Helmet Law Opposition and Safety Construction in a State Motorcyclists’ Rights Organization

• In Event: 606 - Section on Social Psychology Roundtable Session (co-sponsored with Section on Sociology of Emotions)
  In Refereed Roundtable: Section on Social Psychology Roundtables (co-sponsored with Section on Sociology of Emotions). Table 01. Subjective Experiences

Abstract

Public health experts have advocated mandatory helmet laws as a necessary means to increase motorcyclists’ safety and uphold public health for over 40 years. Rejecting their arguments, some motorcyclists have successfully challenged such laws. This is an ethnographic study of the largest state motorcyclists’ rights organization (SMRO) in the United States and its institutionalized opposition to mandatory helmet laws. I focus on motorcyclists’ rights activists’ reasoning behind their opposition to mandatory helmet laws. I explore the connection between “freedom” and an interactionist meaning of safety fostered within the organization to explain opposition to mandatory helmet laws. I thereby address a gap that remains in current approaches to understanding health-related beliefs and behaviors through the study of an organization that has successfully opposed an expert health recommendation.

Author

• Scott Setchfield, Indiana University-Bloomington