This is insane. Literally insane.
I am not for or against a helmet law. But racist?!
I can see it being an economic issue, but that's not race. Absolutely not. There are poor people of all stripes.
As it turns out, their data showed that the vast majority of people already used helmets. Those who don't are mostly those who can't afford it, and fining them won't make cycling safer for anyone.
The bias in the enforcement was substantial: black cyclists got 4 times as many tickets as white, and nearly half of the tickets were issued to homeless people.
If you cannot afford a helmet, you are less likely to wear one, and if you get fined for not wearing on, it isn't going to incentivize you to buy one - it's going to render you less able to buy one.
Or perhaps you are suggesting that black people are poorer because their ancestors adaptations to sunlight light have altered the way they handle their finances or respond to those incentives?
In which case, you shouldn't feel like a blasphemer and should just expound on those theories here. Please, don't leave them unsaid because we are just going to have to assume what you think. And we might make the error of assuming that you are just a racist.
Look up how black people go camping less, how they are better at sprinting than other races, etc.
Do you think a certain race simply not biking that much is so dangerous of a thought, it should be illegal to even think about it and should result in one being called epithets, as you just did?
Ridiculous.
You don't repeal laws because someone feels the law is being applied unequally. You fix the problem which causes that inequal problem, thus, resolving the problem for all laws.
Anything else is just people using race to get rid of specific laws they don't like.
However, context matters. The statistics they quoted showed that the helmet use was at 91% in Seattle.
So if you have a law that is punishing up to 9% of the population and you note some pretty ugly biases in the sample of those who get fined, then it doesn't sound unreasonable to conclude that maybe we don't need to be doing that right now.
Murder has more people obeying that law, therefore, it should be looked at more eagerly with the same optics.
Looking at how only 91% of people are obeying a law, is an absurd and ridiculous method to determine if the law should exist.
You speak of logistical fallacies, but this entire premise is a fallacy.
Fix the problem, fix what leads to inequal application of the law. Removing this law, will not prevent every other law, even the charging of people of colour with murder, which happens excessively as well, when they are innocent.
Ridiculous!
When I see people commit crime in Seattle, the perps are overwhelmingly homeless, so I can’t say I’m surprised.
A) People of African/Melanesian/Aborigine heritage can have hair that is near impossible to wear a helmet with
B) Sikhs. I know in my country that they're exempt from motorcycle helmet laws provided they don't exceed 50km/h.