By lawabider

January 13, 2008 10:20 PM | Link to this

No, how screwed up is this state that this is even a question? Are they going to do this even if the kid is on private property? Everytime a kid gets hurt on a bike, the first thing I hear is “were they wearing a helmet?”. You want to ask if the kid is okay first or are you just looking for something to tsk,tsk about? Do you even know how upset the people affected are that no one cares about anything but some stupid helmet that wouldn’t have made a difference this time anyway? Mind your own business and don’t use the government’s guns to mind mine.

By ASHLEY

January 11, 2008 11:28 AM | Link to this

Get over it people… so they’re thinking about making a law for your kids to wear a helmet. Weather your concerned about your childs safety or not, atleast someone else is. “Oh, they’re just trying to get money out of us…” Blah blah blah.. Shut up the ** up people! Get over yourselves!!!! YOU are the ones who need to grow up! You need not be telling the others to grow up! Be concerned for the safety of your kids! Its a freakin law! Abide by the damn thing, shut your mouths, strap your kid in, and be on your merry way. If they decide to be rebellious and take the helmet off around the corner and get caught, Make them do chores around the house, make them EARN that 25 dollars for that fine they YOU have to pay, and make THEM pay for it. Did you ever think about that?? Don’t you people use that thing in your head called your brain? God, you people are so inconsiderate and can only think of yourselves, and no one else. For once… can’t any one of you - think of some one … OTHER THEN YOURSELF?!

By JFJ

January 10, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this

Journalist, Laura Bischoff, quotes the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute as a source for the benefits of bicycle helmets. She should check her sources. This is not an institute but a one person helmet advocacy website. She would be better informed if she visited a real reseaarch-based organization that publishes its organization - the Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation http://www.cyclehelmets.org. It publishes original peer reviewed research and opinion. You’ll find evidence there showing helmet legislation in jurisdictions around the world doesn’t work. Perhaps it’s because helmets themselves have limited utility, being useful only for preventing minor abrasions to the head. Cycling is a safe method of transportation and recreation that results in great health benefits and is important in the fight against obesity. Politicians and bureaucrats should leave it alone.

By JP

January 9, 2008 8:31 AM | Link to this

Blaming the liberals for this is ridiculus, but typical of those who don’t really get involved, just blog and complain about liberals. Being a liberal, however, I believe that this measure, too, is ridiculus. I’m concerned about quality of life issues. I don’t want my grandchildren to not hop on thier bikes for a ride down the sidewalk just because they ‘fear’ that their parents will be fined if they are caught without their helmet. In turn, we’ll be punishing hard-working families who find $25 to be a chunck of the weeks food budget, and it really won’t affect the affluent who toss $25 at a pedicure every week. Our children shouldn’t be made to fear play, but respect safety, and use helmets when they feel they are in true danger. That would be when crossing a street with a driver carelessly using a cellphone maybe?

By Robert T.

January 8, 2008 10:03 PM | Link to this

This mandatory helmet bill seems to pop up every few years. It’s based on two ideas: 1) Simply riding a bicycle is really, really dangerous; 2) Helmets are so wonderful, they’re the most important safety strategy Both ideas are false. Helmet laws have NEVER produced the benefits promised. And an hour of bicycling causes fewer serious head injuries than an hour of walking. Think bicycling is dangerous? Try the safety quiz at the Bicycling Life website. Think helmet laws work? Visit the “cyclehelmets” website. (Google it, one word. It’s “dot org”) And if you want to tackle the biggest source of fatal head injuries by FAR, put helmets on car drivers. Don’t discourage the most environmentally friendly transportation - the bicycle!

By Paul

January 8, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this

Ahhhh…The “Soviet” of Ohio is at it again comrades!!! Notify “The Central Committee” in Columbus that the will of the people will not be denied!!! It will be mandated and law that the children of “The Collective” will begin wearing head protection or it’s of to “The Gulag”. (A week in Moraine outside of the GM plant?). I grew up with no seat belts, metal dashboards ect. If you prefer to have your child wear a helmet, put it on him/her. Don’t legislate my choice to be less (or more) protective of my child/grandchild.

By TN

January 8, 2008 4:20 PM | Link to this

To Eric *ss, Since you’re this why don’t you tell the sponsors to add shin guards, face sheilds, knee pads, elbow pads, shoulder pads - well why don’t we just put your kids in a big bubble? You don’t get the point - wake up! Grow up!

By timothy

January 8, 2008 3:11 PM | Link to this

Regardless of what you think about the importance of helmets, this is none of the state’s business!

By Concerned Taxpayer

January 8, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this

Eric S - I’m sure we both could go on and on about risk, severity, probability of occurance, hypothetical situations, financial responsibility, and the value of investing in a $10 helmet. Which in fact I don’t dispute the value of wearing. However, the central issue at hand boils down to the question of should the the gov’t unnecesarily be meddling in the lives of citizens & restricting their freedom to make decisions for themselves & their families, whether it be a good or bad decision. Remember that the single most important item in US history that has set us apart from the rest of the world is choice. Without the freedom to chose we aren’t any different than communist countries. (on a side note I would much rather that free market systems such as the option to get cheaper healthcare premiums or deductibles to convince people to wear helmets than the gov’t telling them they have to)

By DC

January 8, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this

I think it’s great-we make our kids wear them, and they feel stupid because none of the other parents make their kids wear them. It will be alot easier with alot less complaining if it the law. I do think it’s a shame parents don’t make their kids wear helmets all the time. My kids complain it’s not “cool” and I tell them it’s not cool to die or be in a coma from a head injury, either. Especially since my kids don’t just ride, they do jumps and tricks. I don’t get why so many people are against protecting their kids.

By DC

January 8, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this

I think it’s great-we make our kids wear them, and they feel stupid because none of the other parents make their kids wear them. It will be alot easier with alot less complaining if it the law. I do think it’s a shame parents don’t make their kids wear helmets all the time. My kids complain it’s not “cool” and I tell them it’s not cool to die or be in a coma from a head injury, either. Especially since my kids don’t just ride, they do jumps and tricks. I don’t get why so many people are against protecting their kids.

By SuperBen

January 8, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

The first thing I thought of was little 6 year olds riding around with helmets, but this is not what the law is about. It, like motorcycle helmet laws, seat-belt laws, insurance laws, are nothing but successful insurance lobbies. It isn’t about the younger kids, but the extreme sport wannabes who try doing stunts on their makeshift BMX and crack their skull on the pavement. Mom and Dad’s insurance pays their bills, but with this law, it will reduce the amount of claims insurance companies pay out for injuries like this. It has nothing to do with the government proposing something safer for us. As a kid, I never knew a single peer who ever injured themselves on a bicycle other than maybe a scrape or bruise.

By Eric S

January 8, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this

Concerned Taxpayer - Lets use your imaginary future children as an example. Little ‘Joe’ is circling the driveway on his bike with training wheels and takes an unshielded header onto the concrete. You rush little ‘Joe’ to the emergency room and as you are admitted you are asked for your insurance information. Since it was your negligence parent that caused ‘Joe’ to be there in the first place you would assume all the financial responsibility… wouldn’t you? Being honest and realizing it is your fault. A $10 helmet doesn’t sound like an inconvenience now does it?

By CJF

January 8, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

Regarding 60’s freedom lovers becoming control freaks… it is worse than you can imagine. My kids (age 16 and 23) and I were asked to complete a survey at the license bureau last week. Most of my answers reflected a need for less government intervention while my “law lambs” think there should be more laws and policing by the State Highway Patrol. Thanks to DARE and Driver’s Ed, my kids are brainwashed.

By JTP

January 8, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this

I have two kids and they both wear helmets. My problem continue to be the state telling me how to parent. What do I say to my kids when they get a ticket for not wearing a helmet while the guy next door rides by on his Harley not wearing one? If you are going to legislate safety - be consistent!!!

By Jim 5

January 8, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this

I am sure that helmets are a good idea, and perhaps the law would give parents more leverage to make kids wear them even when the kids do not want to. But, another “nanny” law? Why are the 60’s “freedom-lovers” such control freaks now that they run everything?

By Concerned Taxpayer

January 8, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

Eric S - I’m a complainer & don’t have kids. However, when my wife & I decide to have children, we expect to have the opportunity & responsibility to raise our children and protect them as we see fit. Would I have my future children wear a helmet while riding down the street, probably yes, depending on how old they are and how busy the street. But I doubt I would make them wear one when they are riding circles in our own driveway. (Like many younger kids do) Why should the gov’t force me to make my kids wear it when they are riding circles in my driveway? In this certain situation, you can be injured just as severely tripping over an untied shoelace and falling to the concrete and hitting your head. Should the gov’t force those under 18 to wear velcro shoes because shoestrings ‘can’ be too dangerous? I’ll be sure to buy stock in velcro shoe companies!

By Jeff

January 8, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

The continued government mandated sissy-fication of society. What about the right to choose? I guess a 17 year old girl will now have to wear a helmet when she rides her bike to an abortion clinic. I guess she only has the right to do what she wants with certain parts of her body. Ignorance and hypocrasy run wild among Democrats.

By fletch

January 8, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this

All of my kids wear a helmet but when will the government stop intruding in our lives.

By fletch

January 8, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this

All of my kids wear a helmet but when will the government stop intruding in our lives.

By Eric S

January 8, 2008 11:47 AM | Link to this

Notice how the complainers STILL wont say if they have kids or if those children already wear helmets.

By Cindy

January 8, 2008 11:31 AM | Link to this

Shortly after Ohio entacted a SEAT BELT law, my brother was killed in a car accident WEARING HIS SEATBELT. Helmets are no guarantee against injury. Stop trying to protect us from ourselves.

By Concerned Taxpayer

January 8, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this

It’s great to be able to post these comments on the DDN website, but they really need to be emailed to the sponsors of the bill: Senator Tom Roberts, troberts@maild.sen.state.oh.us and Rep Michael Skindell, district13@ohr.state.oh.us

By Jon Wilson

January 8, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

Putting helmets on your kids riding bikes is always a good idea. However, there’s no reason for a law telling me to do so.

By Bob

January 8, 2008 10:29 AM | Link to this

I’m all for it. I’m glad Ohio lawmakers are taking a step to ensure the safety of the citizens. Maybe this will be the first step to a mandatory motorcycle helmet law as well? We can only hope.

By TN

January 8, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

Just remember the names State Sen. Tom Roberts and State Rep. Mike Skindell. Vote their silly a**es out of office in next election. We need to get rid of idiot officials that refuse to focus on real live issues.

By R. Anglin

January 8, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this

Big brother to the rescue. We should pass laws that helmets go on your head 24 hours a day. Every day we lose another freedom. It won’t be long before we have none left.

By the Strawboss

January 8, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

67,000 bicyclists receive head injuries every year. 1 in 8 have a brain injury. And yet again some people want to make divisive political comments. The same people crying Big Brother probably flip when they see a unrestrained child in a car. Well it’s the same thing. The only people who will suffer from this law are parents who aren’t responsible enough to make their kids wear a helmet.

By the Strawboss

January 8, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

67,000 bicyclists receive head injuries every year. 1 in 8 have a brain injury. And yet again some people want to make divisive political comments. The same people crying Big Brother probably flip when they see a unrestrained child in a car. Well it’s the same thing. The only people who will suffer from this law are parents who aren’t responsible enough to make their kids wear a helmet.

By the Strawboss

January 8, 2008 9:50 AM | Link to this

67,000 bicyclists receive head injuries every year. 1 in 8 have a brain injury. And yet again some people want to make divisive political comments. The same people crying Big Brother probably flip when they see a unrestrained child in a car. Well it’s the same thing. The only people who will suffer from this law are parents who aren’t responsible enough to make their kids wear a helmet.

By Eric S

January 8, 2008 9:04 AM | Link to this

How many of the people complaining have children? Of those how many have children that wear helmets when riding a bike?

By bla

January 8, 2008 8:56 AM | Link to this

Dah! Head+no helmet+ windshiels of car= DEAD or REALLY MESSED UP!! I know some one PERSONALLY who died while riding a bike and got hit by a car. Guess what no helmet. They said if she would have been wearing one..she would have lived.

By Andro

January 8, 2008 8:52 AM | Link to this

i am so sick of being told what to do by our government. kids can get hurt doing virtually ANYTHING! parents need to parent… RESPONSIBLY. period.

By nursecilla

January 8, 2008 8:37 AM | Link to this

I think it is a good thing. Now kids won’t feel “stupid” for wearing one, because everyone will have to. It is long overdue. My boys will be wearing them!!

By nursecilla

January 8, 2008 8:37 AM | Link to this

I think it is a good thing. Now kids won’t feel “stupid” for wearing one, because everyone will have to. It is long overdue. My boys will be wearing them!!

By King Kool

January 8, 2008 8:20 AM | Link to this

This law is ridiculous in so many ways. OHIO does not even have a helmet law for motorcycle riders! Getting bumps & scrapes is all part of how children learn. If you don’t want to learn, just leave the training wheels on.

By James

January 8, 2008 8:20 AM | Link to this

I’m glad Ohio is tackling the big issues, but once again they haven’t done enough to protect us from ourselves. Where are the knee pad laws, elbow pad laws, shin guard laws, and a cup law for boys (even though that might be discrimination). Why won’t Ohio politicians think of the children’s shins ooh the humanity.

By JIM

January 8, 2008 7:52 AM | Link to this

LET’S SEE NO SMOKING,NO GAMBLING,MUST WEAR HELMETS IF UNDER EIGHTEEN.THIS MUST BE OHIO.I UNDERSTAND SAFTY BUT THIS IS UP TO THE PARENTS.LET THE POLICE WORK ON OUR DRUG PROBLEMS THAT THE CITY HAS!

By Eric S

January 8, 2008 7:36 AM | Link to this

Bicycle helmets can be purchased new for less than $10. Seems like a good value for reducing injuries to Ohio’s children. What is the deductible if that child has to go to the doctor or emergency room? What if that child has a long term impact due to a head injury. The whining Conservatives that lament the interference of the government must not get out of the house much. Go to any public area, mall restaurant, etc. and observe parents that allow their children to go screaming around with little to no supervision. Unfortunately we must protect those that wont protect themselves. Pick a better battle.

By jj

January 8, 2008 7:34 AM | Link to this

Could be a life saving law if it is enforced and parents are held responsible.

By nurse

January 8, 2008 7:31 AM | Link to this

There is nothing more tragic than a preventable cranial injury. This should appliy to kids on blades and skateboards too.

By Janice

January 8, 2008 7:18 AM | Link to this

It’s the parents job to decide how to raise their kids, not the government. To all these people who think it’s a good idea for your government to decide what’s best for your kids, it’s only a matter of time before the government dictates exactly how you may and may not discipline your children. It’s what step at a time.

By darla

January 8, 2008 4:00 AM | Link to this

Mah kids don’t need no helmets — I can get way more money if they gets hit by a car or something in one of them lawsuits!!!

By Green13600

January 8, 2008 2:10 AM | Link to this

I do not see the big deal as to why minors should raise a big stink about wearing a helmet on public roads when riding a moped in Ohio. The purpose of a helmet would be to save your life. In addition, lives would be saved when youngsters use a helmet right. After all, health care costs have been rising at an all-time high; not wearing a helmet … and ending up in a hospital would be an added responsibility parents would endure if their children were severely injured without a helmet … particularly when up to two million dollars would be spent on rehabilitation after a near-fatal injury. Some people would assume this would be governmental intrusion; I’m sorry … both the parents and the children have to act responsibile when using a moped on public highways. The issue of public safety would carry a higher degree of importance than the issue of invasion of privacy. You Figure It Out!! Do not blame me if your children ended up in a hospital — or in a morgue — because you did not take six minutes out of the day to teach them how to use a helmet right when operating a moped in Ohio.

By bueller

January 7, 2008 11:12 PM | Link to this

Great idea! I think the government should make it a law that we should wear helmets and safety goggles anytime we leave our houses. Thank the Lord our God that we have the government to protect us! WTF?

By JTP

January 7, 2008 10:11 PM | Link to this

How can the State of Ohio say that minors must wear a helmet on a bike but continue to be one of a few states that do not require helmets on motorcycles? Sounds like the motorcyclists have a strong lobby. If you are going to legistrate safety at least be consistant!

By JTP

January 7, 2008 10:10 PM | Link to this

How can the State of Ohio say that minors must wear a helmet on a bike but continue to be one of a few states that do not require helmets on motorcycles? Sounds like the motorcyclists have a strong lobby. If you are going to legistrate safety at least be consistant!

By js

January 7, 2008 9:56 PM | Link to this

I thought we lived in a free county?? But it seems that we have individuals that have nothing better else to do with there time. Motorcyle riders need not wear a helmet. Parents need to be parents. They should know what is best or where the children can ride safely. The state needs to butt out.

By Concerned Taxpayer

January 7, 2008 9:42 PM | Link to this

Just when you think you’ve seen it all. I can understand laws to protect people from the irresponsibility/recklessness of others (i.e. driving drunk) but when was the last time your health or life was in danger because someone else chose not to wear a helmet? It seems ohio is trying to stop the laws of natural selection — instead they just need to accept that you can’t fix (legislate away) stupid and let nature take it’s course.

By starcastic

January 7, 2008 9:27 PM | Link to this

I’m not joking in the least when I predict that within ten years helmets will be required in cars. Ridiculous.

By Amanda

January 7, 2008 9:19 PM | Link to this

I grew up in the 80’s and never knew a friend of mine to wear a helmet while riding a bike. If my parents would have made me wear a helmet I would have just waited until I got around the block to take it off. Why ticket the parents? That seems a bit much to me. My parents had no control over what I did when they weren’t around. I was scared to death of my parents, but still knew when I could get away with breaking the rules.

By M

January 7, 2008 9:18 PM | Link to this

Sounds like a good thing. However how about watching those who drive motorcycles and start fining them. Some laws are great if they are enforced consistantly.

By M

January 7, 2008 9:17 PM | Link to this

Sounds like a good thing. However how about watching those who drive motorcycles and start fining them. Some laws are great if they are enforced consistantly.

By D. Greene

January 7, 2008 8:57 PM | Link to this

Parents should mind their children, not the state government. One wonders, where the heck are the parents? Is this even a big problem? Whatever.

By painfultruth

January 7, 2008 6:36 PM | Link to this

Well, everyone knows that no citizen in Ohio is smart enough to protect themselves, so the “Nanny Ohio” must intervene. Next, we’ll see that all passengers in cars need helmets and anyone attempting to walk down the street will need a helmet as well. How about state-mandated bulletproof vests for inner-city residents? Now, that’s a good idea! AND, before you call this a racist comment, look at the crime data!

By gd390

January 7, 2008 6:34 PM | Link to this

This is just another way liberals are sticking their nose into the business of law-abiding citizens. Let’s see - who will benefit from this. The helmet manufacturers (selling of helmets), the state (ticketing violators), liberals (telling other people what to do). I think the state should be more in the business of educating citizens about the risks and what can be done to prevent injury. Let parents decide for themselves whether or not to accept the risk.

By victor mickunas

January 7, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

YES!