Helmet Laws

[rjo3491]

Well, I just read that here in Michigan, our mandatory helmet law is due to be repealed this Summer. Riders over 21 who take a safety class, or who have carried a cycle endorsement for more than two years will be able to ride without headgear. I would guess that this would most likely appeal to the, "cruiser crowd", but I'm sure that there will be some sport bike riders that take 'em up on the deal.

In general, what are the opinions here on this forum regarding mandatory gear requirements?

BTW, I guess I support the right to choose, though I have no plans on changing my own habits. A couple of Summers back, I caught a compressed pop can in the face (face mask that is) - it was roughly shaped like the blade of an electric edger. It could have been much worse without the helmet!

 

[lomax]

OK I will start and get yelled at by the masses.

While I personally would never ride without gear I do not think it is the Nanny states place to protects us from ourselves.

That is probably enough said by me on the matter. :thumbup:

OK flame suit on.

Marc

 

[VEGASRIDER]

Rest assured, expect an increase in motorcycle fatalities related to head injuries, and just simply head injuries. Expect your state, I mean you, the tax payers to foot the costly medical bills that these injured riders will accrue because they are riding without or very little medical coverage.

I think helmet laws are similar to seat belt laws. So are seat belts mandatory in Michigan?

 

[MHS]

Here, I'm pretty sure under 21 is required to wear a helmet, over 21 is not. I'm not sure about finer details (like passenger vs rider, permit vs license, learning course vs not, etc.) though.

The part I don't get is how ass backwards it is here. A seatbelt is required, but a helmet is not.

I'm all for mandatory helmet laws - you won't find me or any of my passengers without one.

 

[tcmalker]

Me being a conservative kind of guy have to agree with the new law. I enjoy my freedom...to choose.
And before I get flamed, what if they make a new law that you have to wear a helmet inside your CAR, in the name of safety. Think about it.

 

[lomax]

This is a VERY serious question for me and I am in no way taking anyone to task. I have searched on the subject of tax payers having to pay for medical bills and have found nothing on the subject. While it does stand to reason that someone would have to pay for the uninsured, does anyone have a link to something where this has been researched?

Again I am not taking ANYone to task and I would really like to know about this.

We have never had a helmet law here in Colorado and what what I have found out injury rate and insurance costs are in line with states that do have helmet laws.

Again I think people should be responsible for their own actions and yet realize that most are not.

Thanks.

Marc

 

[tcmalker]

I would bet most motorcyclists have jobs (and insurance) since owning a motorcycle is consider leisure. I mean a motorcycle, along with gears, ain't cheap!

 

[nksmfamjp]

Frankly, I don't care because headgear will not cause a rider to avoid an accident, generally.

Still, I have hit some bugs in a full face which would have almost taken my head off. . .I might have swerved real good without a helmet.

Personally, a good full face helmet is a requirement for me. Not a flip up, because I like my chin. By the quantity of these at the local bike store, I guess others seem to agree. I also like padded gear and leather if sliding is a possibility.

Cruiser riders have a different image to contend with. I wore a full face on a cruiser in all but the hottest weather. Then I started wearing a skull cap and glasses. It felt good, but I could not bear the thought of how it would feel in a crash. This is one reason I have little use for cruisers now.

 

[VEGASRIDER]

This is a VERY serious question for me and I am in no way taking anyone to task. I have searched on the subject of tax payers having to pay for medical bills and have found nothing on the subject. While it does stand to reason that someone would have to pay for the uninsured, does anyone have a link to something where this has been researched?

Again I am not taking ANYone to task and I would really like to know about this.

We have never had a helmet law here in Colorado and what what I have found out injury rate and insurance costs are in line with states that do have helmet laws.

Legislator seeks to repeal helmet law - News - ReviewJournal.com

Nevada is trying to follow the footsteps of Florida. Repeal the helmet law, they will come and visit. Just like Florida, Nevada is home to one of the largest motorcycle rallys in the country. The Laughlin River Run. Florida saw an increase in attendance to their rally once they repealed their law. Plus motorcycle sales increased. But fatality rates increased as well as medical costs for the uninsured.

 

[The Dude]

Well, I just read that here in Michigan, our mandatory helmet law is due to be repealed this Summer. Riders over 21 who take a safety class, or who have carried a cycle endorsement for more than two years will be able to ride without headgear. I would guess that this would most likely appeal to the, "cruiser crowd", but I'm sure that there will be some sport bike riders that take 'em up on the deal.

In general, what are the opinions here on this forum regarding mandatory gear requirements?

Sounds like they're adopting the same helmet law PA has. I would never ride without one, but I think people should be free to do it. Just riding a motorcycle is considerably more dangerous than driving a car. Who am I to judge? Besides, most of the Harley crowd are geezers. What do they have to lose? I may be one of those guys some day, you never know. It's funny that the general public will support helmet laws for motorcyclists, but if you ever suggested that drivers be required to wear a bicycle helmet in their car, you'd get laughed out of the room. And how many drivers die every year from head trauma? You could save a lot more lives by requiring helmets in cars. But that would inconvenience the vast majority of voters, not a small minority.

 

[lomax]

Legislator seeks to repeal helmet law - News - ReviewJournal.com

Nevada is trying to follow the footsteps of Florida. Repeal the helmet law, they will come and visit. Just like Florida, Nevada is home to one of the largest motorcycle rallys in the country. The Laughlin River Run. Florida saw an increase in attendance to their rally once they repealed their law. Plus motorcycle sales increased. But fatality rates increased as well as medical costs for the uninsured.

Thanks, That is good reading. :thumbup:

Marc

 

[psnbye]

I like the "Law of Common Sense" way of thinking. Helmets ususlly help in a crash and I know I would be truly dead without one. I just dont like it when I'm forced to comply with someone else's idea of whats good for me, even when I know it's true.

 

[Kazza]

If you don't want to wear a helmet, and if you were ever seriously injured, you took the risk. I may be really harsh in my opinion, but why should my tax dollar pay for your recovery in hospital? You took a calculated risk, unlike the other rider who wears all the gear?

If you don't want to wear a helmet, maybe a compulsory insurance policy is the way to go, that way, if you were ever injured, all your medical expenses were covered.

Does that make sense to anyone else? If you are in an accident in Australia, the government pays for your hospital care. You can also take out private health insurance, which ensures a nice hospital and the top specialist care.

 

[VEGASRIDER]

Actually, this would be a perfect opportunity to invest in people's life insurance. Pay their premiums and have them place you as the beneficiary, the rate of return would be enormous on the riders that would ride without a lid. The statistics would be on your side.

 

[dxh24]

I agree that i don't think the gov't needs to protect us from ourselves, and i always use a full face because ive seen what not using a helmet does. My buddy had to lay his bike down, his face caught the road and basically tore the right half of his face off, it was a fairly routine lay down and had he had a helmet on probably would have come away without a scratch, just my .02

 

[tcmalker]

If you don't want to wear a helmet, and if you were ever seriously injured, you took the risk. I may be really harsh in my opinion, but why should my tax dollar pay for your recovery in hospital? You took a calculated risk, unlike the other rider who wears all the gear?

If you don't want to wear a helmet, maybe a compulsory insurance policy is the way to go, that way, if you were ever injured, all your medical expenses were covered.

Does that make sense to anyone else? If you are in an accident in Australia, the government pays for your hospital care. You can also take out private health insurance, which ensures a nice hospital and the top specialist care.

This sounds like socialized medicine to me. I wonder how much tax you guys pay, 50-60%? Sorry, but I enjoy my freedom. I don't need the government to tell me what's good for me. If I don't want to wear a helmet or buy (health) insurance, it's MY choice. :Flip:

You can think of it this way also:
Someone who is NOT wearing a helmet would be more careful when he rides because he knows he's a goner if something should happen.
Someone who IS wearing a helmet would take more risk because he thinks his helmet will protect him.

 

[Motogiro]

OK I will start and get yelled at by the masses.

While I personally would never ride without gear I do not think it is the Nanny states place to protects us from ourselves.

That is probably enough said by me on the matter. :thumbup:

OK flame suit on.

Marc

I understand what you're saying but it also might be better for all of us in the sense of lower insurance rates because of the increased risk of rider injury as well as risk to others involved in MV accidents because someone gets hit it in the face and goes out of his lane. I've seen it happen to someone I was riding with with his face shield up and it wasn't even a direct hit in the eye.
I have been the recipient of a rock to the knee when riding in jeans and can't imagine that pinched rock hitting me in the face.

I just hope they don't make it illegal to ride with a helmet because I would like to keep exercising my freedom to wear one :Flip:

With what we know in today's day and age....

 

[macem29]

I think adults should have the choice to wear a helmet or not,
and if they're stupid enough to ride a motorcycle without a
helmet there's nothing inside the skull worth protecting anyway,
kinda Darwinian you know, thinning the herd

 

[Kazza]

This sounds like socialized medicine to me. I wonder how much tax you guys pay, 50-60%? Sorry, but I enjoy my freedom. I don't need the government to tell me what's good for me. If I don't want to wear a helmet or buy (health) insurance, it's MY choice. :Flip:

You can think of it this way also:
Someone who is NOT wearing a helmet would be more careful when he rides because he knows he's a goner if something should happen.
Someone who IS wearing a helmet would take more risk because he thinks his helmet will protect him.

Don't like the government telling you what to do. Aren't you a LEO? Don't you see enough of injured/dead people in accidents? Anything that can help stop people getting hurt is a good thing.

As for my tax rate? 50-60%? I'm not rich. Tax rate is irrelevant.

 

[victorb]

This sounds like socialized medicine to me. I wonder how much tax you guys pay, 50-60%? Sorry, but I enjoy my freedom. I don't need the government to tell me what's good for me. If I don't want to wear a helmet or buy (health) insurance, it's MY choice. :Flip:

[snip]

This is incredibly shortsighted.. You're already in a "socialized medicine" system.. It's not an alien concept.. It just means that you, as a taxpayer, already pays for state hospitals when insurance coverage are maxed out (or nonexistent). Start by reading the link that vegasrider posted in this thread:

A large number of the riders lacked insurance or were underinsured. The county-operated hospital ate $45 million of the treatment costs, according to John Johansen of the Office of Traffic Safety.

Where do you think those $45M came from? Yup: socialized medicine, the damn nanny state of Nevada picked up the tab.

With freedom comes responsibilities, and with responsibilities comes consequences. A true free/private system would work like this: you get treatment as far as you/your insurance policy can cover. Once you're maxed out, we (society) send you to walgreens to pick up your own bandaids. You now have the freedom to make any choices you want, since your choices will not impact society. But that freedom comes at a price, the responsibility to carry proper insurance. That is a fair system, no? You ready for this? If you are, then it's all good. If not, you accept the fact that you might need the society to pick up the tab and by the same token accept the fact that society wants to lower its costs by making you wear a helmet.