No Helmet

[Doorag]

I saw someone riding in London without a helmet on my way to work this morning. Instead of a helmet, he was wearing a dark blue turban and a black bandana tied around his face 'bandit style'.

I think he was a probably a Sikh, but I'm pretty sure nowhere in the UK highway code does it stipulate that anyone of a particular religion may avoid the helmet law.

Has anyone else seen this before?

 

[Arty]

Although "properly secured protective headgear" is a legal requirement in the UK, an exemption to this requirement exists for followers of the Sikh religion if they are wearing a turban.

I think the exemption has existed since the 70's.

 

[reiobard]

There was a guy last year in California that got out of a helmet ticket last year because he was wearing a baseball cap and the law doesn't depict what constitutes as a helmet. He claimed that his cap was what he considered a helmet and won.

 

[Doorag]

Although "properly secured protective headgear" is a legal requirement in the UK, an exemption to this requirement exists for followers of the Sikh religion if they are wearing a turban.

I think the exemption has existed since the 70's.

Interesting. I didn't know that. Thanks.

 

[Tailgate]

Total B.S. unless UK accepts and similarily honors that I have my one man religion that says I must not wear anything on my head. CA DMV once had litigation over a Muslim who didn't want to remove burka for a d/l photo.

 

[fstronblue]

Wear a helmet, who cares what the law says, if you don't wear a helmet you're just spare parts.

 

[Zack]

A few weeks ago Sikh was in court in Toronto (Brampton) because he was fined some 115 dollars for not wearing helmet. Armed with lawyers he pulled up that crap about religion but didn't work this time. He lost.

I was surprised because they get away with unbelievable things. Lady at airport security decided that she will not work in uniform pants or skirt up to the knees but only if skirt is all the way to the ground (religious grounds). They said, that uniform is under regulation and when she is to wear it (as she did for years) she can go back to work. Bunch of lawyers got involved (who pays them??) and now she is under indefinite leave with pay until courts solve the issue. I guess I and other tax payers are financing that circus.

This is not really theme for this forum, sorry

 

[reiobard]

thats BS... if you don't want to wear the uniform then don't get the damn job....



It is like getting a jb at hooters and wanting to wear a frock...

 

[sideshow_downs]

thats BS... if you don't want to wear the uniform then don't get the damn job....



It is like getting a jb at hooters and wanting to wear a frock...

HAHAHA soo true:Im With Stupid:

 

[Nelly]

Although "properly secured protective headgear" is a legal requirement in the UK, an exemption to this requirement exists for followers of the Sikh religion if they are wearing a turban.

I think the exemption has existed since the 70's.

You are correct mate, it only became an issue when helmet laws became fully endorsed.

Nelly

 

[Mart Man FZ6]

There was a guy last year in California that got out of a helmet ticket last year because he was wearing a baseball cap and the law doesn't depict what constitutes as a helmet. He claimed that his cap was what he considered a helmet and won.

I don't want to start any crap, but I'm calling BS on this one. I've lived in CA since before the helmet law went into effect. The DMV requires a DOT approved helmet. There were some that contested in the early stages of the law because the DOT doesn't test or approve helmets. Now the places that sell the shorty "outlaw" helmets also offer a DOT peel off sticker to place on the back of the helmet. For the most part, cops won't bother you as long as you have some kind of helmet on. My brothers a cop and said they usually won't bother anyone unless they don't have a helmet on.

Now there are allot of guys that buy oversized skull caps and wear baseball caps under them while riding. A bunch of my buddies that I used to ride Harley's with did this. Maybe this was the case you heard about and the guy had a ballcap under his outlaw helmet.

 

[Mattberkshire]

Whatever the legal or religious argument. If you don't wear a helmet you're a knob.

A bloke rode past our house on Saturday on a Ninja. He was wearing a t shirt, shorts and trainers (and a helmet). What a knobber:Im With Stupid:

 

[marke14]

Now the places that sell the shorty "outlaw" helmets also offer a DOT peel off sticker to place on the back of the helmet.

:rockon: Why not? Too freakin' funny. I don't get people who don't wear helmets - FULL FACE helmets. I have been smacked in the helmet by bugs and debris far too many times to imagine riding without one.

 

[HavBlue]

There was a guy last year in California that got out of a helmet ticket last year because he was wearing a baseball cap and the law doesn't depict what constitutes as a helmet. He claimed that his cap was what he considered a helmet and won.

This I would love to find out more about. The reason for this was the original test of the law in "People of the State of California v. Melody Robin Woods" in July of 1992. This case involved CVC section 27802 (a) which requires a helmet to meet Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 218 (49 CFR Sec 571.218). At that time, the CHP had issued a bulletin N0. 34 dated June 2, 1992 and describing helmets that did not meet the standard as represented by Standard 218. Basically it boils down to the helmet or item used as a helmet being required to have the ability to pass the safety requirements as described by the DOT. The DOT is prohibited by law from developing a list of approved helmets however, to assist the user they have developed a marking system that should be non-removable. Therefore, the no list no law argument is not valid. So, a ball cap, which would be subjected to the intent of CVC section 27802 (a) would clearly fall short of being remotely considered a safety helmet.

Have you got any more info on that case Bard?

Thanks,
Charlie

 

[HavBlue]

:rockon: Why not? Too freakin' funny. I don't get people who don't wear helmets - FULL FACE helmets. I have been smacked in the helmet by bugs and debris far too many times to imagine riding without one.

Heck, I go bug catching all the time and have more than a few half shelled DOT approved helmets. Funny thing is I have never had a wasp or bee in one of those but I have with the FF helmet on. Been stung too.

 

[corekneelius]

im not sure what to think of these people around town, it seems i am the ONLY person i have seen on a motorcycle (of any type except one other guy on an sv650) that wears any gear at all! i was on some backroads the day i drove my bike home and some guy was damn near dragging his knee in SHORTS FLIP FLOPS AND A UNDERSHIRT!!!!! what gives, am i paranoid or what...i cant imagine riding without my helmet! maybe i am a coward but i still ran my baby up to 125 tonight 20 miles after my 600 mile break in! i just feel so out of place but i dont think there is anything that could keep me from wearing my helmet. (i live in a college town north of houston) and everyone my age thinks they are invincible or whatever...i will admit my own dumb ass mistrakes though, i used to run triple digits every time my old roomate let me on his 07 600rr and usually this was in shorts, t shirt and sandals...no glasses no helmet but like i said earlier i cannot imagine riding without at LEAST a helmet now. maybe a couple years makes all the difference? anyways what does everyone else think when you see some dude riding wheelies at 90mph next to you down the interstate with NO gear?

haha crazy people, what can you do?

 

[corekneelius]

:rockon: Why not? Too freakin' funny. I don't get people who don't wear helmets - FULL FACE helmets. I have been smacked in the helmet by bugs and debris far too many times to imagine riding without one.

im with you on that one

 

[HavBlue]

:rockon: Why not? Too freakin' funny. I don't get people who don't wear helmets - FULL FACE helmets. I have been smacked in the helmet by bugs and debris far too many times to imagine riding without one.

Have you never worn an MX style helmet with goggles?

On the exemption issue for the folks with turbines, did you folks in Canada not take issue with a guy in one of your provinces within the last few years when a case went to one of the high courts and the dude was basically told to get a helmet or you ain't riding?

 

[Bullwinkle]

Personally I think helmet laws suck. For the most part I wear a lid now days, however when the mood strikes me I like to go without. Alaska put the choice back into the hands of the rider a few years back as it should be.

 

[HavBlue]

Personally I think helmet laws suck. For the most part I wear a lid now days, however when the mood strikes me I like to go without. Alaska put the choice back into the hands of the rider a few years back as it should be.

Personally, I think this is dead wrong and there shouldn't be a choice just as there shouldn't be a choice when sitting in or driving a cage and needing to have a seat belt on. You show me one state, just one, wear there hasn't been a dramatic increase in head trauma or the loss of life that is directly relative to a lack of that rider having had a helmet on his or her head after the helmet law has been repealed and I would say go for it but you can't. Then, to take this one step further, when that rider does fall and becomes a vegetable, having a lack of sufficient insurance to cover their bad choice, it's public funds that keeps that idiot alive because of our laws in these 50 United States. Beyond this is the damage that generally follows in terms of the family unit.

It has been said you can't legislate safety and I think this is a load of crap as represented by those 22 million plus folks with a driver's license or motorcycle endorsement in the State of California. No seat belt or helmet and you pay, period. It isn't cheap to go without either. For those that say they are protesting the law, bull, if they were protesting then why are they wearing the helmet or beanie? Seems they don't care enough about their protest to put their money where there mouth is by not wearing one. Now that would be protesting........