Two Wheel Fix - View Single Post

anthonyk · 04-01-2009, 09:18 AM

I commute the whole length of Mopac every day, and it moves below 20mph for much of that length during rush hour. It pretty much sucks.

I'm still not buying the "freedom" argument, Mike. First, Texas has a helmet law on the books already. Riders are required to wear helmets. There's just an exception specified that says that a peace officer can't arrest you or give you a ticket for it if you meet specific criteria. It may sound like semantics, but the fact is, riding without a helmet in Texas is against the law. Remove that one exception, and riders can start getting ticketed again. In my mind, compared to that, this lanesplitting thing isn't a slippery slope at all.

Also, by supporting this, nobody is really giving up any freedoms. Conversely, nobody is preserving freedoms by opposing it. If this passes, ol' Sputnik and his crew will be in the same position they are now. They won't be able to lanesplit, and won't get penalized for not wearing a helmet. If they successfully kill it, they're in the same position. What's the big deal?

The truth is that the general public thinks motorcyclists are hooligans. We're daredevils who don't care about safety. If they're going to extend us the courtesy of allowing lanesplitting, I think it's reasonable to help reinforce the image (at least) that many motorcyclists are interested in safe and responsible riding. Like it or not, wearing a helmet is associated with being safe and responsible. It's a reasonable tradeoff in my mind.

04-01-2009, 09:18 AM	#72
anthonyk WERA White Plate Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Austin, TX Moto: '01 Aprilia Falco Posts: 1,041	I commute the whole length of Mopac every day, and it moves below 20mph for much of that length during rush hour. It pretty much sucks. I'm still not buying the "freedom" argument, Mike. First, Texas has a helmet law on the books already. Riders are required to wear helmets. There's just an exception specified that says that a peace officer can't arrest you or give you a ticket for it if you meet specific criteria. It may sound like semantics, but the fact is, riding without a helmet in Texas is against the law. Remove that one exception, and riders can start getting ticketed again. In my mind, compared to that, this lanesplitting thing isn't a slippery slope at all. Also, by supporting this, nobody is really giving up any freedoms. Conversely, nobody is preserving freedoms by opposing it. If this passes, ol' Sputnik and his crew will be in the same position they are now. They won't be able to lanesplit, and won't get penalized for not wearing a helmet. If they successfully kill it, they're in the same position. What's the big deal? The truth is that the general public thinks motorcyclists are hooligans. We're daredevils who don't care about safety. If they're going to extend us the courtesy of allowing lanesplitting, I think it's reasonable to help reinforce the image (at least) that many motorcyclists are interested in safe and responsible riding. Like it or not, wearing a helmet is associated with being safe and responsible. It's a reasonable tradeoff in my mind.