[UqWBcuFx6NV4r]

Dude, what? You’re upset about mandatory helmet laws? What next? Are you going to complain about seatbelts?

Being a libertarian is one thing, but acting like there is no good justification from those whom you oppose, is just… dishonest.

Bike helmet laws enjoy very widespread support nationwide and nobody is under any illusion as to their posed vs actual societal benefit. You’ve made up some boogeyman.

[marssaxman]

King County (where Seattle is located) repealed its mandatory helmet law in 2022, not because anybody has changed their mind about bike helmets being a good idea, but because the law primarily served as a discretionary-enforcement tool for harassment of homeless people and racial minorities. The law had no measurable impact on helmet-wearing rates or rates of brain injury, because people who can afford helmets generally choose to wear them. The city of Tacoma had repealed its mandatory helmet law two years prior, for similar reasons.

[galleywest200]

> because people who can afford helmets generally choose to wear

A helmet is much cheaper than the bicycle is it not? If you can afford the bike you can probably get the helmet.

[cwillu]

Homeless people don't buy many things. If they have something, it's probably one of the few things they owned and were able to keep when they became homeless.

[clipsy]

The costs are additive, unless you think there are people buying the helmet without a bike.

[knolan]

I’m not a libertarian. I’m not opposed to helmets and I and my family wear helmets while cycling. I fully support vaccines.

Mandatory helmet laws have the consequence of reducing the amount of people cycling. There’s no justification for them when compared to international practices.

Many of those who support mandatory helmet laws do not understand what the purpose of a helmet is and that it will not protect you from a collision with a vehicle.