Repealing State’s Helmet Law

Peter King’s column, “Let Freedom Ring . . . (And Skulls Crack)” (Jan. 14) about the pending repeal of the state’s helmet law, is appalling. He argues that taxpayers are benefited [by the helmet law] because government-paid medical care for the injured is reduced. If that’s the justification, then it seems it would follow that we should enact many more freedom-restricting laws to reduce health-related problems.

Reducing the state speed limit to 25 mph would certainly reduce injuries and medical costs. Outlawing the production of alcohol and tobacco would eclipse the life-saving benefits of motorcycle helmets, and so on.

The question is not how many injuries and health problems can be prevented with a new law, but how much freedom should be given to people to do what they wish to do so long as it doesn’t harm others. It sounds like King believes that repeal of the helmet law means you must not now wear a helmet when you ride.

W.J. BOWERS

South Laguna

* “It’s all about freedom.” That’s Gred Seda’s statement, when talking about the motorcycle helmet law (Jan. 9). His statement is true about most laws. They impose restrictions on our freedoms. The irresponsible actions of a few require that every society have laws. But laws should not replace judgment and responsibility.

For example, the I-5 Freeway may have a posted speed of 65 mph, but if the highway is blanketed in a heavy fog, the California Highway Patrol uses the term “prevailing conditions” in determining safe speeds. This determination requires judgment on the part of both the public and the CHP, not just reliance on the posted speed. This should be the deciding factor in more of our laws.

I cherish my freedoms. I just wish our legislators would be a bit more discerning about these freedoms and our judgment and responsibility, when they go about enacting legislation because of irresponsibility.

CUYLER W. WENBERG

Santa Ana

* So the GOP wants to liberate motorcycle riders from the infringement of wearing a helmet? Fine. Let’s put an amendment on the bill which provides that in case bikers suffer injuries they are unencumbered of the right to sue anyone or claim any sort of public assistance, financial or otherwise. Freedom does have a price, doesn’t it?

THOMAS RISCHE

Torrance

* The motorcyclists want the helmet law repealed. The Legislature should accommodate them. Of course, it should have a small proviso--”ride without a helmet and you’ve given your consent to be an organ donor; the organ recipient(s) would make a donation for the burial/memorial of the deceased.”

We have a shortage of human parts for transplants and this would allow the helmetless to reduce the backlog. Of course they have to die first.

BEA GREENAWALT

Fontana