Foolish decisions can be broken down into two categories: those which put others
at risk and those that pose a risk solely to the decision-maker. It is a most obvious priority for government to guard against the former, but why the need to guard against the latter? I think not!
 
The Alberta government is reviewing its safety rules for all-terrain vehicle
(ATV) use. Transportation Minister Luke Ouellette has made it known that he'd
like to see a mandatory helmet law introduced. This is all in response to pressure from injury researchers and activists who are crying "crisis" after a sharp increase in the number of ATV fatalities in
Alberta. Just four fatalities were registered in 2001, but that jumped to 12 in
2005, 22 in 2006, and 17 in 2007. Yet no atv or motorcycle helmet safety laws were repealed during that
period.

 
Meanwhile, we've seen an even sharper increase in the number of ATVs in use,
with Alberta leading the way nationally. More than 89,000 new ATVs were sold in
Canada in 2006, with 26 per cent of those sold in Alberta. It's been a steady trend, as ATV sales in Canada tripled between 1996 and 2001. Moreover, as the Canada Safety Council has pointed out, on a per-ATV basis, the rate of injury has been improving over the last 10 years. When it comes to ATVs, obtaining some training and wearing a helmet is advisable. Most responsible users already do so. Some clearly do not, but is that because they're waiting for the law to tell them to do so? If someone knows the risks of inexperience and/or not wearing a helmet and makes a foolish decision anyway, what difference would more regulation make?
 
Shouldn't any government's priority be improving safety in areas where it's outside
our control? Gang shootouts put others at risk. Drunk drivers put others at
risk. Tainted food puts others at risk. ATV users not smart enough to wear a helmet do not. As tragic as any death is, the reality is that someone riding his ATV recklessly and without a helmet in some remote back country is a threat to no one but himself. At the risk of sounding callous, it's really not my problem nor is it
my business. Of course, we always hear the health-care arguments -- that costs of responding
to and treating these injuries are too high and taking a too much of toll on
those working in the system. Universal health care should not be an excuse for government to run our lives.
By that rationale, it should be illegal to not exercise 30 minutes a day. And no
doubt we'd see fewer hospital visits if everyone wore a helmet while climbing a
ladder or ice skating or just walking around in general. 
 
Even if you accept the need for new laws, would they make a difference? 
 
An excellent example of how ineffective state intervention is as opposed to
education, common sense and responsibility can be found in New Hampshire, which
is the last U.S. state without a law mandating seatbelt use for adults. 
To be sure, New Hampshire's rate of seatbelt use is among the lowest in the
United States, but that has not led to high fatality rates. In fact, it is among
the lowest -- 16th overall in 2005.
 
Which begs the question -- do safety measures such as seatbelts or helmets
create a false sense of security in some people, thereby leading to more
risk-taking? When it comes to any new ATV laws or regulations, the enforcement hurdles cannot
be overlooked. As troublesome as the notion is of a drunk, helmetless yahoo ripping around his
acreage on an ATV, the notion of law enforcement entering that private property
to write a ticket is far more disturbing. But, of course, law enforcement would not be there to write a ticket, just as there is no possible way to police the vast majority of ATV use.
 
For example, it's already illegal to operate an ATV while under the influence of
alcohol. How many riders do you think have been cited for that? Again, it's
common sense and responsibility -- not fear of legal repercussions -- that guide
the majority of ATV users in the decision to ride sober. The province would do much better to look at ways of promoting ATV safety. Education can go a long way in helping to change attitudes, or ensuring that 
stupid decisions are at least informed ones.