Alberta to exempt turban-wearing Sikhs from motorcycle helmet laws

D_Accord

Legacy Member
http://calgaryherald.com/news/local...ban-wearing-sikhs-from-motorcycle-helmet-laws

Turban-wearing Sikhs will be able to ride a motorcycle in Alberta without a helmet starting next month, the government announced Thursday.

The exemption for drivers and passengers over 18 is to take effect April 12. B.C. and Manitoba are the only other provinces with similar laws.

“The Sikh community has urged us to grant this exemption in recognition of its civil rights and religious expression,” Transportation Minister Brian Mason said in a statement.

Alberta is home to more than 52,000 members of the Sikh religion, according to 2011 census figures.

“The government should always strive to accommodate free expression, especially when the expression does not harm others who make this choice, nor further restricts the reasonable choices of its citizens. This case is not different in this regard,” said Kelly Ernst, president of the Rocky Mountain Civil Liberties Association.

In a statement posted on the Facebook page of the Sikh Motorcycle Club of Edmonton, Gurpreet Pandher described Thursday as a “milestone and memorable day” in Alberta’s history.

Parmeet Singh Boparai, the former president of the Dashmesh Culture Centre, said discussions have been taking place with the Alberta government on the exemption since 2015, and members of the community have been advocating for the change for years.

“It’s a big achievement for the community,” he said. “It gives us a platform to share our values, our beliefs and our look with other communities of Alberta.”

Boparai said he plans to become a motorcyclist once the helmet exemption is in effect.

----------

ah but if you're black/white/Asian/native... you still have to wear a helmet.
 
http://calgaryherald.com/news/local...ban-wearing-sikhs-from-motorcycle-helmet-laws

Turban-wearing Sikhs will be able to ride a motorcycle in Alberta without a helmet starting next month, the government announced Thursday.

The exemption for drivers and passengers over 18 is to take effect April 12. B.C. and Manitoba are the only other provinces with similar laws.

“The Sikh community has urged us to grant this exemption in recognition of its civil rights and religious expression,” Transportation Minister Brian Mason said in a statement.

Alberta is home to more than 52,000 members of the Sikh religion, according to 2011 census figures.

“The government should always strive to accommodate free expression, especially when the expression does not harm others who make this choice, nor further restricts the reasonable choices of its citizens. This case is not different in this regard,” said Kelly Ernst, president of the Rocky Mountain Civil Liberties Association.

In a statement posted on the Facebook page of the Sikh Motorcycle Club of Edmonton, Gurpreet Pandher described Thursday as a “milestone and memorable day” in Alberta’s history.

Parmeet Singh Boparai, the former president of the Dashmesh Culture Centre, said discussions have been taking place with the Alberta government on the exemption since 2015, and members of the community have been advocating for the change for years.

“It’s a big achievement for the community,” he said. “It gives us a platform to share our values, our beliefs and our look with other communities of Alberta.”

Boparai said he plans to become a motorcyclist once the helmet exemption is in effect.

----------

ah but if you're black/white/Asian/native... you still have to wear a helmet.

Just let everyone 18 and older ride without a helmet or seat belt. Only provision, the government has the right to deny you emergency services and/or force you to pay for your own medical care in case of accident.
 
No problem whatsoever. As long as they pay the total of their medical bills if they don’t splatter their brains over the road.
 
No problem whatsoever. As long as they pay the total of their medical bills if they don’t splatter their brains over the road.

This. Apparently they earned a so called "religious right" to dramatically increase their chances of sustaining brain injury in a high risk activity. It's truly a privilege for the taxpayers to support that newly acquired freedom.

In Manitoba you could see a doctor and get an helmet exemption... On account of having a neck injury and the helmet being uncomfortable as a result. I kid you not.
Unsurprisingly, A few Drs. would write most if not all the exemptions.
 
No problem whatsoever. As long as they pay the total of their medical bills if they don’t splatter their brains over the road.

let's be honest here. if they get into an accident where a helmet would have made a difference, they're highly unlikely to make it out alive.
 
let's be honest here. if they get into an accident where a helmet would have made a difference, they're highly unlikely to make it out alive.

That's not being honest. That's some weak sauce self-serving relativism.

Actual science begs to differ. Sure the context is slightly different, but I don't see how this wouldn't translate to oversize motor powered bicycles (aka motorcycles)

“Helmet use is associated with odds reductions of 51% for head injury, 69% for serious head injury, 33% for face injury and 65% for fatal head injury. Injuries to the neck were rare and not associated with helmet use,” the study found.

“These results suggest that strategies to increase the uptake of bicycle helmets should be considered along with other injury prevention strategies as part of a comprehensive cycling safety plan.”

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeand...-serious-head-injury-by-nearly-70-study-finds
 
You know we're talking about motorcycles not bicycles, right?

Yes, and I edited my post to reflect that.

Not every motorcycle collision is someone wiping out at 120km/h either...

The consensus is that they save lives. Governments that don't get their public safety legislation from some scriptures are headed in the opposite directions: Ie more mandatory helmet laws.
Reported helmet use was higher in universal law states (88 % vs. 42 %). Median charges, adjusted for inflation and differences in state-incomes, were higher in partial law states (emergency department $1987 vs. $1443; inpatient $31,506 vs. $25,949). Injuries to the head and face, including traumatic brain injuries, were more common in partial law states.
https://injepijournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40621-016-0072-9

Here, as if the case really needed to be made in 2018...
 
This will make it easy for Alberta to raise reg cost for bikes and if anyone tries to complain that it's not right making everybody pay more because of turban people, they will be labeled "people speaking up against a religion" to shut them up.
 
let's be honest here. if they get into an accident where a helmet would have made a difference, they're highly unlikely to make it out alive.

11cb40b9e2d6b9fd5614513b0cf6cd91.jpg


Any crash where you tumble. No helmet = possible concussion, broken jaw or cracked skull from a bump on the pavement. Full face helmet = usually get up and walk away

@22s
 
Just let everyone 18 and older ride without a helmet or seat belt. Only provision, the government has the right to deny you emergency services and/or force you to pay for your own medical care in case of accident.
Pretty much, do what you want but before please sign here, there, there and there too please.
 
Leur compagnie d'assurance vont leur charger la totale.

ils pourront pas parce que ca sera de la discrimination basée sur la religion.

as for the helmet: mine probably saved me from very nasty injuries a few times at the track...
 
ils pourront pas parce que ca sera de la discrimination basée sur la religion.

as for the helmet: mine probably saved me from very nasty injuries a few times at the track...

non, c'est basé sur le fait qu'ils ne portent pas de casque.

on devrait se partir une religion où toute modification à une auto est permise. comme ça il n'y aurait plus de ticket pour les mufflers.
 
Oui mais moi je dis que si les assureurs veulent leur charger la totale ils vont contester parce que c'est de la discrimination basée sur leur religion.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
 
Oui mais moi je dis que si les assureurs veulent leur charger la totale ils vont contester parce que c'est de la discrimination basée sur leur religion.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Pense pas. La religion te donne le droit de rouler sans casque mais c'est à tes risques et péril. Alors tu dois payer comme les autres, sinon rendu là c'est de la discrimination envers notre système d'assurance. Le "retourne dans ton pays" pourrais être à ce moment légitime.
 
Oui mais moi je dis que si les assureurs veulent leur charger la totale ils vont contester parce que c'est de la discrimination basée sur leur religion.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Contester oui, mais est ce que c’est vraiment possible gagner contre une compagnie d’assurance?
 
Back
Top