Helmets: Are We For or Against Them This Week?



Hey. If I have to wear a helmet when
I'm on my hog...so should they!

We’ve mentioned in the past that the Legislative Session can sometimes make for strange bedfellows. Here’s another head-scratcher of an example:

On February 14, a representative for ABATE of Maryland, a motorcyclist group that turns out in force each year to oppose mandatory helmet laws, showed up to argue FOR the required use of helmets.

This testimony came during the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee’s hearing of SB 309, which we talked about last week. In addition to titling, registering and insuring mopeds and scooters, this law would require all riders of these vehicles to wear helmets and protective eye wear. The representative from ABATE argued that while their organization doesn’t agree that an adult should be required to wear a helmet, if motorcyclists have to wear them, then those driving scooters and mopeds should have to as well.

Ah, yes. The classic, “why do they get to do it if I can’t?!” argument. The go-to debating tool of first-graders, everywhere.

But wait, the story doesn’t end there. Just one week later, members of ABATE showed up in the same chamber, to testify in front of the same committee against mandatory helmet laws. (SB 488) Scooters and mopeds were again referenced when one motorcyclist asked the committee why people on scooters could make the choice to ride without a helmet, but he couldn’t.

Are we all thoroughly confused yet? Par for the course in Annapolis.