Use of bike helmet just common sense

In the letter of March 17, Kelly Adams argues against Bob Hawkins’s proposed Regina bylaw making bike helmets mandatory.

Adams argues that the bylaw would undermine “the basic values of freedom of choice and self-determination” and that “adults in our society must have the right to decide for themselves what is and is not appropriate for them.” This sounds like the old arguments against mandatory seatbelt legislation. It has been proven time and time again that seatbelts save lives. Bike helmets also save people from serious injury or death.

Another argument is that “cycling experts disagree with Hawkins’s assertions” and “Experts assert that making helmets mandatory does not necessarily prevent accidents, but could actually give motorists and cyclists alike a false perception of safety.” I wonder who those “experts” are. There are also “experts” who say that climate change is a hoax.

I admit that it may be true that helmets don’t prevent accidents, but they do save people from serious injury. My sister has been an avid cyclist for a long time. Back in the 1980s, a couple of friends persuaded her to get a helmet, and it paid off. She once took a fall while cycling and hit her head. I have no doubt that the helmet prevented a serious injury.

I don’t understand what Adams has against bike helmets. Adams’s arguments are an example of the worst form of libertarianism. Petra Seyffarth, Regina