Abstract
Helmet laws are suggestive of a societal trend toward the increased formal control of risky behaviors. Applying Tittle's integrated model, this case study sees the intersection of federal cost recovery interests, social solidarity concerns, and views of motorcyclists as “social dynamite” as setting the stage for motorcycle safety issues to become constructed as social problems. A governmental bureaucracy has led numerous helmet law campaigns. Financial burden and public safety arguments are used to justify helmet restrictions. A countermovement argues that helmet laws could lead to a slippery slope of declining freedoms. Implications of the debates between opposing positions are raised.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
