Four decades after helmet-wearing became widespread among cyclists, at least here in the US, helmet laws and regulations remain controversial. Medical experts are all but unanimous in recommending helmets, citing their efficacy in preventing brain injury (something to which I can attest). So, most doctors and surgeons favor requirements to wear head protection.
On the other hand, not all cyclists favor such regulations. I admit that sometimes I miss the wind through my hair, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way. But I want to keep on riding, so I am willing to sacrifice that to keep my brain intact. And, as much as I respect this country's Constitution, with all of its flaws, I don't buy civil libertarian arguments against helmet laws--which some cyclists voiced years ago but I rarely hear anymore. (That, of course, may be a consequence of where I live and the people I normally see.) Still, I am conflicted about helmet laws. I certainly encourage cyclists to wear helmets, but I also understand that laws have unintended consequences.
One such outcome has played out in the Seattle area. In a way, as upsetting as it is, it shouldn't come as a surprise because it's a result of a pernicious, pervasive problem: the unequal enforcement of the law.
If you are, or are perceived as, a member of any "minority" group, whether by race, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, or socio-economic class, you are more likely to be cited for minor infractions--or for no infraction at all--than other people are. (Yes, it's happened to me.) Turns out, one such minor infraction can be riding bareheaded in places with helmet laws. And, if you are a member of a "minority" group, that citation for a minor infraction is more likely to turn into a major fine or even a jail sentence, just as a cut is more likely to turn into an infection or something more serious if you don't have the means to treat it.
The key word here is "means." "Folks aren't riding around without helmets because it's fun," according to Edwin Lindo. "They're doing it because helmets aren't cheap." Lindo, who identifies as Central American Indigenous, started the NorthStar Cycling Club to support Indigenous, Black and other cyclists of color in the Seattle area. He was referring to Seattle Municipal Court statistics showing that while an estimated 4.7 percent of the city's cyclists are Black, they receive 17.3 percent of the summonses for not wearing helmets. For Native American and Alaska Native cyclists, those numbers are 0.5 and 1.1 percent, respectively.
 |
| Edwin Lindo |
For this reason, and others, Lindo and other activists encourage helmet-wearing but want Seattle to repeal its mandatory helmet law. They cite the experience of Tacoma, which repealed its own helmet law, because it was, if unintentionally, reflecting the racial and other disparities in law enforcement.
One of the other disparities is economic: Homeless and poor people are also disproportionately cited for not wearing helmets. As often as not, they are riding bikes that were acquired for little or nothing. So, they don't have funds to pay for buy a helmet--or pay for a ticket when they're cited for not wearing one.
So, the question of wearing helmets raises a question the COVID-19 pandemic has brought up: How does a society promote the health and safety of the greatest number of people without exacerbating racial and economic inequities?
