You don't repeal laws because someone feels the law is being applied unequally. You fix the problem which causes that inequal problem, thus, resolving the problem for all laws.
Anything else is just people using race to get rid of specific laws they don't like.
However, context matters. The statistics they quoted showed that the helmet use was at 91% in Seattle.
So if you have a law that is punishing up to 9% of the population and you note some pretty ugly biases in the sample of those who get fined, then it doesn't sound unreasonable to conclude that maybe we don't need to be doing that right now.
Murder has more people obeying that law, therefore, it should be looked at more eagerly with the same optics.
Looking at how only 91% of people are obeying a law, is an absurd and ridiculous method to determine if the law should exist.
You speak of logistical fallacies, but this entire premise is a fallacy.
Fix the problem, fix what leads to inequal application of the law. Removing this law, will not prevent every other law, even the charging of people of colour with murder, which happens excessively as well, when they are innocent.
Ridiculous!