A Special Exemption to Motorcycle Helmet Laws

[J0E]

I was walking outside when I saw a motorcycle drive by and the most noticeable thing which came to mind - he wasn't wearing a helmet. Then I realized he was a Sikh wearing a Turban. So he was driving down the street without anything, other than his turban to protect him in the event of a crash.

Thing is, it seems that everyone else has to wear one, except them. I did a bit of research, and the following link came up:

http://www.stephensandholman.com/2009/0 ... elmet.html

For decades, Canada has demonstrated a strong motorcycle safety record, mainly due to the many safety regulations the government imposes on its motorcycle riders. Canada enacted mandatory helmet laws for all motorcycle riders as early as the 1960's. As a result, the number of serious injuries resulting from motorcycle accidents has been much less than in other countries without such stringent helmet laws.

However, in recent years, an interesting exemption to these helmet laws has been granted by the Canadian government. Many Sikhs living in Canada have voiced strong objections to the helmet laws, claiming that helmets would prevent them from wearing their turbans while riding their motorcycle. Wearing a turban is a fundamental demonstration of faith for Sikhs.

In the case Dhillon v. British Columbia, the court ruled that defending the religious rights of Sikhs to honor their tradition of wearing turbans trumps any safety precautions that inspired Canada's helmet laws. As a result, Sikhs are now allowed to leave their helmets at home in order to ride their motorcycles with a turban on their head.

Thing is, if the turban is so important in their religion, shouldn't they be required to have special helmets made for them? Rather than the law not applying to them, rather an addendum so, they still comply with the laws, but need specialized protective equipment to accomodate the size of their turbans to cover their heads. These helmets might look a bit strange and bulbulous, but at least they'd do the trick.

[weebles]

the only issue i have is that if he falls off and whacks his head and get serious head trauma that a helmet may have prevented it will cost tax payers tons of money to rehab a serious brain injury. which could have been prevented simply by wearing CSA/DOT approved helmet that everyone else has to wear for saftey reasons.

If said person chooses not to wear a CSA approved helmet their insurance rates should be way higher incase of such an accident.

the reason we have helmet laws is to protect the person riding it is like the seatbelt laws they are for the persons own saftey.

[What The Duce!]

who deleted my fucking comment!

[Zero Cool]

There ought to be a waiver. No insurance/no msp.

Sent from my SGS using Tapatalk

[What The Duce!]

just deport them and end of issue

[J0E]

just deport them and end of issue

I get the impression there's a high deportation rate among them:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... ation.html

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-news ... sband.html

http://www.faithandmedia.org/articles/show/655

[What The Duce!]

not enough for my liking

[RM250]

Ya call it a turbi-mut

[Tatertot]

There ought to be a waiver. No insurance/no msp.

Makes sense to me.

[me]

Not speaking specifically to the helmet situation.....but I always thought that if there was anything that interfered with one's ability to do something, because of religious beliefs...that you would simply avoid it ?

[What The Duce!]

Well as long as they split their heads open and die in the accident I dont give a fuck if they want to drive around on bikes with a dirty rag wrapped around their smelly hair

[me]

Go take your meds.

[What The Duce!]

I did and im already starting to feel much better

[me]

Take more.

[What The Duce!]

I could take a front end loader full of drugs and I still would not like fucking punjabi kittens anymore than I do now

[weebles]

Not speaking specifically to the helmet situation.....but I always thought that if there was anything that interfered with one's ability to do something, because of religious beliefs...that you would simply avoid it ?

that make sense if they cannot wear a helmet because of their religon then they should choose not to ride a motorcycle.
Which due to safety and canadian law/regulation requires a person to wear a CSA/DOT approved helmet for the riders own protection and safety.

[What The Duce!]

only in BC weebles, only in BC

[J0E]

I thought the reasoning for granting the exemption was pretty thin.

I've seen Sikhs in various occupations who appear to be wearing a compact version of the Turban. It's not the full version, but smaller like a bandanna. It can definitely accommodate a helmet and fit on the riders' head quite comfortably without compromising the riders' beliefs. So they don't have to wear the 'full' or traditional version since many wear the alternate style:



I thought the judge's reasoning seemed weak in granting this exemption and could instead have chosen a transition period (up to 1 year) for these riders to adapt and find suitable gear which could accommodate their situation.

Anyway, it seems rather arrogant and presumptuous for someone to be flouting the laws like that. It seems like they thumb their noses up at everyone, laughing at the law. Should these riders been accidents which injure them for life, the liability should always go against them.

[MacArthur]

Then why dont we allow kittens hats aswell?

[weebles]

well then what the problem I think it should be manadatory for everyone to wear an apporved helmet when riding a motorcycle.

as it is mandatory to do so in B.C. and in accordance with Canadian law.

[What The Duce!]

Ontario told those rags to go fuck off and they are not allowed to ride a MC with a turban on , the military told them to fuck off too. I was in Shilo (artillery base) when the first rag_head came thru and tried to challenge the military rule for having to wear a combat helmet while shooting artillery guns and they booted him out saying it was a safety requirement. They are just a bunch of troublemaking cocksuckers

[J0E]

Ontario told those rags to go fuck off and they are not allowed to ride a MC with a turban on , the military told them to fuck off too. I was in Shilo (artillery base) when the first rag_head came thru and tried to challenge the military rule for having to wear a combat helmet while shooting artillery guns and they booted him out saying it was a safety requirement. They are just a bunch of troublemaking cocksuckers

I don't think there's anything wrong, but I've seen the shorter version used, so the argument that someone has to be wearing a full version which would not permit them to wear protective gear doesn't hold any weight.

I did that CBC Vote Compass thing and they asked about tolerance for immigrants with religious beliefs, and I sad Zero tolerance. Because they come to a secular country like Canada, infect it with their religious morals and expect everyone else to accommodate them. And then you end up with situations like these. Immigrating to another country shouldn't be like staying at a five star hotel where every whim is catered to.

[What The Duce!]

ya but they are the same as muzzies, always trying to push the limits and challenge the laws of Canada

[weebles]

Ontario told those rags to go fuck off and they are not allowed to ride a MC with a turban on , the military told them to fuck off too. I was in Shilo (artillery base) when the first rag_head came thru and tried to challenge the military rule for having to wear a combat helmet while shooting artillery guns and they booted him out saying it was a safety requirement. They are just a bunch of troublemaking cocksuckers

I don't think there's anything wrong, but I've seen the shorter version used, so the argument that someone has to be wearing a full version which would not permit them to wear protective gear doesn't hold any weight.

I did that CBC Vote Compass thing and they asked about tolerance for immigrants with religious beliefs, and I sad Zero tolerance. Because they come to a secular country like Canada, infect it with their religious morals and expect everyone else to accommodate them. And then you end up with situations like these. Immigrating to another country shouldn't be like staying at a five star hotel where every whim is catered to.

agreed everyone should be treated the same by the provincial and federal govronment...like crap

[me]

Then why dont we allow kittens hats aswell?

I don't know why I'm answering this....but the kittens has no religious significance....it's simply to keep the sun off.

[Zero Cool]

Then why dont we allow kittens hats aswell?

I don't know why I'm answering this....but the kittens has no religious significance....it's simply to keep the sun off.

Why is it absolutely necessary and allowable to wear a Turban under any circumstance but not carry a Kirpan?

They're both equally important in religious significance, no?

[me]

I wasn't suggesting that. I was leaning more towards thinking it's odd to partake in an activity that requires something that is against one's religion.

[me]

Not speaking specifically to the helmet situation.....but I always thought that if there was anything that interfered with one's ability to do something, because of religious beliefs...that you would simply avoid it ?

See ? Like that. =))))

[anon]

Adhering to one's religion used to mean something, and require a high level of commitment. Like you had to put up with being ostracized, ridiculed, crucified, etc. Now it's too much to ask people to abide by our safety regulations it seems, if those regulations interfere with one's right to play soccer or ride a bike without a helmet or otherwise endanger oneself. I believe in religious freedom - specifically the freedom to practise your religion without:

A) Imposing it on others.

B) Asking for special exemptions from safety regulations to make your religious observances less onerous for you.

[MacArthur]

I supose the turban may protect them from an injury