Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > Help!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-09-2001, 04:49 AM   #51
banda
Founding Member
 
banda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 230
Default Re: GRRRRR....

Hello?



Read the original post. The writer was about how much more it costs HIM to hit a helmetless rider instead of one with a lid.



That's not a reason to mandate helmet use.



I was not arguing not to wear a helmet. Was there anything in my post that sounded like an argument not to wear a helmet? No.



Learn how to read, dingleberry.



I was just pointing out that the original poster's argument was that riders should be REQUIRED to wear helmets, not for their own safety, but so that he personally wouldn't be liable for their injuries when he ran over them.



That's like saying that everyone should be required to wear bullet-proof vests so that HE won't be in as much trouble when he accidentally shoots them. Sure, we would all be safer if we wore bullet-proof vests all day long, but it's intrusive, and it doesn't address the main point that this SOB shouldn't be shooting at citizens in the first place.



I CHOOSE to wear a Snell rated full face helmet, Aerostich, boots and proper gloves EVERY time I ride my bike. My choice shouldn't give the original poster carte blanche to hit me with his car. I think he ought to treat me as though I weren't protected, regardless of what my state requires me to wear.



So, smart-ass with poor reading skills, do you wear the level of protective equipment that I do? If you do, then that's an achievement of wisdom far beyond your reading comprehension skills.
banda is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 02-09-2001, 04:51 AM   #52
CYCLE_MONKEY
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 154
Default Re: Helmet Law Repeal Stats

This should really be a non-issue. I, personally, wear a helmet. Aside from the obvious safety issue, much more comfortable than being pelted with bugs, rain, cigarettes, ashes, wind, rain, and all the other road debris. In addition to all this, the wind noise, watery eyes, and the wind burn. I can't imagine riding without. Think of taking a long trip in your car, at 70mph, with your head sticking out the window the whole way. Not very appealing, eh? If all this appeals to you, more power to you, brother, and good luck. I'll never stand in the way of your personal freedom. HOWEVER, do not ask for me to pay for your medical bills, or subsidise the cost of your insurance. It is very easy to prove statistically that there are more, and more severe injuries recieved by going helmetless. Just as the evil insurance companies are allowed to charge extra for teenage male drivers (paid my dues many years ago), and smokers, they should also be allowed to charge more for helmetless riders. And if you have no insurance, Joe Public shouldn't have to pay for YOUR choice. Emergency rooms should be allowed to refuse service to the uninsured, as long as it's coming out of OUR wallet. There, wasn't that simple?
CYCLE_MONKEY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2001, 04:57 AM   #53
banda
Founding Member
 
banda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 230
Default Re: Helmet Law Repeal Stats

All good points.



I would offer another couple of factors to be taken into consideration, fatalities per mile travelled, and traffic density.



I think that you will find that there are many more good riding weather weekend days in some years than there are in others. 5 rainy weekends in a summer would reduce the total number of motorcycle miles travelled by a significant percentage. Less miles travelled usually translates to less opportunity to get your melon crushed by a semi.



Also, taffic density on rural and urban roads has climbed sharply. Since the early 70's, we have increased the total number of miles of paved road in the states by about 50%. The total number of licensed vehicles however has quadrupled. That means there are more than twice as many cars on any given mile of paved road today than there was a couple decades ago. Denser traffic means more collisions.



To be completely fair, any statistics would have to take these factors into account.
banda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2001, 05:04 AM   #54
ducatirdr
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 130
Default Re: Helmet Law Repeal Stats

ABATE in Massacusetts is working on repealing the helmet law here. Most of the action is forced by the fact that most harley riders are riding with beanie novelty helmets here in the state and are getting pulled over and ticketed for an illegal helmet. Seeing how the court system has no legal definition of a legal helmet all you need is a dot sticker. Still the state police write tickets. We know it's more harashment than trying to save lives.



My biggest problem with open face helmets is the parachute effect with the wind pulling on the helmet over 45mph without a windshield. Full face helmets on a slow ride down mainstreet on a 90F hot summer day is not fun.



On the Duc the full face goes on because I ride the bike with sport in mind. I also geek out in full leathers, race boots and gloves. I look like a power ranger but I point to the rash on the left side from a past low side and smile. Ever notice how trends force saftey better than laws. No one rides a bicycle now without a helmet. It's too uncool.



Ever notice that kid's on sport-bikes spend $500 on a helmet and wear a nylon windbreaker and sweat pants. HD riders spend $500 on leather jacket, pants and gloves and no helmet.
ducatirdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2001, 05:09 AM   #55
banda
Founding Member
 
banda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 230
Default Re: Helmet Law Repeal Stats

YOU have chosen to take this scenario to explain that if the state had required the guy to wear a helmet, it wouldn't be costing you as a tax-payer.



Wouldn't your interests be better served if this guy had insurance?



So maybe the state shouldn't be so concerned about requiring helmet use, but they should require proof of health coverage.



Think about it. Your neghbor, wearing a dandy helmet, slides into a guard-rail and slices off his legs, spilling his vital organs all of the embankment. He has no insurance, so you and I end up paying for his surgeries, hospital stays and eventual rehab treatments. That costs us money. But he had a helmet on!



Let's re-run the scenario, except your neighbor has insurance and doesn't wear a helmet. He hits the guard-rail with his noggin, and becomes a life-long, incurable Democrat. Sucks to be him, but his insurance picks up the majority of the tab. Doesn't cost us a thing.



Which scenario is better for society?
banda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2001, 05:16 AM   #56
GSparky
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 8
Default Re: Helmet Law Repeal Stats

When I was much younger, I had the occassion to do a surprise endo after hitting a hidden culvert in the right of way in high grass. Upon examination of my helmet afterwards, I found a HUGE gash which if it had been my head would no doubt caused me much grief. Or perhaps none at all if it killed me. There is a fate worse than death in a motorcycle accident, and that is to be left with brain damage and/or permanent disability



Do your self and all of your family a favor. Wear a good full face helmet and as much protective gear as you can get on.
GSparky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2001, 05:21 AM   #57
ArtOfTheMotorcycle
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 29
Default Re: Natural selection

Unfortunately, when than idiot becomes a vegetable because he wasn't wearing a helmet, natural selection doesn't do its thing. He ends up getting parked in a hospital bed and after he has bankrupted his family, becomes a ward of the state. Too bad society would never permit the live-free types to sign away their rights to endless medical care.
ArtOfTheMotorcycle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2001, 05:24 AM   #58
DataDan
Founding Member
 
DataDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 117
Default Re: Helmet Law Repeal Stats

I don't know of a good measure of traffic density. Miles traveled is available nationally but not by state. Registrations was the only measure of exposure provided in the NHTSA evaluation.


I argue, however, that for the present purpose--comparing changes year-to-year within a state--registrations is a satisfactory measure of exposure.
DataDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2001, 05:45 AM   #59
Iman01
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 55
Default Re: A few words from some prominent people.....

Are you to dumb to get the point? Ben didn't say just the liberties that are fashionable.
Iman01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2001, 05:56 AM   #60
x1lightening
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 34
Default Re: GRRRRR....

If you read my post thoroughly, you might have noticed that I mentioned that I do wear my helmet. I wear my helmet, because of some of the reasons that you mentioned above, but mainly is I like my head right where it is and in the condition it is in. That and the fact I trust very few of the idiots out there driving cars.

you mention peer pressure? I find this hard to believe in the area that I ride in. The majority of sportbike riders DO wear them and this is a no helmet law state. On occassion you will see a few without them, but that is thier own decision. Most people that have ridden for any amount of time have laid thier bike down or have been pulled out in front of by a car and know the repercussions of thier actions.

I am by no means stating that it is smart not to wear a helmet. What I stated is that the governement has no place in this decision. When you get in your car with a buddy, do you tell him to put his seatbelt on? If you get pulled over for some reason, if the passenger is not wearing his seatbelt does the driver get the ticket? no the passenger does. Its his decision, his responsibiblity. It is a proven point that seatbelts do save lives and so do helmets, but is that the governements decision to make. This individual is making his own choice, and is responsible for his own choice. If you would like to take this argument to the extreme, then you can state that all motorcycles are unsafe, that motorcycle riders are more apt to be injured in an accident, that the medical costs of those accidents are more expensive, and thus the government should mandate that they are not legal to be ridden at all. This may not be a great scenario for this argument, but I think you might get the point.

"Helmet laws are an issue of social responsibibity, not individual rights" This clause really catches my eye. For some reason I forgot that the US was a socialist country? Forgot we were not the land of the free! This is even beter for us motorcyle riders!!! WITH SOCIALISM, COMES SOCIALIZED MEDICINE! thus destroying your whole argument about insurance companies, insurance costs, you having to pay for my skull as you run me down in your car, etc, etc etc....

Those of us that have experience on a motorcycle know the importance of our safety equipment. We don't need to be told! I am truley sorry to hear that the riders in your area do not wear them due to peer pressure, but that speaks of the intelligence level and maturity of the riders in your area. "I don't want to be the ony full-face geek on the street" ???????? MAke your own decision and show some intelligence. You obviously live in a free state, make your own decison, your peers don't have to live with your decision or the repercussions or your decision, YOU DO!

Motorcycle riders should be able to make thier own decisions in regards to this issue, they might be poor decisions, but they are THIER decisions.
x1lightening is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off