Does WA ban helmet cameras?

[hmwave]

I came across this video:

http :// www . youtube . com / watch?v=5o5b6255xhs (copy/paste and remove the spaces to launch the URL)

WA Tukwila county cop claiming it's a violation to have a helmet camera, or anything else mounted on helmet exterior.

(he may be right on the safety issue but in my experience GoPro mounts are so brittle I'd think the camera would be bouncing down the road by itself rather than torquing your neck around).

I spent some time searching the WA RCW site but can't find anything conclusive on helmet cam usage.

Anyone know?

 

[hmwave]

Possibly related...

CHAPTER 368
[substitute House Bill 1103]
MOTOR VEHICLES—USE OF TELEVISIONS
368 AN ACT Relating to the use of television viewers in motor vehicles; and amending RCW
46.37.480.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Washington:
Sec. 1. RCW 46.37.480 and 1996 c 34 s 1 are each amended to read as
follows:
(1) No person shall drive any motor vehicle equipped with any television
viewer, screen, or other means of visually receiving a television broadcast
((which is located in the motor vehicle at any point forward of the back of the
driver's seat, or which is)) when the moving images are visible to the driver
while operating the motor vehicle on a public road, except for live video of the
motor vehicle backing up. This subsection does not apply to law enforcement
vehicles communicating with mobile computer networks.
(2) No person shall operate any motor vehicle on a public highway while
wearing any headset or earphones connected to any electronic device capable of
receiving a radio broadcast or playing a sound recording for the purpose of
transmitting a sound to the human auditory senses and which headset or
earphones muffle or exclude other sounds. This subsection does not apply to
students and instructors participating in a Washington state motorcycle safety
program.
(3) This section does not apply to authorized emergency vehicles,
motorcyclists wearing a helmet with built-in headsets or earphones as approved
by the Washington state patrol, or motorists using hands-free, wireless
communications systems, as approved by the equipment section of the
Washington state patrol.
Passed by the House April 14, 2011.
Passed by the Senate April 1, 2011.
Approved by the Governor May 16, 2011.
Filed in Office of Secretary of State May 17, 2011.

 

[hmwave]

SENATE BILL 5143 is related.

But I can't find anything to support that offficer's claim.

 

[ANZAC]

I use a Drift HD riding around Vancouver and Portland with no worries. Keep the government away from our helmet cams.

 

[HotRodZilla]

Nothing in Hmwave's post restricts helmet cams. Your best bet is to look up your state statutes. Remember, there may be a rumor running around that guys department or precinct that the cams are illegal and instead of looking it up to be sure, he just stops people to tell them it's illegal. Prolly doesn't issue cites because he has no idea how to list it.

THAT would be my theory.

 

[Ignacio]

Admin Note: Let's keep this confined to Washington State, about helmet camera, or the points about things mounted on helmet exteriors....ideally a SPECIFIC RCW or not. It's not about about Federal law whether its legal to record a cops or not, wiretap, or anything else off the OP's topic. Thx.

--------------

I hear this rumor year after year and have never seen an actual RCW about this. And I've looked extensively and can't find any. I supposed there's a possibility I haven't found them, but I do have some familiarity with RCW....and haven't found the law that we also have to duct tape roses that are no older than a week to our helmets too.

I say there is NOT a WA law against helmet cameras nor any pending legislation.

The cops response when the guy asks what specific RCW isn't helpful certainly..I think it tends to reinforce the notion there isn't one against it. But we don't know if this cyclist has a history or note with local cops...I kinda wonder how much of a hooligan he is....or back in 2011 our state was wrestling with what to do with dirt bikes that people were using as street bikes and may have been a focus back then.

 

[DennisJ]

This was discussed on the PNWRiders forum (PNWRiders.com) last year or the year before and a citaton of the law provided by PMWRider member Tex who does a lot of pro motorcylcling outreach to the Legislature. If I remember correctly the law cited referenced any item that projected over a certain distance from the surface of the helmet. Something like 3/4 of an inch I think. I remember the "Mowhawk" haircut thngs as one item specifically mentioned. As with any encounter with law enforcement maintaining and polite and positive attitude (hard I know in the circumstance) seems to have a lot of influence on the outcome of your meeting with the LEO.

 

[Ignacio]

This was discussed on the PNWRiders forum (PNWRiders.com) last year or the year before and a citaton of the law provided by PMWRider member Tex who does a lot of pro motorcylcling outreach to the Legislature.

Link? I've heard that rumor too, am a member there, and and haven't been able to find it myself...including looking at all 152 posts by "Tex". Lots of chatter in 2011 & 201, but no actual law details. The only Washington State law I find on helmets is RCW 46.37.530 and appears to be silent about things on helmets like a GoPro.

 

[DennisJ]

Found a reference provided by a current WSP office in the "Ask A Leo" section of PNWRiders.com and have included it. Full link: pnwriders.com/law-enforcement/167976-helmet-cameras.html

_____________________________________________________________

The Washington RCW's (Revised Code of Washington) for helmet laws has the following excerpt -

(3) For purposes of this section, "motorcycle helmet" means a protective covering for the head consisting of a hard outer shell, padding adjacent to and inside the outer shell, and a neck or chin strap type retention system, with the manufacturer's certification applied in accordance with 49 C.F.R. Sec. 571.218 indicating that the motorcycle helmet meets standards established by the United States department of transportation.

When you look up the Federal Regulations for helmets, that describes the restrictions of the helmets. That is the law that restricts attachments to the helmets. Here is the post from the CFR's -

S5.5 Projections: A helmet shall not have any rigid projections inside its shell. Rigid projections outside any helmet's shell shall be limited to those required for operation of essential accessories, and shall not protrude more than 0.20 inch (5 mm).

So what is essential? Well, a camera such as a go pro, contour, or any other camera is not an essential item. As for the chatterbox and other communication devices, I think they fall under the following -

RCW 46.37.480 - Television viewers — Earphones - (3) This section does not apply to authorized emergency vehicles, motorcyclists wearing a helmet with built-in headsets or earphones as approved by the Washington state patrol, or motorists using hands-free, wireless communications systems, as approved by the equipment section of the Washington state patrol.

Are the chatterbox headsets approved by the state patrol? Not that I know of, but my interpretation is that it is a hands free device. As most things, it will come down to the officers discretion. If you are cited for the camera attached to the helmet, it will be for the Washington RCW 46.37.530 which references the Federal Regulation.

Here are the links -

Washington RCW's

Helmet Law - https://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.37.530

Earphones - https://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.37.480

Federal Regulation -

https://www.bikersrights.com/nhtsa/fmvss218.html (Look at section S5.5 Projections)


I hope this answers your questions.

 

[Ignacio]

Thank you DennisJ. Actual verifiable information and links directly related to the OP.

 

[hmwave]

Yes, thanks, exactly what I was looking for.

From my interpretation seems Bluetooth communicators/hands-free devices remain a gray area. I have a Scala G9 which protrudes a lot more than 5mm.

If it came to it, hopefully a reasonable conversation with an officer would result in a warning rather than a ticket wrt to the G9.