Angry Bikers Take Aim at Mandatory Helmet Laws

The accelerating anger of 1,000 motorcyclists who rumbled through Griffith Park was aimed at one thing: kicking up umbrage over a law making it mandatory that they wear helmets.

The majority of those who showed up at the May 22 protest were outlaw types: classically tattooed and long-haired. Others were just biking enthusiasts.

Most were members of ABATE, an organization geared solely at stopping helmet laws and working with the comparatively staid American Motorcyclist Assn.

All were angry at AB 36, the mandatory helmet law passed by the California Legislature and awaiting Gov. George Deukmejian’s signature. All believed that their side of the issue had gone unheard.

The legislators had argued that the law would cut the cost of public medical care by reducing serious injuries.

The 140,000-member motorcyclist association agreed that it was a dollars-and-cents issue. But the group used different numbers and arrived at a different answer.

“A lot of people will just give up motorcycling,” the association’s Jim Bensberg said. “Sales tax and vehicle fees will be lost and the impact will be tremendous.”

In Louisiana, a helmet law went on the books in 1982, causing motorcycle sales to drop 6.5% in the state at a time when sales were up everywhere else in the country, Bensberg said.

“If you project just a 5% drop in sales, considering that an average bike costs about $2,000 . . . you would expect the state of California to lose $792,000 in sales tax alone (in the first year of the helmet law),” he said.

Robert Terry, legislative assistant to the sponsor of the bill, Assemblyman Dick Floyd (D-Gardena), said the helmet law was backed by insurance and other groups that “represent 9 million members.”

“Several million medical tax dollars are being spent for motorcyclists to express their freedom of choice,” Terry said.

For even stronger stuff, Floyd had Mary Price of Sacramento on his side.

Price’s son died as the result of a motorcycle crash two years ago. He had suffered head injuries. He had not been wearing a helmet.

The issue was emotional enough to prompt the birth of ABATE, the group that sponsored the Griffith Park rally to draw attention to the bill and urge the governor not to sign it.

AB 36 was the first helmet bill that had made it to the Capitol floor in a quarter-century. “We were simply caught off guard,” said ABATE’s David Phillips of a May 19 Senate vote that approved the law.

“California is a free-rights state,” he said. “Nobody thought it would get passed.”

Phillips contends that about 60% of California’s estimated 700,000 bikers already wear helmets regularly and criticized legislators for taking the position that “we’re responsible enough to elect the President of the United States but not responsible enough to determine whether we should wear an extraneous piece of clothing.”

Both the motorcyclist association and ABATE want the helmet law scrapped and replaced with training programs to make car drivers more aware of motorcyclists and to ensure that motorcyclists can handle their machines.

California already mandates a special training program for motorcyclists under 18, but Phillips noted that the program has been in place for less than a year and said its impact has yet to be felt.

Many legislators who back mandatory helmets believe that a helmet law combined with strong education would provide the best protection for motorcycle riders.

“One of the issues opponents use says we have a training program on line in the state,” Terry said. “Maybe we should have both training and helmets.”