Hmmm I am mixed on this, not sure why though because I am a big ATGATT proponent and feel everyone should wear gear including scooterists. But where does government interference stop? Makes me wonder what is next. It also seems like it would be hard to enforce. To me it is a no brainer to wear gear and I do even in the dead of summer - full gear. We are struggling with these issues here as well because the motorcycling/scooter communities are completely divided. You have those like myself that gear up even for a 5 minute jaunt and others who tootle down the highway at speed just wearing jeans and a t-shirt. Helmets are mandatory here and there is no choice and they have recently changed the helmet styles you are allowed to wear, no more beanies. I think government would be better to require riders who don't wear gear to carry extra medical insurance and those that do wear full gear should get a rebate on their insurance. The article is right in saying that most motorcyclists wear gear, and that more scooterists don't wear gloves, etc. I have seen some pretty unnerving things with my fellow scooterists, flip flops/dress shoes/high heels, various states of dress like shorts & skirts, NONE of this is going to stop the road rash and any sort of injury. I am forever having the gear talk and have actually converted a few folks to at least wearing jeans, motorcycle jacket and boots. I think they should look at Belgium see how they work their program. The whole thing about gear particularly in North America, if governments legislate its use there is always backlash claiming it is against rights and freedoms. Personally I feel that people who don't wear gear are selfish, because they aren't the only ones going out for the ride, it is the family and people that love them as well as they are the ones left looking after the person after the crash.
There is a lot of discussion on whether insurance rates should reflect your lifestyle choices. I guess that I'm not a real fan of this method but don't have a better suggestion. Except maybe address tort reform first before heading down this path...
I'd be in compliance except for the airbag jacket. So, as my grandpa used to say, "No skin off my teeth."
I live in Florida where all that is required is eye protection. It's always interesting to see what gear, if any, other riders where. I look at it this way...you're not going to win against the math. You will go down at least once. You will have some sort of accident. How really doesn't matter how it will happen, but it's going to happen. So why not wear at least a helmet at all time. Gloves at all times. A protected jacket at all times. Boots...well you get the picture. Protecting yourself only makes sense. I would do it mandated or not. My only concern with the French law is that in requiring certain things you increase the cost to the motorcyclist. An "airbag jacket" might run $500 for example. Which many can't afford. The price would come down due to demand that is true...but your still removing many potential riders out of the sport do to the cost of equipment.
The French government are forever proposing this sort of thing and almost never do such ideas pass into law. The reason is that French bikers will not accept this sort of interference from the state and will vigorously protest about it. Last year, the compulsory wearing of hi-vis was proposed, as was having to carry your own breath detector kit at all times. Both were about to be made law, then pulled as the people reacted against it. The French are brilliant at protesting against silly laws and often block motorways, ride slowly and all sorts of other methods to get their point across. These proposals will go the same way - into oblivion, thankfully.Whatever your views on ATGATT, this is not the way to go about it.