EDITORIAL
Bicycle helmet bill
wrong for Oregon
Senate Bill 1088 would require all bicyclists in Oregon
to wear a helmet at all times. Failure to do so could result
in a $25 fine.
Although helmets are certainly « wise idea, and smart
cyclists do use them, enacting a helmet law is a misguided
attempt at increasing public safety. Why? Because it
ignores one of the basic tenets of bicycling — to relax
under a sunny sky on a quiet bike path.
Helmuts do save lives. No one disputes this. Increased
helmet uso loads to fewer head injuries, cheaper medical
bills and additional taxpayer savings.
But many cycling accidents occur on busy streets or
intersections, not side streets and bike paths. Many peo
ple don’t use their bikes so much for commuting to work
or school — when a helmet
probably should lx! used —
but instead just want to take
advantage of blue skies and
nice weather.
To wear a hejmot when a
cool breeze is blowing and
the sun is raining down is
akin to using a condom
when both partners ant HIV
negative and have no risk of
children. In both cases, the
conditions an* perfect. Why
The bill ignores
one of the basic
tenets of
bicycling — to
relax under a
sunny sky on a
quiet bike path.
spoil the moment with cluttory. uncomfortable gear'
One of the most attractive arguments for the helmet law
is that it would lower insurance rates by cutting medical
costs However. Americans make personal choices every
day that potentially affect insurance rates Every time
someone takes a bite out of a Big Mac, he or she is one
step closer to a heart attack. Yet cholesterol is still legal.
Singling out cyclists because they make a hedonistic and
dangerous decision is unfair. People make bad choices
every day.
Some people also say the bicycle helmet law is gov
erned by the same principle as Oregon's seat belt law. its
motorcycle helmet law. and its mandate of safety restraints
for children riding in cars, all of which wisely protect cit
izens from serious injury. Thu difference, however, is that
cars and motorcycles go significantly faster than bikes.
Only experienced cyclists frequently go faster than
30 mph, and they wear helmets because they know bet
ter than to ride that fast without protection. If someone
makes a stupid mistake, that's their prerogative. Only 10
people were killed in Oregon last year from bike acci
dents. and it's a safe bet that most of the state's 2.8 mil
lion residents own a bike.
And unlike seat !>elts, bike helmets cost money — any
where from $35 to SI 20. College students who can bare
ly afford food may be forced to ride on the lam for quito
some time.
While there is little doubt that people riding on busy
streets and highways should wear helmets for their own
sake, everyone olse should not be so restricted. Riding
unhindered on a bike path is not dangerous, and cyclists
should not be forced to wear clunky headgear like hel
mets.
Oregon Daily
Emerald
1 ne C>agon 0*)y I ,i pot».»h«l dfcty Monday trvrougn f "day Own} IN. Klww
yaat and Kieaday ana Thuitday donng lh« 6. ina Oagon Daily Em*i«K)
PubfcsNng Co Inc al m« U<vva«tity ol Oogon fugana. Oagon
The Emaiaid opeialae .ndependenBy & tha Umyawtf man orffcoee m Su*e 300 of the
Erb Memcwua llnon and .» a m«i«« o' the Attociated Piets
The E mmans it pi.vai* pioporty The uNawlul i*w* c» ute o< pape<t J P<oeecul«toie
by *«•
Editor: Pal Malaeh
Naws Editor
Editorial Editor
Graphics Editor
Entartatomant Editor
Jafca twg
Martin f >sha
Jafl Pa*i*>
Ff«y*Horn
FrMUnc* tailor Mivxn aaucum
Editorial Editor R)v*» Jwismo
Sports Editor Dim Owtwnnosu
Supplsmsnts Editor Css** AnOmtan
Nrghl EdHor: Jaka Borg
Aesoctats Editor*: Tammy Baley Slvdont Govommont AcfivTes. Daraiyn Trapp#
Crynmumry. Co«*an Pohkg. Ikgher f du-ahoo Klmmit'mxy
Nm SUM Chatter Anon Man Bender Ju«im Brown Ser*h Clark. Mag Dadolph. Amy
Oevanport. Jen KMon. Amanda Ferno, Anthony Forney. Bam Ftage. Tore** Fkmisaigar
Rebecca Mart*. Slava lufcm*. Katy Moefter Trffcni MjWxr Tnsia Noai tHr Shaw. Erick
Studenrcka. M*ron Soaor. Handy Ttueoan Mcheie Thompson Aguiar. Amy Van Toyl. Todd
William*. C-laylon Vaa
Qanarat Man agar: Judy Red Production Manager: Afcchaie Hoaa
Advertising Tom l each Saar Manager Shawn Banran Omce Malaga- Jan* irota.
Tara*a l*ab«*ie. Prw<i Johnson N. On* Kanofl Jeramy Mason Van V OBrya/' It. Gaiian
Oh Rachael True Anga Wmtpiaem
CUaslttad. (tacky Merchant Managar Bany Logan Sharon Sauva
Distribution Brandon Andarton. k*ck Man"rung Graham Srmpeon
Buainaas: hathy Carbon# Supennaor Ajdy Connoky
Production: Ingrid Whaa Production Coonknakv Krishna Granger Oaa McCodb. Slacy
Mtchee Jennifer Hoiand. Jennifer Smith
Nmroom M6-54I1
Bu«n*M 0**ic« J4*-S512
Dtaplay Advaruaing - J4A-J7I2
CIami'M AdvartIMng MMM3
7*e MAT/0*JAl
C£3T D/0. -
LETTERS
Won't defend
So. not one of us "sad people
without visions” streamed in
Hof) Weigel's defense, huh7 Gee
whiz. t:hill out.
We ere individuals and oat h
one of us t,an appreciate celiba
cy or not. It appears to me that
Weigel is making a martyr of
himself, running around com
plaining (yes, complaining) no
one wants to caress him with
his point of view. I, for one. will
not defend him. simply because
I do not agree with him
His commentary [ODE, May
18) is quite aggressive in that it
knocks other people left and
right In one sense he's preat h
ing love and understanding, but
un underlying tone of hypocrisy
manifests itself
Be celibate. Go right ahead It
doesn't bother me I'm not say
ing he shouldn't be celibate. So
why do 1 (we) bother you? Why
does it bother you that
"Andrew's silly letter" should
be published7 I applaud the
Emerald for publishing dissent
ing points of view.
Weigel can call me and any
one else his "opponent" if he
wants He is creating sides here,
nut me It's true. I do not have
the "same hope and love" for
him as he might for me. I never
asked for anything from him. So
why on earth would he have
"hope" for me? Am I, or anyone,
missing something he can give
me?
Peter Sheir
Post Baccalaurette
Righteous?
Hob Weigel’s commentary in
the Emerald an May 18 really
struck a nerve within me. Ini
tially. I was impressed with his
courage to stand up for his
lifestyle. However, 1 didn't like
the methods Weigel used to vent
his anger over the fact that, God
forbid, someone made fun of his
lifestyle
He certainly has a right to
express his displeasure with the
way he is being treated But for
someone who dislikes the cur
rent state of humanity so much.
ht> seems bent on generalizing
about those who aren't as incor
ruptible us him.
Me states, "Mow dare any of
you compare a lifestyle whose
very focus is fruitless self-grati
fication with a lifestyle of
celibacy ." Mow dare Weigel
believe he is somehow more
righteous because he leads this
"pure" life For someone who
claims to have just as much love
and hope for other people, he
fails to understand that there are
some people who actually make
love to each other instead of
using sen for this "fruitless self
gratification "
Another phrase in Weigel's
commentary disturbed me. Me
claims we don't understand the
personal sacrifices he has made
for those who "are/were gay."
Since when do gay people sim
ply stop being gay? Me says he
offers a "total lack of persecu
tion " Seems Weigel has some
learning to catch up on
Perhaps he should stop con
gratulating himself so much.
Paul VanSickie
Pre-Journalism
Junior fascists
It's instructive to see the
junior Fascists from the Student
Insurgent demonstrating their
thuggish approach to political
discussion in their latest issue.
Evert more instructive is the
silence of their friends on the
faculty.
At the first University Assem
bly meeting to discuss the
amendment to the race, gender,
non-European requirement, the
issue came up of intimidation of
the faculty who openly opposed
the proposed change. Propo
nents of the motion ridiculed
this concern at the meeting, and
in the last issue of the Insurgent
listed this as one of the issues in
the debate that "poisoned the
atmosphere of the c.ampus."
Now the intimidation has
become overt and public in the
Insurgent, and we're waiting to
hear from those who told us that
this was a silly and poisonous
issue. Perhaps we misunder
stood — maybe all they meant
was that there) was no issue of
intimidation on the part of the
faculty or the administration,
because that would be handled
by their student auxiliaries.
Scott DeLancey
Professor, Linguistics
Brand speaks
Recently I wrote to five facul
ty members who were attacked
by the Student Insurgent. I told
them that I directed members of
tlie University administration to
respond quickly, and as a result.
Provost Norm Wessells wrote a
letter to the editor of the Kmer
old. The letter would have come
from me if I had been on cam
pus to sign it.
1 also offerer) the resources of
the University, through Director
of Public Safety and the Coordi
nator of Student Conduct, to
help in dealing with any reper
cussions from that publication.
I find it totally irresponsible
to label individuals, as was
done in the Insurgent. It is con
trary to the ideals and traditions
of higher education This type of
intimidation hinders construc
tive dialogue and makes it more
difficult for the lampus commu
nity to resolve the complex
issues surrounding curricular
change.
While it is true that free
speech and First Amendment
rights permit significant lati
tude, respect for others cannot
be forsaken. Unfortunately, in
this instance, as well as others
that have taken place recently,
some persons have not shown
the respect each person
deserves.
We need to get past those
attacks. We need to reopen the
conversations that will lead to
mutual respect. Neither the
President nor the Provost can do
this for the campus; it requires
the participation of faculty, staff
and students alike. I.et us com
mit ourselves to building a com
munity in which each individ
ual person is appreciated and
respected.
Myles Brand
President