From: klf@druwa.ATT.COM (FranklinKL)
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles
Subject: Helmet Law Editorial
Keywords: Long but informative!
Date: 1 Sep 92 18:26:40 GMT
Distribution: rec


I was sure that I posted this earlier but have not seen it on the net so am
reposting.  If through some vagary of the newsserver, this becomes a
redundant post, my apologies to the net.


I am posting this to the net because I feel it is of general enough interest
to warrant a wide distribution.  Given the distortions put forth by our
old friend Dick Floyd in California, I'm not surprised to see the blatant
distortions and lies contained in the attached letter.

The following is an editorial that appeared in the 8/31/92 edition of the
Longmont, Colorado Daily Times Call.  It is the second editorial they have
published advocating helmet laws in recent years, however this one is far
more blatant than the last.  I hope this paper gets deluged with letters
from angry and concerned bikers.  If anyone wishes to write, their address is:

                        Daily Times Call
			P.O. Box 299
			Longmont, CO 80502

Following is the contents of the editorial, reproduced unedited and without
permission:

	***********************************************************

			Daily Times-Call Editorial

	  	    We can't afford lack of helmet law

With apologies to motorcyclists who like to feel the wind whipping through
their hair, it looks like Colorado had better enact a mandatory helmet law
next year.

Safety considerations aside, the Legislature should pass the law because it
can't afford to throw away millions of dollars in federal highway money.
And pass the law it will unless the legislative banty roosters who like to
posture and crow about mandates from Washington win the day again.

Without a helmet law, Colorado's highway building budget will lose about
$2 million in 1994, a sum that will double the next year and continue
for each year the state goes without a helmet law.

Currently, 47 states have seen the light and passed helmet laws.

Colorado legislators searching for other reasons to pass a helmet law
might latch onto the current cost to taxpayers that accrues from our
lack of a helmet law.  Several studies have concluded that a helmet law
would save taxpayers several million dollars a year in hospital and
medical bills that are rung up by indigent motorcyclists who are
injured riding without helmets.

Of course, just as people wearing seatbelts in autos can be seriously
injured or killed in accidents, so can motorcyclists who wear helmets.
But usually the belted or helmeted person suffers less severe injuries
and therefore requires less medical care and can return to productive work
much faster.  Obviously there are savings to be considered there, too.

The bottom line seems to require acquiescence on the part of the
Legislature, unless they have money to throw away.

	*************************************************************


Well, there it is.  I'm going to respond with a letter to the editor
when my anger subsides and after I have contacted the AMA to confirm
a few points.  I'm also going to send a copy to the AMA.  When I write the
letter to the editor, I'll post it to the net for info.

Ride safe, Ride free!

--
Ken Franklin 	They say there's a heaven for people who wait
AMA     	And some say it's better but I say it ain't
GWRRA           I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints
DoD #0126       The sinners are lots more fun, Y'know only the good die young