AustinMN wrote:

wrote:

JFJones wrote:

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.

In the U.S., all the helmet laws I have seen have explicit exclusions for
using helmet use or non-use as a contributing factor (good or bad) to an
accident.

True enough, but I don't know how it will
go in Ontario. Another thing is that people
can be stopped and (often) searched for
not wearing a helment, if there is a helmet
law in place. If the stop is (barely) legal,
the search is often not challenged at trial
so there can be no appeal. Bad PD. Happens
all the time.

Please don't interpret this to mean I support MHL's, just that I rather
they
be defeated on their merits, not made-up "facts".

Austin
--
I'm pedaling as fast as I durn well please!
There are no X characters in my address


I am not a lawyer. I do not even see email sent to this address, due to
past DOS attacks. If you wish to respond, do so through this newsgroup.