aKula

Yes but aren't the legislators morally obligated to pass such legislation if it will save lives? I can understand concerns about this being a case in which, to a certain extent, freedom is being traded for security and there is a rather famous quote warning againts that.

But being forced to wear a helmet however, could be compared to being stopped walking near an unstable cliff. Would you stop your friend walking next to the cliff even if they were fully aware of the risk? What about banning it for everyone?

I am not entirely comfortable in dismissing any law to do with the safety of individuals (even if they're not putting anyone else at risk). I am not againts saving people from their own stupidity. Of course there is still the fundemental problem in that you're limiting somebody's freedom in a way that is incompatible with the underlying ideals of the United States.

I guess I would agree with Charlatan. You will find more opposition for this kind of law in the United States because of the great emphasis on individual freedom in the nation's ideals. The opposition will come because of these principles. Then again you hardly see anyone in Germany on a bicycle wearing a helmet, but in Australia most do and it is mandated by law. So it's not like the USA has a monopoly on non-helmet wearing culture at the expense of the western European social democracies.

__________________
"I am the wrath of God. The earth I pass will see me and tremble." -Klaus Kinski as Don Lope de Aguirre