wrote in message news:dGhpc2lzbWU=.4a45307d4bd76de2a8d7ba7e338127b ...
JFJones wrote:

There is a report on http://www.magma.ca/~ocbc concerning the launch
of a province-wide campaign to fight Ontario's helmet law.

wiwth a helmet law in place, the motorist
can claim contributory neglegence (*)
on the part of the bicyclist, and
thus reduce the amount the motorist
has to pay. That is the real reason
for this law. It has nothing to do
with concern for bicyclists' safety.

Ah but it doesn't even appear that they need a helmet law to claim
this. In a case of a cyclist vs. the city of Toronto where the cyclist
was doored, the judge found the cyclist 25% at fault for not wearing a
helmet, although no helmet law yet exists for adults.

Here is a copy of the article that appeared in the globe and mail (I
would send the direct link but now the Globe and Mail requires a paid
subscription to read archived articles)
http://www.web.net/~lukmar/BLD/B1398...05/E824062418/