Helmet Laws

[Zzzz]

**comparative to the rest of the motoring world

iPhone keypad = much to be desired

 

[dean owens]

if the general public is too dumb to govern ourselves, how is it that we are smart enough to elect the few wise ones among us to do it for us?

i'm very much for self-governance. i think people should have the freedom to be stupid. we learn from making mistakes. if those mistakes are painful enough we don't do them again.

but let's say we can't figure that out. let's say that government can solve all of our problems. i have a few things... some of which have been brought up already. first, studies have been done that show if you're serious about fatalities in car accidents then everyone should wear a helmet. how serious are we about getting the government involved with that?

for those that think that all these laws make everything safer you should look into nascar. i know very little about nascar but i do know that after dale earnhardt died they put in all sorts of safety measures. what they have found is those safety measures haven't made it safer. knowing they are safer, the drivers now take many more risks in the races now. in general this is how we operate as people. when there is less fear of harm we tend to be more reckless in our behavior.

also, where does it stop. is it just helmets? what about someone who is wearing a helmet (and therefore lives) but is just wearing shorts and flip-flops? they go down and need a lot of skin graphs. this will cost a lot of time and money. how does that work into everyone's "if i'm going to pay for them" mentality? i wear jeans when i ride. they are not good riding pants. should i be allowed to ride? or is only after i have bought a full leather suit?

lastly, let's take this a place none of you want to go. i've had sex with one woman my whole life and that's my wife. at some point this was motivated by my religious beliefs but i didn't become a christian until late in high school. i chose not to have sex with anyone until i got married well before becoming a christian. why? STDs! i didn't want any of them. we could virtually wipe out all STDs (including AIDS) in one to two generations if we all only had one sexual partner for our whole lives. i think we can all agree that getting rid of STDs would be a good thing. and i think we can all agree that we don't want anyone to die of AIDS. since we can all agree that STDs do drain money away from the health care system (as well as money sent to places in africa to help with the epidemic there) i think that can only lead to one conclusion. we need to make it illegal to have sex with anyone you are not married to. and we need to make it illegal to ever get a divorce after getting married. i think we can all agree that would be best for us and save a number of lives and save a lot of money. who's with me? :rockon:

for the record i have always worn a fullfaced helmet. i think it's stupid to do otherwise. but i believe people should have the right to be stupid.

 

[dstaffx]

if the general public is too dumb to govern ourselves, how is it that we are smart enough to elect the few wise ones among us to do it for us?

i'm very much for self-governance. i think people should have the freedom to be stupid. we learn from making mistakes. if those mistakes are painful enough we don't do them again.

but let's say we can't figure that out. let's say that government can solve all of our problems. i have a few things... some of which have been brought up already. first, studies have been done that show if you're serious about fatalities in car accidents then everyone should wear a helmet. how serious are we about getting the government involved with that?

for those that think that all these laws make everything safer you should look into nascar. i know very little about nascar but i do know that after dale earnhardt died they put in all sorts of safety measures. what they have found is those safety measures haven't made it safer. knowing they are safer, the drivers now take many more risks in the races now. in general this is how we operate as people. when there is less fear of harm we tend to be more reckless in our behavior.

also, where does it stop. is it just helmets? what about someone who is wearing a helmet (and therefore lives) but is just wearing shorts and flip-flops? they go down and need a lot of skin graphs. this will cost a lot of time and money. how does that work into everyone's "if i'm going to pay for them" mentality? i wear jeans when i ride. they are not good riding pants. should i be allowed to ride? or is only after i have bought a full leather suit?

lastly, let's take this a place none of you want to go. i've had sex with one woman my whole life and that's my wife. at some point this was motivated by my religious beliefs but i didn't become a christian until late in high school. i chose not to have sex with anyone until i got married well before becoming a christian. why? STDs! i didn't want any of them. we could virtually wipe out all STDs (including AIDS) in one to two generations if we all only had one sexual partner for our whole lives. i think we can all agree that getting rid of STDs would be a good thing. and i think we can all agree that we don't want anyone to die of AIDS. since we can all agree that STDs do drain money away from the health care system (as well as money sent to places in africa to help with the epidemic there) i think that can only lead to one conclusion. we need to make it illegal to have sex with anyone you are not married to. and we need to make it illegal to ever get a divorce after getting married. i think we can all agree that would be best for us and save a number of lives and save a lot of money. who's with me? :rockon:

for the record i have always worn a fullfaced helmet. i think it's stupid to do otherwise. but i believe people should have the right to be stupid.

One of the problems is that some stupid people don't get to learn from there mistakes because the mistake kills them.
Anyway. Its human nature to endanger ourselves. Even if we are 100% protected we will find a way to kill ourselves by accident.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

 

[Zzzz]

I've only got one problem with the 'free the head' group of thought - I feel damn sorry for the guy driving a cage who has a motorcyclist accidentally lay himself down coming round a corner at high speed. The poor cage driver who has to live with the knowledge that he killed a motorcyclist, regardless of the fact that it wasn't his fault. And I doubt it'll be any consolation that it could have been avoided if only the stupid motorcyclist wore a helmet

 

[Nelly]

why? STDs! i didn't want any of them. we could virtually wipe out all STDs (including AIDS) in one to two generations if we all only had one sexual partner for our whole lives. i think we can all agree that getting rid of STDs would be a good thing. and i think we can all agree that we don't want anyone to die of AIDS. since we can all agree that STDs do drain money away from the health care system (as well as money sent to places in africa to help with the epidemic there) i think that can only lead to one conclusion. we need to make it illegal to have sex with anyone you are not married to. and we need to make it illegal to ever get a divorce after getting married. i think we can all agree that would be best for us and save a number of lives and save a lot of money. who's with me? :rockon:

There is a lot of sense to what you are saying. I agree with some of it and I disagree with other parts.
I think that you over simplify the whole Aids/HIV agenda.
Thousands of people have HIV due to no consequence of their love making decisions.
HIV has been transmitted through more than one medium:
Infected blood transfusions.
Children infected during delivery from an infected mother.
Healthcare workers who receive a sharps injury.
Addicts who share needles.
What I take form your argument is that all these people should be denied the right to experience a fundamental human emotion? I am sure this is not the case. You are quite correct that some STD’s could be resolved with responsibility and care. People can also choose to wear condoms. Sadly it will take more than one or two generations before HIV is finally a disease of the past.
I like your argument and reasoning but the HIV comparison misses the mark.

Nelly

 

[Tailgate]

Given the choice, I'll opt out of Nanny state government. It's never been done (I don't think so) but what would we say if we're told that motorcycle riding is too dangerous, helmet or not? I enjoy riding a bicycle sans helmet---but I suppose that will be going by the wayside soon. I imagine the same for snow skiing, etc. Oh well. Of course, none of this is to say that they're aren't pros as well in requiring outdoor enthusiasts, motorists to buckle up, strap on (er' maybe I should've phrased that better...).

This is off topic (sort of) but do others in US scratch their heads why in the USA, seatbelts are not required equipment (except for the driver!) in busses? WTF? You go to other countries and busses have a seatbelt for every frickin' passenger. it's not like there aren't mulitple fatality bus crashes in the US. Go figure...

 

[Tailgate]

Exactly what I was going to say!

If helmets aren't mandatory, why are seatbelts?

Both save lives, both should be required.

Helmets in cars, too? If so, I imagine that they'd be available in a more lightweight type of helmet should that day ever come.

 

[TampaFZ6]

Not everyone is at a state of mind to do the right thing about protecting themselves appropriately. I agree with the folks on the forum who say that government medical cost will go way up and that would justify state government to require people to protect themselves appropriately. If people have their own medical insurance and sign a waiver that they will not be dependant on state medical care than they can do what they want in protecting themselves. My sister got into a car accident and was not wearing her seat belt. Now she lives in a nursing home on government medical care unable to walk because she hit her head and the impact damaged her brain stem. The rest of her brain works fine but the area that controls her body functions was damaged. My own personal experience was hitting the ground turning around in gravel on a slope where my head impacted the ground pretty hard. In those days Florida had a mandatory helmet law. Anyone can justify not wearing a helmet but to me it’s like playing Russian roulette with your head. Ironic that I see folks wearing really fancy foot protection and nothing on their head. One can live a productive life without their foot but it only takes a fairly minor whack on the head in the right place to change your life for good.

 

[DownrangeFuture]

I don't know about other states, but in Florida you have to carry proof of at least 100,000 in medical coverage for each rider/passenger without a helmet and I think you have to have proof of life insurance as well. If you aren't carrying enough coverage then you or your family is liable. All states should do that for every type of vehicle. The hospital fixes you up, then if it costs more than your insurance covers, the government comes and gets the difference from you.

Of course, the military health care system won't cover me if I don't wear a helmet, so it's a moot point for me.

 

[Nelly]

I don't know about other states, but in Florida you have to carry proof of at least 100,000 in medical coverage for each rider/passenger without a helmet and I think you have to have proof of life insurance as well. If you aren't carrying enough coverage then you or your family is liable. All states should do that for every type of vehicle. The hospital fixes you up, then if it costs more than your insurance covers, the government comes and gets the difference from you.

Of course, the military health care system won't cover me if I don't wear a helmet, so it's a moot point for me.

That sounds like a sensible solution to the problem of the " Sod you, I ain't paying because your dumb" school of thought.
It's very clever to as I suspect the premiums would be equivalent to a top notch bone dome.
Typical military doctrine. I can (and will) put you in harm’s way. You however, cannot put yourself in harm’s way lol.

Nelly

Nelly

 

[Motogiro]

I don't know about other states, but in Florida you have to carry proof of at least 100,000 in medical coverage for each rider/passenger without a helmet and I think you have to have proof of life insurance as well. If you aren't carrying enough coverage then you or your family is liable. All states should do that for every type of vehicle. The hospital fixes you up, then if it costs more than your insurance covers, the government comes and gets the difference from you.

Of course, the military health care system won't cover me if I don't wear a helmet, so it's a moot point for me.

A way to do that with better economic feasibility might be pass a law that requires everyone on a bike to wear a brain bucket. Then no one has to be stopped for proof of insurance and the helmet is probably cheaper than the extra premium you have to pay to not wear a helmet as well as being preemptive in a mishap.

I can say from personal experience. I mean this is not an opinion. This is from scientific proof. Not political scientific proof. Wear a helmet!
It doesn't matter to me that governing bodies require it. It does matter to me that F=ma and gravity require it. It matters to me that LOVE requires it! To me LOVE squashes all scientific algorithm and political view. Put on your LOVE helmet baby! We gonna rock all nite long! Yeah Baby! :rockon::BLAA:

 

[McLovin]

I grew up in a part of Europe where seatbelt laws were nearly non existent. When I came to US, friends warned me, especially in SoCal, to wear a seatbelt even in the back seat because the po-po's will give you an expensive ticket right away. So I took that advice but I was really uncomfortable for a while. It took me a while to get used to putting it on every time and I was always pissed about the fact that I was peer-pressured into putting it on in the back seat even. I resisted.

Today, after being in the US for 6 years, I totally get why that law exists. It actually feels weird to NOT have my seat belt on. And this is not because of the fear of police but because I now really understand that seat belts can save your life. So the seatbelt law, beyond simply protecting me against my will, actually developed a good habit in me. So this is exactly how the helmet law works. From todays perspective I can tell you that I was thinking like an idiot because no one advised me any better. Some laws work on an educational level and make our society better that way. Especially, hard headed young people desperately need that annoying authority to teach them good habits.

 

[Tailgate]

Thank you very much:

rino60
agf
dstaffx
Humperdinkel
Kazza
Motogiro
McLovin
VEGASRIDER
MHS
Gothenburg

Your checks are in the mail and should arrive within one week!
---Shoei Helmet Corp.

 

[Zzzz]

Thank you very much:

rino60
agf
dstaffx
Humperdinkel
Kazza
Motogiro
McLovin
VEGASRIDER
MHS
Gothenburg

Your checks are in the mail and should arrive within one week!
---Shoei Helmet Corp.

:lol: I could only wish that was the case! Still glad I was first though! Hurray for the Junior Member

 

[ClutchUp06]

Sorry if this offends anyone but IMHO I think you are completely stupid to ride a motorcycle without a helmet and protective gear. We have that stuff for a reason.. to protect us as best as possible.. You want to kill yourself go ahead but as for me I'm going to dress the best I can if something were to happen.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[Nelly]

just to make my position clear I strongly advocate the use of helmets and safety gear.
Its sad that goverments need l to legislate against stupidity. The seat belt laws were deemed to be a great success in the Uk. Yes the goverment of the day was concerned by the public tradegy. But I bet that the financial burden to the public coffers was 90 % of the motivation. This sucess was also heightened by a period of drink driving reform and agressive policing. At least it was recognised that alcohol exacerbated risk taking behaviour. No helmet laws with insurance indemnety might well offer a good solution to the problem. However in order for sucess to be acheived, an effective policing stratergy will need to be undertaken to ensure that the people was don't gave a hoot have the required insurance. And this my friends will also result in signifiant cost to the tax payer. There is not a cost neutral solution.
Nelly

 

[callmegandhi]

My personal opinion matter little, especially because I live in Wisconsin. I support the right for the rider to choose. It may be a poor decision to ride without a helmet but the decision is theirs. I do think that if they choose not to wear one and are in an accident that they pay for hospital visits and any recovery costs out of their own pocket. It was their "decision" after all.

 

[Andz]

Riders over 21 who take a safety class will be able to ride without headgear.

Did nobody see the irony in this opening post? What kind of a safety class then endorses you not wearing a helmet?

 

[mave2911]

Possibly because I live in a country where wearing a seatbelt in a car, and a helmet on a motorcycle AND a bicycle (outside your yard) is mandatory, but I really can't imagine why the Government would take such a backward step in safety.

Sure, there are a lot of you, and that may well enter into their thinking (helps to cull a few, especially the stupid ones), but it is entirely ludicrous to me that one would think they don't have to wear a helmet.

It is a proven life-saving device.

See, the problem with this alleged 'Free Will' is if it's not illegal, then people will think they can.

Sure, you all talk about 'if the rider falls off, then it's his bad luck', but you're not considering the innocent third parties.

What about the surgeon or nursing staff that have to try to save your face, because you made, what I consider is, a stupid decision and thought you 'accepted' the risk, or poor ambulance bearer that has to try to hold your face/head together whilst his/colleague bandages up the mess.

I'm sorry, but if people's decisions are too stupid to adequately protect themselves, then the Government makes laws to make it so they have to.

What about the poor little girl that has to see your face, mangled beyond all recognition, because you 'thought you had a choice', or the family of 5 you swerved into and killed because you caught a rock or bug on the face.

What about drink-driving laws? They exist because some people are too stupid to protect themselves, and the innocent third parties that otherwise would be at risk.

Flame away, I care not - but I think if you ride a bike without a helmet you've made a stupid decision.

But then again, as it's really only killing Americans, it's no great loss eh? (jks!)

In my opinion, there is no scenario in which it is acceptable not to wear a helmet and gear on a bike, on the road.

Cheers,
Rick

 

[mave2911]

In follow up, I'm sorry if the above offends anybody's delicate sensibilities, but my personal opinion on PPE is quite obvious.

It is not my intention for anybody to feel slighted - surely we can argue the sensibility or otherwise of a decision or choice?

Cheers,
Rick