AMA political call to action

[fiddle mike]

http://capwiz.com/amacycle/callalert/index.tt?alertid=58411501

[Karen]

Thanks, will call.

[BF]

I think you should have the right to not wear a helmet if you don't want to.  However, you also have the right to have your brains splattered all over the highway if you don't.  Same with seatbelt laws. 

[Rocketman]

I just read the AMA write-up.  I'm confused by the last point they have.  What does it mean to redefine "motor vehicle equipment" to include motorcycle helmets, and why would that be a bad thing?  Even if it does "quietly suggest" to states that they spend money on helmets, why is THAT a bad thing?  What does that definition affect?
These are not leading questions, I honestly want to know.

Another question the article brings up is brought on by my cynical nature:  Whenever I'm told that there are two amendments: one is good and here's why; the other is good, just trust us... I get nervous.

For the record (although this should have NO bearing on my other comments):  I support all the other points in this write-up.

Mark