New cali helmet/obstacle marking laws?

snomaster

snomaster

Active member
I just saw this disturbing story on TetonAT... I wear a helmet and think others should too, but the law has no place being so involved with our ski resorts, especially if they have ANYTHING to do with deciding boundary areas, roping obstacles, etc. Leave that to ski patrol who know their mountains.

----

License, Registration…and Helmet Son.

by randosteve August 30th, 2010

http://www.tetonat.com/2010/08/license-registrationand-helmet-son/#more-15233

You might not hear an officer ask you to show your helmet when you’re driving down the highway, but if you are under 18 and ski in any of the resorts in California, you just might have to as early as the 2010/11 season…by law.Last week, the California state senate passed a bill (SB880) that would make helmets mandatory for skiers and snowboarders under the age of 18 riding at any of the many winter resorts within it’s boarders, with a fine of up to $25 for those that violate it. At the same time, the state assembly passed another bill (AB1652) that would make California resorts publicly report fatal injuries that were incurred on it’s property. It would also require ski areas to implement better boundary line and danger zone signage. Both bills await Gov. Schwarzenegger’s signature and he has until Sept. 30 to make them into laws.

While I would agree that it seems like a good idea to make sure that some hazards are marked better, I think the danger of laws like this are that ski areas will be forced to rope off and close some of the funnest terrain they have. There is such a huge judgment factor involved when deciding what is kind of terrain is hazardous and what is not. To some suit in the senate, yeah…a 15 ‘ cliff, a boulder in the middle of a slope, and downed tree…all of these things could easily be looked at as hazardous features. BUT, to many others, they are legitimate places to ski and ride…and the whole reason they ski the first place. I probably would have voted against this one.

In regards to the helmet issue, this one just seems plain wrong and bad for the sport of skiing. If they want to pass a helmet law, they should have it stop at the age of 12 or so. 18 just seems too old for the long arm of the law to be telling a kid what to do when they are just out having fun. I think most teens now-a-days wear helmets anyway and there will always be injuries whether one wears a helmet or not. Generally I would say helmet use should be left up to the individual based on their own assessment of risk.
 
It's good that they've passed a bill on compulsory helmet wearing for under 18s, but I think it's stupid that if you're under 18 and caught not wearing one that you have to pay a fine...
 
Welcome to the new big brother state. Where a bunch of out of touch lawyers get to tell you what's good for you and what's bad for you.

Although I think it's dumb not to wear a helmet, I think it's twice as worse that someone can tell you what decision that you make.
 
i really think people should wear helmets, but the government telling them to do so is the wrong way to get it done imo. perhaps state mandated lower ticket prices for people who wear helmets would be a better way? as for the other bill, that is bullshit, but it shouldn't be too much of a problem if mountains are smart enough to mark stuff as 'dangerous' rather than 'out of bounds' so the gapers know where not to go
 
why the fuck do people feel the need to make this type of shit into laws? wearing a helmet, or skiing in a dangerous area is dangerous to yourself only. its a personal choice to put yourself in that situation and we have every right to do so. laws are not there to take place of your own common sense, people need to be responsible for their own fucking decisions and actions. I fucking hate the type of people who think this shit is a good idea.

 
Good, i know for a fact that my wearing of a helmet has saved my life twice. and for those who are saying that by 18 your old enough to make your own decisions they're right, but this law is for people under 18 who are still not able to make smart choices on their own and frankly have parents that have lost control of them. I think this will teach kid the benefits of wearing a helmets and also help greatly with the insurance costs of running the resort(i know there will still be injuries but this will reduce them a bit).
 
false. when things go wrong, ski patrol or SAR are obligated to go find you and save you. Thus putting them at risk as well.
 
If a ski patrol doesn't want to risk themselves to save another person, then they shouldn't be a patroler. They know that when they sign up, that they may be put in risky situations.

We had a new firefighter join, that blatantly said that he'd never risk his own life, just to try and save someone else. Word got around in a flash, and this guy was gone within a month.

OP related, this is just another rung on the ladder, along with laws banning trans fat, salt, smoking in bars, fast food restaurants, etc.
 
CALIFORNIA HAS BEEN AT THE FOREFRONT OF HELMET LEGISLATION FOR YEARS. I LIVED IN THE BAY AREA FROM 1991 THROUGH 2003. ANYTIME A COP SAW ANYONE UNDER 18 NOT WEARING A HELMET WHILE DOING ANYTHING THAT INVOLVED MOVING OTHER THAN SITTING IN A CAR, WALKING, JOGGING, OR RUNNING WITHOUT A HELMET THEY'D GET THEIR SHIT YELLED AT!

/caps lock
 
they know the risks of being a ski patroller, nobody is forcing them to get a job as a ski patroller, its their choice to choose a job that involves taking risks to help others. ive got a couple friends who are ski patrollers and they hate how much they have to rope off and enforce pointless crap. and ive never once heard them complain about being put in a dangerous situation, hell thats the reason most of them chose that job, thats what they love about it, whenever they have to do some intense rescue (which isnt very often) they come back super pumped about it.
this is just another example of why people need to be held responsible for their own choices and actions. if someone wants to be a ski patroller thats their choice, and their choice to sign up for a job that has risks involved. If they got hurt on the job, thats nobodys fault but their own that. they could have avoided that by not signing up for a somewhat dangerous job. we dont need laws telling people that they have to make safe choices, and we dont need laws telling people they need to choose safe jobs.
 
i seriously wonder if the governator is going to pass these...

ive been tracking these bills since like april and i honestly cant figure out his views on helmets

hes a pretty die-hard skier given his celebrity status and has been at mammoth a ton of times ive been out skiing

ive never seen him wear a helmet in person or in any photos...
 
wow, that is quite some bitching and moaning

Was it only a few years ago that resorts in Western Canada took down all the jumps to minimize the liability? If making helmets enforced keeps up the terrain we love, then it is a small sacrifice some of you are going to make.
 
well atleast Schwarzenegger is a skiier and prolly skied in Austria, so maybe he will make a good judgement on the marking issue.
 
Hey, just look at it this way: mandated helmet laws will most likely translate into cheaper insurance for ski areas, which could in turn translate into lower lift ticket prices.
 
YES.

do you want legislative reps dictating how trails are marked and roping off extreme terrain?

on helmets... I would much prefer incentives to encourage helmet use than having laws against it.

overall, I just want to keep the law as far away from skiing as possible.
 
Cheaper insurance=More money in the owners pockets.

And that is the only thing that cheaper insurance would do. Resorts are still setting attendance records, with ticket prices as they are. Pass prices are going up every year, EVEN IF insurance rates go down, prices won't.
 
i dont think they would drop prices but why does it matter im pretty sure most people on this website wear helmets already
 
So what happens at Heavenly?

And how is this law (if signed) going to be enforced? Is the ski patrol going to be handing out fines? Or will there be police on skis? Seems like quite a hassle to have to stop a kid, somehow determine if he is under 18 (pull out an id?), then issue a ticket, all on mountain. Dumb, the government needs to stop tell everyone what is good or bad and let us make our own decisions.
 
Good idea I think. I actually prefer wearing a helmet, I know I'll go harder, and I think it's more warm.
 
from my understanding the resort just needs to post signs regarding the law on things like the main lifts, trail maps, etc. but isn't responsible for enforcing the law

probably going to be enforced when kids get concussions or whatever at hospitals and are found not wearing helmets or maybe the occasional police raid at the resort

besides - its the parents getting fined, not the kids
 
sorry but this is gonna be a little long...

so first off, helmet laws have been around in CA for a long time. Growing up from the time I could ride a bike until I turned 18 I was required by law to wear a helmet. So i would ride my bike out of view of my house and ditch the helmet, the thing is if an 18 and under person doesn't want to wear one they won't and their parents are just going to get stuck with fines. I don't see any harm in the idea behind the law other than the government stepping in and telling citizens how they need to live their lives or how their children need to live their lives.

secondly, ski patrol can be a paid or volunteer position at many mountains. my dad has been a volunteer patrol member for over 20 years, and quite honestly he does not get all stoked on crazy rescues. i'm sure younger members may still, but he would much rather guarantee his personal safety by calling another member of the patrol to assist or perhaps take control of the situation (not saying my dad would do this, but as he gets older his personal well being is becoming a little more of a priority). i do agree there is a willingness to accept risk, but not every patrol member wants to be rappelling down through the corkscrew at squaw to help an injured rider.

thirdly, and perhaps the main point of all this, is that a law requiring increased signage and padding obstacles beyond man made structures is ludicrous. the guy who pushed for the law obviously suffered a huge loss with the death of his 24 year old daughter, however, he obviously does not understand the way the skier code works. every resort marks obstacles to the best of their ability, but it is always the rider's responisbility to accept and assess the risk they are taking. if they start padding trees, rocks, and closing cliffs and features that are deemed to dangerous they are destroying a major aspect of the sport, risk. without risk skiing would be similar to a lot of other more "mainstream" sports, risk is the reason we all do this because it gives us the adrenaline rush and stoke at the bottom of a park, cliff, line, whatever it may be.

/rant
 
Ya I wear a helmet most of the time and think they are a great idea, but a helmet law is fuuuucked up. Kids fucking parents should be capable of taking care of that, and lets face it kids without competent parents can't afford to ski.

If I lived in cali and was under 18 and that passed I would get a die cut that takes up my entire helmet and says "fuck you" and wear it errrry day.
 
Please mister politician, come and wipe my kids ass for me too, I'm far too incompetent to make any of my own decisions or take responsibility for my own choices or parenting.
Oh yeah, and while you are at it, please make more helmets laws, for backyard trampolines, ice skating, gymnastics, diving boards, and riding in cars, all of which carry a risk of head injury that is comparable to skiing.
Support helmet use all you want, but supporting helmet laws is fucking unbelievable.
The world has gone so soft in the last 30 years, a bunch of pussies ready to bend over and let politicians and lobbyists dictate how they should raise their kids.
 
If people could man up, take responsibility for their own actions, stop blaming everyone else for something thats 100% their fault, stop expecting everyone to tell them how to live their life, there would be no need for huge insurance cost's, because people wouldnt be blaming the resort for there retarded mistakes. it basically goes for everything. not just skiing. the more laws you have to control people, the worse it gets in pretty much every way.
 
i think if anything this is a statement on how crappy parents are today.

i mean seriously, if parents would do their jobs and force their kid to wear a helmet, this law would never have been passed in the first place.
 
thank you!!!! i cant wait till i have kids, so i can shelter them from pussy real world. encourage dangerous behavior all the time, let them play with knives and guns, let them play on the roof. shit i wont allow protective pads. if they wanna skateboard, ski, bmx or whatever, they are gonna have to get hurt.
 
the dude who inspired and pushed for the increased signage/ ropes had his daughter die at Alpine Meadows a few years back. Alpine has an open boundry policy which means that inbounds and "backcountry" are marked but not roped off or gate accessed. his daughter jessica was hiking along a knife edge ridge to get to one of the many in-bounds but hike-to bowls that alpine has. on one side of the ridge is the resort, the other side is backcountry. she slipped and fell down the backcountry part of the ridge and suffered fatal injuries. alpine patrollers responded and were unable to save her.

i know the area and let me tell you, if you are walking a quarter mile along the ridge to get to some drop in area, you can plainly see you don't want to fall off the backside. 100% her fault, or the fault of the person who took her out there. This os similar to the case of the kid who overshot the jump in WA and sued the resort. Both could plainly see the risk, went for it, and lost.
 
You do realize that until about 1990, no kids wore helmets on ski hills, unless they were racing. So are we to assume that every single parent from 1900-1990 were "crappy parents"?
EVERYONE who's over 30 skied without a helmet when they were kids, and miraculously the vast majority of us somehow escaped death, in spite of our "crappy parents".
 
Whoops, maybe I missed your point and we are on the same track. I thought I detected sarcasm but I might have been off base
 
people also didnt wear seatbelts and thought smoking was fine, are you going to encourage your kids to do that too? times change. its not 1990 anymore.
 
Good point, at this rate by 2040 everyone will have to wear helmets and full body armour for any activity that has ever produced an injury, can't wait.
 
But holy crap! Most of them are still alive and perfectly fine. I for one think that, like others have said, the government needs to stop tell us what is good and bad for us and let us make our own decisions.
 
I have decided to wear a helmet this year for a majority of days but thats my personal choice i wouldnt force that on someone else
 
shit, 1990 was taking it too far, im thinking 50's safety at the least, but more like 1800's safety. i may have lived till 50 back then, but it would have been worth it.

 
im fine with common sense stuff, like using a seatbelt if its there, wearing a helmet if you have one. but it has definitely gone too far. there's still a ballance between unnecessary risk/stupidity, and being a total pussy. and unfortunately it has gone way too far to the pussy end, and the negative effects are starting to show more and more. i was camping with my friends by ourselves by the time we were 11 for multiple days. my parents didnt care if i wore a helmet, ive got a couple concussions, 5 broken bones, almost cut my finger off, gotten poisoned multiple times, etc.. and im glad that every one of those things happened to me. its had nothing but a positive effect on me, and nothing had any lasting effects, yet.
ive got friends who were raised much more strictly when it came to safety, and its just annoying doing anything active with them. everything hurts, everything makes them sore, they are uncoordinated, boring, have very little common sense since everything they learned was through books and their parents. not real life experiences. shit one friend wouldnt ski for a month because he had a bruise on his elbow. you definitely miss out on alot of living when your not taking risks and getting hurt. and yes, every now and then it may result in lasting injuries, death etc.. but its worth the risk.
hell my grandpa grew up on a farm, almost lost his leg when he was a little kid, got in tons of fights, knew how to shoot when he was 4, got kicked and bucked off a horse multiple times all this before he was 10, was a fighter pilot in WWII, lost two finger's, rode a motorcycle daily up until 5 years ago, fell multiple times, fell off his roof when he was 70. smoked quite a bit, hates doctors, and he's 96. and the coolest/happiest person i know.
all those pussies out there who have never taken a risk in their life are just gonna end up getting killed by a drunk driver or something anyway so whats the point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top