you ride without a helmet and turn yourself into a vegetable after an accident that you waive your right to disability payment. Cameras are tough. There’s the exit ramp from rt8 in Shelton at the top of Warner hill. Every morning two or three people run the red. I’ve seen so many accidents there. Things like a camera would definitely stop that but i don’t love a computer just spitting out tickets.

10

[deleted] t1_jdo29dg wrote

>I just want a stipulation that if you ride without a helmet and turn yourself into a vegetable after an accident that you waive your right to disability payment

That would be great, but I doubt it would be seriously taken up for reasons. I'm also not a fan of speed/red light cameras because the companies that make them generally do not like releasing the source code, which is problematic if you're defending yourself against a ticket.

5

Xyldarran t1_jdobygd wrote

I mean the helmet law is whatever, but the camera aspect has to go.

7

JustADudeBeingADood t1_jdolzzu wrote

How is this any different from seatbelt laws? Enough dumbass riders turn their heads into preventable cherry pie to create a burden on the rest of society.

Are you also going to fight against seat belts?

7

Gooniefarm t1_jdocd1l wrote

Automated fines are just a money grab. They fine the owner of the car, not the actual driver who broke the law.

Helmets should be required. We have to wear seat belts, and helmets on pedal bikes, why not helmets on motorcycles? Not wearing a helmet on a bike should result in your health insurance denying any claims from a crash. If you refuse to wear a basic safety device proven to reduce injuries, you can pay your own hospital bills.

5

pond_minnow t1_jdooj2o wrote

Already contacted mine in opposition of this bill.

3

NLCmanure t1_jdqqsad wrote

I'm neither for nor against the helmet law but I think it is very wise to wear one. I have always worn a seatbelt even before it became mandatory. When I used to ride the helmet was always on my head. You don't have to be moving to smack your head. I'm embarrassed to say this but a helmet saved my head once. I came up to a traffic light and came to a stop but I couldn't get my foot out because a boot lace got entangled in the frame of my bike and down I went, very fast.. Smacked my head on the ground hard enough to see stars.

3

AdHistorical7107 t1_jdodc6o wrote

Sounds like some folks are against getting caught....

1

mynameisnotshamus t1_jdomwml wrote

It’s more the idea of constant surveillance. It’s the principle more than the act and is definitely a precedent setting / slippery slope situation.

5

AdHistorical7107 t1_jdont1l wrote

Then get off your computer, cell phone, and reddit. Because guess what, they are tracking you...

0

mynameisnotshamus t1_jdoo0xr wrote

Of course. That’s a horrible argument for this however.

2

AdHistorical7107 t1_jdookwx wrote

Your argument is constant surveillance. I literally just showed you how you are constantly surveilled and now you say it's a bad argument...

Just... wow....

−1

Formal_Asparagus_987 t1_jdpi0yu wrote

I have to disagree with you. I think it’s good. There’s been too many pedestrians dying just for walking it’s so sad. I think we need the cameras and speed traps. It will force people to slow down. People are driving in the streets like how they drive on the highways. It’s really sad.

1

redcapmilk t1_jdrln69 wrote

Not when the organ donation supply is so low.

1

awebr t1_jdom8bf wrote

Repeal seatbelt laws! This is a loss of our freedom of choice!

There's also no such thing as a "green light camera" and nothing in the bill is wholesale banning right turn on red. In dense downtown areas with a lot of pedestrian traffic, restricting right on red absolutely makes sense, in rural areas, not so much.

And regarding automated enforcement, do people really think stationing armed officers at a couple intersections around town to catch red light runners is the best means of enforcement? A camera works 24/7 and frees up officers to attend to actual police matters and not just traffic duty. I've watched officers pull people over for a couple days at a big problem intersection in New Haven - the issue is that once an officer is busy issuing a ticket, the intersection is completely unenforced for the next 10 minutes. Traffic duty is a strain on our officers and we have the technology to fix it. For the most part, the people scared of automated red light / speed enforcement are the ones who have enjoyed breaking the law to save 30 seconds on their commute.

0

mynameisnotshamus t1_jdon8qy wrote

I’m questioning that you saw someone in New Haven get pulled over for a traffic infraction. I’ve never heard of that happening. /s , but seriously… I’ve never seen it or heard of it happening. I know at one point in the 90’s the police were told not to.

1

awebr t1_jdqw4e0 wrote

I know it was an incredible sight! It's actually happened a few times at the new intersection of the route 34 connector and orange st. There's red light runners essentially every single cycle of the signal because people are flying off the highway and not following the reduced speed limit signs in advance of the signal (although I don't fully blame them, nothing was done to change the design of the road to make it feel less like a highway) so there's been some targeted enforcement there.

2

friedchicken_2020 t1_jdqkazn wrote

This is all shit for you city dwellers to deal with. Out here in the sticks we do what we want. I see a trooper maybe once a week and no town police

0

Boring_Garbage3476 t1_jdt4css wrote

No police needed with red light and speed enforcement cameras. You just get the ticket in the mail.

1

friedchicken_2020 t1_jdt6e2y wrote

Thanks....I know how it works.

My town has one stop light...I'm less then concerned.

1

Boring_Garbage3476 t1_jdt8hq7 wrote

Mine has 5. But I'm more concerned about speed enforcement cameras.

1

friedchicken_2020 t1_jdt96vv wrote

I just don't see it happening out here. It's totally possible but I just don't see them spending the money out here. Maybe at the one stoplight because of the school

1

Boring_Garbage3476 t1_jdta3nc wrote

Don't be so sure. Speed cameras are a cash cow. Every state road produces the milk. You think the state won't spend a few thousand to get year round income from a small town?

1

friedchicken_2020 t1_jdth3ch wrote

I think they'll spend the money just so they can raise taxes....lol I'm not really worried about it out here. Some crafty redneck will disconnect it. This state gets out money every possible way they can

1