JEFFERSON CITY, MO. – When is a helmet just a helmet? Not in the House of Representatives, where Tuesday morning the debate over HB 1464, which would allow motorcycle riders to go without helmets, encompassed everything from personal freedom to health insurance.
Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Springfield, who sponsored the bill, argued that motorcyclists should have the personal freedom to ride without a helmet if they choose. The legislation, which has passed but been vetoed in previous sessions, was changed this year to include a mandatory course for riders who choose to go without a helmet.
Rep. Jacob Hummel, R-St. Louis, argued that the freedom of wearing a helmet was similar to the freedom of wearing a seat belt. However, Burlison said passengers not wearing a seat belt in a car was a threat to other passengers, while motorcyclists not wearing a helmet are threats to nobody but themselves.
Hummel also tried to use the transportation related bill to put an amendment about the gas tax on the bill, but it was rejected as beyond the scope of the bill.
Rep. Sue Meredith, D-St. Louis, argued against the bill from an insurance perspective. She said the $50,000 allowance by the bill was not nearly enough as medical costs could reach $500,000 after only a couple of days.
She also argued as a former motorcycle rider that the costs for the families of other riders caught in accidents could be too high, putting many of them on state aid.
The House committee substitute for the bill was eventually perfected in a voice vote.
