Have you all heard about this?
According to Rideapart:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/mot...elmet-law-loophole/ar-BBTHIg5?ocid=spartanntp
The proposed change would enable police to stop helmetless riders to ensure they comply with the legal conditions of helmetless riding.
Overreach, or no ?
According to Rideapart:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/mot...elmet-law-loophole/ar-BBTHIg5?ocid=spartanntp
The proposed change would enable police to stop helmetless riders to ensure they comply with the legal conditions of helmetless riding.
Texas HB 748 barely changes the existing law, but the change it does make is significant. It empowers police to stop helmetless riders to ensure that they meet all of the qualifications necessary to legally leave the helmet at home.
While we should all agree that wearing a motorcycle helmet is a good idea, allowing police to any helmetless rider for nothing other than not wearing a helmet does seem to be a bit of government overreach. It adopts an attitude of guilty until proven innocent, since the rider who gets stopped must prove their age, their course completion, and their health insurance coverage. While these are all very reasonable stipulations, riders who comply with the law now stand to be stopped regularly, which is inconvenient if nothing else.
Some may argue that if riders don't want to be inconvenienced by frequent traffic stops they don't deserve, they should just put on a helmet. If Texas is going to make life so difficult for helmetless riders, why don't they just mandate helmets for all riders like several other states already do? The law would be cut and dry, and police would have good reason to stop helmetless riders since there would be no question that they would be violating the law. The proposed solution seems to just make more work for everybody for no discernable advantage for anyone.Texas HB 748 barely changes the existing law, but the change it does make is significant. It empowers police to stop helmetless riders to ensure that they meet all of the qualifications necessary to legally leave the helmet at home.
While we should all agree that wearing a motorcycle helmet is a good idea, allowing police to any helmetless rider for nothing other than not wearing a helmet does seem to be a bit of government overreach. It adopts an attitude of guilty until proven innocent, since the rider who gets stopped must prove their age, their course completion, and their health insurance coverage. While these are all very reasonable stipulations, riders who comply with the law now stand to be stopped regularly, which is inconvenient if nothing else.
Some may argue that if riders don't want to be inconvenienced by frequent traffic stops they don't deserve, they should just put on a helmet. If Texas is going to make life so difficult for helmetless riders, why don't they just mandate helmets for all riders like several other states already do? The law would be cut and dry, and police would have good reason to stop helmetless riders since there would be no question that they would be violating the law. The proposed solution seems to just make more work for everybody for no discernable advantage for anyone.
Overreach, or no ?