Old News

SORRY!! The weather link is not working right now. Hopefully it will be fixed soon.

There was a report on the radio last week about a planned ride on the Governor's Mansion and the State Capital Today 8/15/2004. The news report inferred that the riders in this ride may choose not to wear Helmets.

Senator Joel Chaisson is a State Senator (democrat) representing State Senate District 19. His Home is Destrehan, LA. He was first elected to the senate in 2000. He ran unopposed in the Oct. 2003 election for the senate term 2004-2008. So he is in until 2008. Hopefully we all will remember and make sure he has an opponent in the 2008-2012 term elections.

HerBill109 (HB109) Has been signed by Governor Blanco. August 15 you are required to wear a helmet by law (see below?). Good going Ms. Blanco, House of Reps (rips) and Senators. Thanks for taking Louisiana one more step back. How much farther can we back up before we fall?

SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT!!

This is a personal comment of a visitor to this site. These opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the officers or members of ABATE North Louisiana!

IF and only IF :

1. You have ALL your paper work (MC endorsement, insurance, registration, inspection).

OF COURSE YOU DO!

2. You are Sober (NEVER!, NEVER! Ride while intoxicated!!! Helmet or not!!!!).

OF COURSE YOU HerBill109ARE!

3. You are not wanted/a fugitive or have any outstanding tickets/warrants.

OF COURSE YOU DON'T!

IF YOU COMPLY WITH ABOVE (OF COURSE YOU DO ?) AND IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO WEAR YOUR HELMET, JUST DON'T WEAR IT !!!!

You may get a ticket (more than likely you will get a ticket). If you do get ticketed don't just mail your fine in. Wait and go to court then plead "not guilty". Keep pleading not guilty until you are found guilty. (You know you are guilty. You were not wearing your helmet. Duh!). Make the city, parish, whatever go through the motions. By law If you want to, the jurisdiction you are in has to give you your day in court. After you go through all that just pay your fine. You probably will have to pay a little extra for court costs when its all said and done. On the other hand it could get dropped and you would not have to pay jack sh** (I wouldn't hold my breath or bet on that).

If you happen to have the resources ($$$) hire an attorney (a good one) . Have your attorney pursue your case all the way to the La. State Supreme Court. A good attorney given the resources ($$$) to fund appeals all the way to the La. State Supreme Court should win this case for you. The "Helmet Law" (RS 32:109) is illegal! If something like this would happen the Helmet Law would be gone for good! Of course your Attorney's Fee's would be considerably more than the fine you could have simply paid.

What if none of us wear our helmets? Don't you think they would get tired of pulling everyone over? The fine (as long as all you violated was RS 32:109, "helmet law" SEE REQUIREMENTS 1,2,3, ABOVE) is not that expensive.

The trick is "they" will be using the "Helmet Law" as probable cause to pull motorcyclist's over (SEE REQUIREMENTS 1,2,3, ABOVE). Where are the NAACP, ACLU, and other "Tree Hugging" Civil Right's organization's (like those that insist "the ten commandments" be removed from federal/state buildings, those that would have "under GOD" taken out of the Pledge of Allegiance, those that do not allow our law enforcement agencies to use "racial/ethnic" profiling in order to protect our borders, etc.)?

Hey!!! You Bleeding Heart so called Civil Right Organizations the rights of motorcyclists in Louisiana are being stepped on. By passing this bill the motorcycling community in Louisiana is being singled out (as a group) to be unfairly detained or arrested just by our association with each other as a group.

Where are you NAACP, ACLU, etc?

Ms. Blanco, Senator Chaisson how do you respond to this?

What would your constituents think knowing that you are behind a bill that is obviously prejudiced towards a single segment (motorcyclists, in this case) of our state's population?

What if your constituents (Professionals, Retired Seniors, African Americans, Union Workers, Gay/Lesbian, Hispanic, Caucasian, Native American, Rich, Poor, etc.) are made aware of your discrimination and "racial/ethnic" profiling of this segment of our population?

Try passing a law that all women wear dresses covering their ankles. Try passing a law that all Muslims cannot wear a turban. Try passing a law that the Governor (currently Ms. Blanco) is to keep his/her personal issues out of the state legislator (by the way the state constitution already requires this). Try passing a law that all people in the state of Louisiana are required to speak English. Try passing a law that all citizens of Louisiana are required to have a JOB!!! Try passing a law....................!!!! I could go on and on and on.

WAKE UP LOUISIANA!!!

PS: Senator Chaisson I hope you have another career planned!!! You will not be elected again!! You will not be elected to anything, much less a position that allows you to write Laws!!

FYI The Following is a report submitted by one of our Members. Thank you Ford.

In 1968 the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that a New Orleans city ordinance regarding motorcycle helmets (similar to present R.S. 32:109, but without the word visor) was constitutional. The case is EVERHARDT v. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS 217 So. 2d 400 decided December 16, 1968. Plaintiffs, one retail motorcycle dealer and a group of motorcycle riders residing in the Greater New Orleans Area, brought a class action in the Civil District Court in New Orleans, to enjoin the City of New Orleans from enforcing a penal ordinance requiring all cyclists to wear helmets while operating motorcycles within the city limits. They lost in the trial court. However, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, and ruled in the motorcyclists’ favor, declaring the helmet ordinance unconstitutional. The LA Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, holding the helmet law to be clearly within the police power of the city in regulating traffic on its streets, and that it was neither unconstitutionally vague and indefinite, nor violative of the equal protection clause…” Justices Hamiter and Barham dissented.

The New Orleans city ordinance was the model for the original statewide motorcycle helmet law, R.S. 32:390 effective date August 15, 1968, by virtue of Act 273 of 1968, and for some reason the word visor was added. The New Orleans city ordinance did not include the word visor, otherwise the language R.S. 32:109 is virtually identical to the language in the New Orleans Ordinance. This means the visor requirement was not litigated.

When questioned by news media recently, a LA State Police spokesperson was not aware that the visor requirement was in Act 742 or that it has always been in the LA helmet law. LA Highway Safety Commissioner Jim Champagne told the media he would fix the visor glitch in the law prior to the effective date on August 15. This should be interesting, because the present law provides, the Commissioner can add “other (helmet) specifications”, but does not have the power to remove helmet requirements, i.e. visor. The law could be vulnerable to attack, because it can be argued that the visor requirement has no rational relation to safety. One argument is that law enforcement can just ignore the visor requirement, but that plan could be difficult to reconcile with their oath to enforce the law.
Arguably, beginning August 15, 2004 members of Louisiana law enforcement may have a legal obligation to stop and ticket every person observed riding a motorcycle, even if wearing a helmet, if the helmet does not have a visor. This seems to be a ridiculous conclusion, but, hey, we live in Louisiana, life’s just one big Carnival. At least the fine is only fifty bucks, including court costs, with no jail time!

Ford McWilliams

" "
"Other" "REPORT ON THE 2004 LEGISLATURE

HELMET LAW

Act 742: Yes, we have a mandatory helmet law, again. House Bill 109, now Act 742, was passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor. It becomes effective on August 15, 2004. Act 742 puts the helmet law back where it was before Act 404 of 1999 relaxed R.S. 32:109 A., making helmet wearing optional for riders over the age of 18, who had a health insurance policy with medical benefits of at least $10,000.00 for bodily injury.

In the meantime, Louisiana adopted DOT Standards for helmets and Eye Protection Devices. See Notice of Intent published October 20, 2000 in Louisiana Register Volume 26, Number 10, (26 LR 2374); Promulgation published January 20, 2001 in Louisiana Register Volume 27, Number 1, (27 LR 62);

There was talk during the session that House Bill 109 would require the wearing of a “full-face” helmet, because of the following language in the bill, which includes the term visor:
“All such safety helmets shall consist of lining, padding, visor, and chin strap and shall meet such other specifications as shall be established by the commissioner.”(Emphasis added)

I thought it was curious that the law does not require a hard outer shell, but that’s just me.

The real question now, what is a visor? Look at a full coverage helmet. You can observe a movable face shield, (a term used in DOT Standards Subchapter B, #1121. Eye Protection Device; 27 Louisiana Register 62), but not a visor or bill. So if you buy a DOT and Snell approved full coverage helmet, with a face shield, but without a visor, it may not comply with the letter of the law in Louisiana after August 15. Although Harley Davidson and H.O.G took no official position on compulsory helmet legislation, I have heard rumors that Harley Davidson is contemplating some sort of legal action regarding Act 742, because their full coverage helmets, costing several hundred dollars, don’t have the required visor.

When questioned by news media recently, a LA State Police spokesperson was not aware that the visor requirement was in Act 742 or that it has always been in the LA helmet law. LA Highway Safety Commissioner Jim Champagne told the media he would fix the visor glitch in the law prior to the effective date on August 15. This should be interesting, because the way I read the law, the Commissioner can add “other (helmet) specifications”, but does not have the power to remove helmet requirements, i. e. visor. One argument is that law enforcement can just ignore the visor requirement, but that plan is difficult to reconcile with their oath to uphold the law.

Arguably, beginning August 15, members of Louisiana law enforcement may have a legal obligation to stop and ticket every person observed riding a motorcycle, even if wearing a helmet, if the helmet does not have a visor. This seems to be a ridiculous conclusion, but, hey, we live in Louisiana, life’s just one big Carnival. At least the fine is only fifty bucks ($50.00), and that includes court costs!

OTHER MOTORCYCLE RELATED LEGISLATION-All Effective on August 15, 2004.

Act 216: Requires that all driver education courses taught in the schools, drivers license learner’s permit courses, and mandated driver improvement courses include instruction on “sharing the road with motorcycles”. This law could literally save you life.

Act 378: Allows insurance agencies to issue insurance coverage on motorcycles, for a period not to exceed 30 days, even though the applicant does not have a motorcycle endorsement on his driver’s license. This law only applies to applicants for an initial motorcycle endorsement.

This change removes a “Catch 22” from Louisiana law which prohibited the issuance of a policy of insurance on a motorcycle if the owner-applicant did not have a motorcycle endorsement on their driver’s license, while at the same time prohibiting an initial motorcycle endorsement applicant from taking the driving portion of the motorcycle endorsement on a motorcycle without insurance.

House Study Request No. 10: I new it was too much to hope for that the legislature would pass a law that allowed a motorcycle to proceed through a traffic control, after stopping, if the motorcycle does not activate the detection device.

Another “Catch 22” in Louisiana. Do you sit on your motorcycle which is does not weigh enough to activate the traffic control device and wait for someone in a car to rear-end you? Wait for a car to activate the traffic control? Run the light? or Turn right and go down the road looking for a place to make a U-turn (hopefully legal) so that you can go back to the intersection you just left to make a right turn, and be on your way?

This concept was apparently too scary for the legislature to pass, but made too much sense to kill, so it has become a “Study Request”. The last bill I saw become a study request has never been heard from again. Hopefully this idea will not meet the same fate. We need to make some noise on this one next year.

6/18 Below is an email response from one of our supporters in the House (this response came within an hour of mailing the representative). They DO! hear us email them, call them, write them. The Governor especially!! Read below from the "horses mouth">>>>

"Thank you for your support. I suggest that you and everyone that agrees with you contact the gov. as soon as possible and let her know she is unjustly affecting there rights without just cause. Cigaret related illnesses cost the state more every year than motor cycle injuries ever will. She is taking rights away from citizens to prove her authority over Mike Foster."

6/18 HerBill109 was signed by the Speaker of the House. It will now be delivered to the governor for her to sign. Write and ask her not to sign it!!

Before HB109 was voted on by the Senate 6/17 many amendments were proposed none of them passed. Many of the amendments contained requirements for safety training and enforcement of the Motorcycle endorsement requirements in Louisiana. Senator Barham was the most vocal in trying to amend this bill, Thank You Senator Barham.

Mr. Chaisson repeatedly assured the Senators that the amendments concerning safety training and motorcycle endorsement enforcement were not necessary. He claimed that these amendments were already being considered and attached to SB29 already in final passage in the House. He told the Senators not to vote for the amendments since they are already contained in SB29. I believe he has positioned his bill SB29 to fail House passage, die in the house without a vote, or fail to be signed by the governor. I feel he intentionally misled the members of the Senate so HB109 would not be amended.

This Bill Died on The House Calendar; Very well done Mr. Chaisson (your word apparently means nothing; my word is all I am)!!! Was sacrificing your Honor, Integrity, YOUR "WORD?" worth It ??

SB29 was read by title in the House 6/17 and placed on calendar subject to call. It was placed back on subject to call by the representative charged with handling this bill at the request of Senator Chaisson. As I understand the rules unless this representative or Mr. Chaisson call this bill from the calendar and the house allows the call from calendar it will die here. NOTE: It did DIE HERE!.

Past Tense 6/17 FYI: Mr. Chaisson stated to the senate 6/17 that he intends to "move" on this Bill which would indicate he intends to call it from the Calendar in the House. I wouldn't hold my breath. Even if he does, the amendment about over 21 will be taken out or it probably won't pass the House.

Correction to 6/16 heading: "SENATE BILL 29 PASSES THE HOUSE" I was wrong on this I apologize this bill was just reported by the transportation committee to the full house on 6/16 the bill was not voted on see above 6/17.

Here is a link with some excerpts from the House of Representatives Rules that tells you about the reading of a bill. Excerpts from House Rules Basically a bill cannot be passed until it is read on three separate days. A bill cannot be passed until it is referred to a committee and then reported to the house by the committee. On a bills second reading the final question, "Should the bill be passed to a third reading?" must be asked.

A new suggestion about writing the Governor pointing out just another FLAW in "HER BILL". HerBill109 requires the following:

"All such safety helmets shall consist of lining, padding, visor, and chin strap and shall meet such other specifications as shall be established by the commissioner."

Note the requirement for a "visor". A visor is not a face shield. A visor is the little sun shield (like the bill on a ball cap) that snaps on and off the typical open face helmet.

By passing this law, HerBill109, Louisiana will make the use and sale of the Upper End, High Dollar, Full Face "NASCAR" type Helmets that do not and never have had visors (Simpson, Bell, etc.) illegal in our state.

Write the governor and point this out. Write your newspapers and point this out. Write the TV stations and point this out.

The Governor, Senator Joel Chaisson and all the other proponents of this bill are on very shaky ground. You would think they would have got their "ducks in a row" before trying to cram this down our throats. This bill, HerBill109, the helmet law (RS 32:109) in general is really against "STATE LAW" it just needs someone with the necessary resources ($$$) to challenge it !!

This Bill HB109 by: Representative Baudoin, was called before the House of Representatives today 6/14/2004 at about 6:00PM. After a lot of at time and some heated discussions among the Representatives it was voted on and finally passed the House 57 Yes to 37 No: How They Voted.

This is not very good for OUR RIGHT TO CHOOSE TO WEAR A HELMET. This bill will now go to the Senate if it passes the Senate it WILL become law. Senator Chaisson, author of SB29, appeared before the House Transportation Committee this evening 6/14. At that time he stated that he would support HB109 as it is written in the Senate. See SB29 below.

Please use the link below to see more about what happened this afternoon (6/14) in the House of Representatives. It tells you about the Representatives we need to thank. It also provides links to video/audio so you can see just what went on for yourself.

This one has passed the House 6/14/2004. It is now going to the Senate!! If it passes the Senate it will be LAW!!

Exactly like it was pre 1999. Everybody riding a motorcycle in Louisiana will be required to wear a DOT approved Helmet!!!

Russ informed me (6/10) that our lobbyist, Duane Cowart, has advised him that Governor Blanco is Lobbying our legislators (both House and Senate) to pass one of these Bills (HB109 or SB29).

We suspect the reason HB109 has not been "called" yet is the Governor and other proponents of HB109 do not feel they yet have the votes required to pass HB109.

Be sure to let the Senators and House Representatives know your stance on these bills.

SB 29 with the amendments offered by Senator Chaisson, and the House Transportation Committee was reported to the House of Representatives today 6/16. The bill was amended allows Riders over the age of 21 who have completed a motorcycle safety training course to CHOOSE TO WEAR A HELMET.

6/14 After the House of Representatives adjourned the House Transportation Committee met. The Transportation committee considered Senate Bill SB29. Senator Chaisson the author of SB29 was allowed to address the Committee he was accompanied by Mr. Duane Cowart, a Lobbyist for Abate North Louisiana.

Please use the link below to see more about what happened (6/14) in the House Transportation Committee. It tells you about the testimony in the Transportation Committee 6/14 concerning SB 29. It also provides links to video/audio so you can see just what went on for yourself.

June 8 Senate Bill 29 (SB29) was "called" for second reading in the House. SB29 was referred to committee (House Transportation, Highways and Public Works Committee) as required by rule.

This bill was heard by the Full Senate June 2, 2004. There were 5 amendments presented two of them were withdrawn . Amendments #335 by Senator Marionneaux, #336 by Senator Robert Adley (our local senator, THANK YOU Mr. Adley) and #338 by Senator Chaison were voted on by the full Senate. BE SURE TO LOOK AT THIS Senator Hainkel's Ammendment.

Unfortunately Senate Bill 29 passed the full Senate and is now going to the House as amended by #335. Amendment #335 will require all motorcyclists to wear a helmet. This amendment was approved in the Senate by a vote of 26 to11.

Amendment #336 by Robert Adley (failed 8 to 30) was to change the bill from age 21 to any one under 18. Mr. Adley is clearly on our side. Thanks again Mr. Adley. You should let Mr. Adley know your appreciation.

Amendment #338 by Mr. Chaisson (failed 15 to 22) was to delete amendment #335 deleting the age requirement, making all motorcyclists wear a helmet. Why would Mr. Chaison want to delete amendment #335 which makes the bill essentially the same as his original un-amended senate bill 29? Maybe because House Bill 109 (essentially the same bill) has already failed to pass the full house?

Contact your local representative's, (for that matter use the links on this site to contact as many representatives as you can) and let them know they should not vote for this Bill, Senate Bill 29. Their own Bill, House Bill 109, has already failed to pass. Why should they approve the same Bill created by the Senate?

HOW OUR LOCAL SENATORS VOTED ON SENATE BILL SB29: (Remember voting for the bill, SB29, is against us)

For: Max Malone (caddo/bossier), Sherri Cheeks (desoto/caddo), Lydia Jackson (caddo).

Let these Senators, that voted for SB29, know you are not happy with their vote by writing, calling or e-mailing them. Remember the ultimate way to let them know you are dissatisfied with their representation is by not voting for them.

Against: Robert Addley (bieville/bossier,webster,), Kenneth M. "Mike" Smith (red river/desoto).

We are told that Mr. Chaisson is not happy with Mr. Marionneaux's amendment 335. See below about amendments.

The Senate Transportation committee had compromised and had amended the original SB29 to allow motorcyclists over 21 to CHOOSE to wear a helmet. Mr. Marionneaux's has thrown a wrench in the works.

SB29 is scheduled for it's second reading in the house and to be referred to committee June 7. The House session on June 7 is scheduled to begin at 2:00 pm.

SB29 was read by title June 7. A motion to place it back on the calendar was made. It has been placed back on the calendar "subject to call". Excerpt from June 7 House Journal. From what I can tell this means it has to be called by a representative before any actions can be taken on it. It is still on the calendar we just have to check every day to see what actions the house may take on it.

You may like to read about some other current Bills, listed below. Not all of them are about the "Take Another Freedom Law" (aka: helmet law).

You may also like to use our contact lawmakers link to keep up with what our Louisiana State Legislators are really up too. Not just concerning motorcycles.

You may also be surprised at what they think is important to their Constituents.

House Bill 109 : FAILED to pass the House. VERY WELL DONE!! Put back on House Calendar "By Law" we don't see where it is on the calendar yet, when we know you will know. Links below are excerpts from House journal on the days this Bill was considered May 5 shows how the representatives voted. We have been told (not confirmed) that since this Bill didn't get out of the House the Senate committees may not give the Senate Bills to the full Senate UPDATE: see New News above about SB29. Please advise us of any other info:

House Bill 570: This sounds like a good Bill for motorcyclists. It requires drivers ed in secondary schools (high school) and drivers tests to address the need to be aware of motorcyclists when driving. Thanks to Rep. Gary Smith for this Bill. Seems this Bill has passed House. Currently up for 3rd and final vote to go to Senate from the House. Link to Bill info: House Bill 570

House Bill 581 : I think this one SUX!! This is a different Bill not just about the helmet law. Requires the proof of ownership of a helmet or the sale of a helmet before a dealer can sell you a motorcycle? Maybe good for the motorcycle dealers they have a mandatory helmet sale? This one has been referred to transportation committee. I don't see when it is scheduled to be heard. Let us know if you know more. Link to Bill info: House Bill 581

HB521 seems OK gives insurance companies the OK to write a policy for 30 days temporarily to allow you to get a MC endorsement. Fixes the old catch 22 about getting a motorcycle endorsement without having insurance/not getting insurance without the endorsement.

HB864 I think this one really SUX!! Requires a certification from a motorcycle rider/safety/awareness/ course along with current requirements before getting a MC endorsement.

HB1103 This one is kind of different seems OK. Really does not seem to affect us since most of us have above 5 HP engines on our scooters. But it is trying to take some of the BS out of an already BS law. However, it may not be good since it does have text in it about helmets for operators on "scooters" with over 5 HP engines. May need to look at this one a little.

Senate Bill 548 This is another one requiring all operators of MC to wear safety helmet. Have not found where it is scheduled to be heard yet. Let us know if you know what is happening with this Bill.

Senate Bill 852 This is the Bill that Senator Chaisson has included the exact same text as in his SB29 (see above). This Bill has some laws that probably should be passed. Mr. Chaisson apparently was trying to get his helmet (steal some more of our rights) law through by tacking it on to a Bill that may have some merit. This Bill has been amended to excluded the text about motorcycle helmets ( thankfully there are at least a few legislators with some sense down south in our capital.). Mr. Chaisson's constituents should be admonishing him for wasting their money and their time in front of their legislature by his presentation of duplicate Bills. It would be nice to know what Mr. Chaisson's underlying agenda is. This Bill was amended and referred to a committee 5/20/2004.

ABATE N. Louisiana or it's officers are not responsible for any material or opinions associated with this website. This website "abatenorthlouisiana.org" only provides information and education. This site is in no way a commercial site. This site is in no way politically affiliated. Any and all material on this website is freely available elsewhere. Any trademarks, copyrighted material or other owned properties displayed on this site are to be the property of the respective instruments owner. By accessing this site the user agrees to these statements.