Does an offence of HTA 104 (1) - Motorcyclists to wear helmet affect your insurance? Tried to Google, found the statue but could not determine this. I assume it counts as a Moving Violation so it might fall in the Minor category (and hence affect insurance)
Does an offence of HTA 104 (1) - Motorcyclists to wear helmet affect your insurance? Tried to Google, found the statue but could not determine this. I assume it counts as a Moving Violation so it might fall in the Minor category (and hence affect insurance)
These lists say it's a minor ticket (sorry, I don't know of an official list so the informal lists from insurance brokers should be more accurate than my guess). Assuming an otherwise clean record, one minor ticket doesn't necessarily affect rates (or if it does its something like 15%). If you don't have a clean record, it could make a big difference.
How can they prove what's in my heart? I don't have to identify as man or woman or both, so they can't really discriminate me based on what they see, correct? I might look like a Christian but be Buddhist inside (or whatever religion you choose).
How can they prove what's in my heart? I don't have to identify as man or woman or both, so they can't really discriminate me based on what they see, correct? I might look like a Christian but be Buddhist inside (or whatever religion you choose).
I think the exemption in law is for turban wearing Sikhs. OP can make whatever argument they want in court but "ma religion" is probably a quick path to conviction (unless he was a sikh wearing a turban at the time).
I think the exemption in law is for turban wearing Sikhs. OP can make whatever argument they want in court but "ma religion" is probably a quick path to conviction (unless he was a sikh wearing a turban at the time).
I think the exemption in law is for turban wearing Sikhs. OP can make whatever argument they want in court but "ma religion" is probably a quick path to conviction (unless he was a sikh wearing a turban at the time).
I'm assuming part of the reason for the exemption is they are already wearing their turban. I don't think there would be many sikhs that put on their turban just to ride to the corner store.
On a related note, I saw a sikh riding last week. Nice bright orange turban was very visible and his beard was blowing in the breeze. Looked like a lot more pleasant that having your head in a cage (for riding anyway, when a crash happens, the cage will prove its worth).
I'm assuming part of the reason for the exemption is they are already wearing their turban. I don't think there would be many sikhs that put on their turban just to ride to the corner store.
On a related note, I saw a sikh riding last week. Nice bright orange turban was very visible and his beard was blowing in the breeze. Looked like a lot more pleasant that having your head in a cage (for riding anyway, when a crash happens, the cage will prove its worth).
I'll start by saying I'd never ride without a helmet, my brain can't take any more scrambling.
I do think every rider ought to have the same right to decide, with no discrimination for religion, race, gender, or sexual orientation. I'm of the opinion the state doesn't have to restrict any personal rights that do not infringe on others' rights.
I'll start by saying I'd never ride without a helmet, my brain can't take any more scrambling.
I do think every rider ought to have the same right to decide, with no discrimination for religion, race, gender, or sexual orientation. I'm of the opinion the state doesn't have to restrict any personal rights that do not infringe on others' rights.
Seems reasonable to me. The counter argument about health care expense born by others caused by helmetless riders I suspect to be complete crap. I haven't seen a study but I expect helmetless riders will be cheaper for health care (dead is cheap, significantly hurt and alive is expensive).
I think the exemption in law is for turban wearing Sikhs. OP can make whatever argument they want in court but "ma religion" is probably a quick path to conviction (unless he was a sikh wearing a turban at the time).
If I understand it correctly the turban is to keep the Sikh's hair manageable since they are not allowed to cut it. A turban over a brush cut isn't going to pass.
A week or two I saw a rider with a turban and the pillion had a helmet.
How can they prove what's in my heart? I don't have to identify as man or woman or both, so they can't really discriminate me based on what they see, correct? I might look like a Christian but be Buddhist inside (or whatever religion you choose).
Bill 194 from Parliament 41 Session 1 of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario: Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Helmet Exemption for Sikh Motorcyclists), 2016.
www.ola.org
Exemption
(1.1) Subsection (1) does not apply to any person who,
(a) is a member of the Sikh religion;
(b) has unshorn hair; and
(c) habitually wears a turban composed of five or more square meters of cloth.
Seems reasonable to me. The counter argument about health care expense born by others caused by helmetless riders I suspect to be complete crap. I haven't seen a study but I expect helmetless riders will be cheaper for health care (dead is cheap, significantly hurt and alive is expensive).
I can see the insurers upping rates 25% for everyone because of the exemption, just because.
There was a lady on another M/C forum that moved to Alberta and ended up working with brain damaged types, including the M/C ones.
A rider I met in Muskoka showed me his full face. He had gone off the bike and was apparently sliding down the asphalt like a jet airplane, his arms like swept back wings. His face shield was the nose wheel.
I can see the insurers upping rates 25% for everyone because of the exemption, just because.
There was a lady on another M/C forum that moved to Alberta and ended up working with brain damaged types, including the M/C ones.
A rider I met in Muskoka showed me his full face. He had gone off the bike and was apparently sliding down the asphalt like a jet airplane, his arms like swept back wings. His face shield was the nose wheel.
The sad reality is health care costs for insurers and the public are lower when helmets are not mandatory -- I think the reason is easy to understand.
Losing one's face in a fall is a matter of choice for the most part. If that were to happen to me, I'd be grinding off $800 worth of helmet before the asphalt got to my nose.
I wonder how much of this is harley poserism.
I once rode with a sikh guy who had a turban and still had a full face helmet on.
It took him an extra 20 seconds to put his helmet on, but he also rode a sport bike
I wonder how much of this is harley poserism.
I once rode with a sikh guy who had a turban and still had a full face helmet on.
It took him an extra 20 seconds to put his helmet on, but he also rode a sport bike
How? XXXXXXXXL helmet? Any turbans I have seen on older sikh men were pretty damned big (considering all the uncut hair and >5 sq m of cloth, that makes sense). I guess someone could make a helmet that was turban shaped (probably need inflatable or pads inserted after your head is in to get good contact at the base of your skull) but the market would be so small, I doubt anyone will try.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
