In Defense of Bike Helmet Bill

New Jersey recently passed a state bicycle helmet law requiring children under 14 to wear helmets. Unfortunately, this week California’s state Assembly dealt a temporary setback to Senate Bill 1878, authored by Sen. Marian Bergeson. Her bill, which we expect will be resubmitted, would permit local jurisdictions to require children under age 16 to wear helmets. To help clarify the intent of this bill, which we strongly support, we wish to comment on two letters of opposition by Mark O’Connell and Jeff Diamond which appeared July 5 (“Bike Helmet Law Isn’t Needed but Safe Cycling Is”).

Although we agree with certain aspects of these two letters, we do not come to the same conclusions. Mark O’Connell, we feel, misunderstands the intent of SB 1878 when he concludes that it is just “another layer of Big Brotherism that we just do not need in our lives.” To us, SB 1878 is quite the opposite of “Big Brotherism,” as its intent is to return the decision-making regarding bike helmets for children to each individual city, school district or county.

This brings us to the views of Jeff Diamond, that education on safe bicycling is what we need. We completely agree, but find that agreement in no way contradictory to the intent of SB 1878. For the past three years, we and other volunteers have devoted hundreds of hours to the SprocketMan bicycle-safety program in the city of Newport Beach. We began with the premise that educating young children on the rules of the road, the necessity of common courtesy and common sense while riding, and the benefits of wearing bike helmets may lead to a safer generation of cyclists.

As Diamond states, bicycle education is primary, but so is wearing a helmet. We would refer him to statistics from the New England Journal of Medicine that bike helmets reduce the risk of head trauma by 85%. We would even go so far as to predict that bicycle helmets will soon be as commonplace as seat belts and infant restraints in cars.

FRAN FARRER

KAREN EVARTS

Newport Beach