A Vancouver cyclist is challenging British Columbia's mandatory helmet law in court, arguing it discourages cycling and actually makes roads more dangerous for riders.
Ron van der Eerden's Friday hearing is the culmination of his two-year fight over a $29 ticket he received for not wearing a helmet during a trip through downtown Vancouver in 2009.
"There was a police officer there just picking off cyclists one-by-one, giving out helmet tickets," he said, admitting he had broken the law.
But Van der Eerden says the law violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms – and scares off potential riders by painting cycling as a dangerous activity.
"The fact is it does reduce people's inclination to ride a bike, and that's not good for your health, it's not good for the environment and it's not generally good for the safety of cyclists."
He admits that helmets can save lives, but says if more cyclists occupied the roads then drivers would instinctively drive more cautiously – saving the lives of motorists and bike riders alike.
Physician and avid cyclist Tom Demarco agrees, arguing that "for every brain we potentially may save with a helmet, we may be losing another one in an accident that wouldn't have happened if we didn't enact the law."
Demarco is testifying on behalf of Van der Eerden, who is representing himself in court.
He's been wearing a helmet for 30 years, but doesn't believe it should be legislated. If anyone should be subjected to inconvenient regulations, it's drivers, Demarco said.
"Why don't we make it less convenient, more expensive, slower and emphasize the dangers of driving not only to the occupants of the vehicles but to everybody else," he said.
The Crown is expected to argue that helmets save lives and prevent massive health care costs to the public for injured cyclists.
Quebec currently has no legal helmet requirement, while Alberta only requires cyclists 18-years-old or younger to wear head protection.
