BC Getting Tough on Helmet Laws

[eastcoast_gsx]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...elmet-law.html

I wonder if they will revisit the exemption for Sikhs?

[ABadjusterrider_5]

I like the brief paragraph in there about the new requirements for passengers. It's like OH MY GOD THEY'RE CHANGING HELMET LAWS pppssssttttt and passengers too......
Meanwhile back in Ontario, a similar law they tried to pass caused a huge stir.

[eastcoast_gsx]

I like the brief paragraph in there about the new requirements for passengers. It's like OH MY GOD THEY'RE CHANGING HELMET LAWS pppssssttttt and passengers too......
Meanwhile back in Ontario, a similar law they tried to pass caused a huge stir.

The new regulations, which come into effect June 1, also say all passengers must be able to reach foot pegs or floorboards and children who cannot reach the foot rests will not be allowed to ride as passengers

This is already the case in Ontario.

[OpenGambit]

I wonder if they will revisit the exemption for Sikhs?

10 bucks says no.

[eastcoast_gsx]

10 bucks says no.

I would have to agree. Wasn't lost on the website commenters though.

[invictus43]

It's important to remember they have provincially-run insurance out there..

[jay-d]

I'm conflicted being a turban wearing Sikh.

I enjoy wearing my sexy Arai RX-Q and I'm glad they don't allow an exemption over here in Ontario, but on the other end, I'm also happy for my Sikh brothers/sisters in BC that have an exemption.

The Sikh community in BC isn't like the Sikh community in Ontario. They have a lot of Sikh's in power and they know how to stick together.. I'm sure they'll keep the exemption for Sikh's.

[eastcoast_gsx]

The Sikh community in BC isn't like the Sikh community in Ontario. They have a lot of Sikh's in power and they know how to stick together.. I'm sure they'll keep the exemption for Sikh's.

If they fight for this, they should fight for EVERYONE, not just their own little group.

As a Canadian I could give a rats *** if anyone wears a helmet or not (the argument about shared health care is BS) so if you want to argue that it violates your religious rights, you should argue full stop that no-one should be subject to it, not just your "special group"

There, I said that in a decent way I think... maybe not

[OpenGambit]

I would have to agree. Wasn't lost on the website commenters though.

people whine about lots of things, doesn't mean its legitimate.

There are tons of religious exemptions for all sorts of things, the sikh one just doesn't apply to white people.

See the pious life exemptions in the income tax act for the devout, plus are general taxation principles for churches.

[eastcoast_gsx]

See the pious life exemptions in the income tax act for the devout, plus are general taxation principles for churches.

I wish all that would go away, taxes would make a believer out of anyone...

[kellen]

lol @ canadians who refer to our "constitution"

[kellen]

killing people is part of my religion. these bs canadian murder laws infringe upon my freedom

Well, the Crown can appeal the decision if it really wants to, but I suspect they don't really care that much.

I am not in the business of telling other people what their religon requires. I don't think that the law, or legislators should be drawing a line in the sand about whats a religious tenet and whats not, especially when religon and culture are mixed together ( we don't try to tell catholics that their stance against contraception isn't in the bible - see the moral rights debate )

But I will say that both courts in BC and ON disagree with you. Both decisions agreed that there was infringment, it came down to balance and one went one way and one went the other.

Sent from my SGH-I896 using Tapatalk 2

[OpenGambit]

killing people is part of my religion. these bs canadian murder laws infringe upon my freedom

Good luck with that.

[kellen]

Good luck with that.

i know rite