Helmets and tourism?

[Mountaineer]

I like the commentary. I personally favor the helmet law. Probably the biggest outcome is that new riders, nearly all under age 25, get the protection whether they want it or not, get saved from death or more serious injury, and develop a habit that won't quit for them later on. How many people, seriously, will stop wearing a helmet when they get older?

The other thing I was wondering about is if anybody can guess or knows about whether motorcycle rallies suffer from helmet laws?

Thanks again-

[callmelenny]

Texas currently has this law:

Effective September 1, 1997, persons at least 21 years old are exempt from wearing a motorcycle helmet if they:

   * have successfully completed a motorcycle safety course, or
   * are covered by a health insurance plan providing the person with at least $10,000 in medical benefits for injuries incurred as a result of an accident while operating or riding upon a motorcycle.

I would prefer the OR be changed to AND .

I never ride without a helmet, even on a bicycle. I was in a bad bicycle wreck at 16 and my helmet had asphalt embedded in it. I would be a vegetable at best without it.

But I guess I think that informed adults should be able to do what they want as long as it doesn't cost me more to cover their stupidity. Banning 16-18 year old car drivers would do a lot more to save numbers of lives but that is not going to happen.

[Rema1000]

Why not carry the insurance thing a bit further...if you wreck and are severely injured as a result of speeding or racing on the street the insurance company doesn't have to pay for your injuries.    

I thought that common policies were already forfiet if you damaged yourself or your vehicle in the process of committing a crime.  Obvious example would be a bank robber shot by a security guard, might not have death benefits.  Taken further, a driver who is pursuing another car out of road rage (think "Ben Hur"... attempted vehicular homicide), and crashes, may not be covered by their collision insurance.   But that's a stretch: you'd have to prove intent to kill.  But speeding and reckless driving are just misdemeanors, I think.

But that's getting pretty far from the helmet question.  It seems to me that the mandatory helmet question is very similar to the mandatory seatbelt question: both efforts met with strong opposition; consumers complained that they were not being treated as responsible adults.  Other consumers complained that they were paying extra in insurance premiums to cover the carelessness of the ignorant.

I can see some truth to both sides.  I don't find it annoying to wear a seatbelt, or a helmet, so of course, I don't see mandatory seatbelts or helmets as a problem.  But I can imagine that some of the same people who advocate mandatory helmets would also advocate banning the motorcycle on public roads.  And I would see that as a problem.  Actually, I joke with friends that m/c
-style helmets will probably be required to ride in cars in another 50 years .  So there has to be a line somewhere.

All I can say is, pick what level of (de)regulation you're comfortable with, and support it.

[Blingmasta]

In Tennessee, we've got mandatory helmet laws, and I don't mind a bit, cause I would never want to ride without one. But for the states that don't have helmet laws, I wonder if there has ever been a lawsuit against that state by someone who wasn't wearing a helmet and effed themselves up and sued the state for not making them wear a helmet to protect themselves. Pretty outlandish, but with all the RIDICULOUS lawsuits floating around out there, it's always a possibility. Peace

[Fint]

I personally feel you should be able to drive a car without a seat belt, or ride your gs500 without a helmet (or jacket, or boots, etc). But when you get in a wreck and suffer an injury that would have been avoided if you were using the recommended safety gear, then we all get to point and laugh at your mangled body (or broken head)

[Susuki_Jah]

still i would rather the states worry about making it safer to ride period rather than worrying about what gear we are wearing. thats like saying "ok guys we know our roads are f%&ked up and to keep from having to fix them we will make you spend money on things to keep you safe on our f%&ked up roads.

[Traveler]

I don't care if you wear a thong, a cup, Yfronts, or for that matter go Commando, but when you ask me to pay for your medical care because you don't value your brains enough to protect them, I take issue.
Workers Compensation specifies that many workers have to wear safety hats, heavy gloves, pants and eye protection and they don't even travel at 100 miles an hour.
The State does have a duty to protect incompetents from themselves and that includes us (if we're naive/stupid/invincible enough to go near naked into this cruel world).
Get a life, keep yours.
Let me know if that's too wishy-washy.

[cernunos]

Ok...it's wishy washy  :mrgreen:  I think if you're going over the speed limit and crash then you should have to pay your own medical. Thinkin' of my Baby and this forum.

C.......

[weaselnoze]

and be in debt the rest of your life, for a stupid mistake?  accidents happen because of mistakes.  insurances covers mistakes.  if insurance didnt cover mistakes, then there would be no need for it!  when i was 17 i was being stupid and wrapped my parents car around a pole.  i had to have brain surgery to remove blood clots and i almost died.  so you can imagine the medical bills.  who is gonna pay for that?  if insurance didnt cover it, my family would be eating out of dumpsters and living on the street.  if this doesnt make any sense its because its 2am and im kinda tired.

[Susuki_Jah]

and be in debt the rest of your life, for a stupid mistake?  accidents happen because of mistakes.  insurances covers mistakes.  if insurance didnt cover mistakes, then there would be no need for it!  when i was 17 i was being stupid and wrapped my parents car around a pole.  i had to have brain surgery to remove blood clots and i almost died.  so you can imagine the medical bills.  who is gonna pay for that?  if insurance didnt cover it, my family would be eating out of dumpsters and living on the street.  if this doesnt make any sense its because its 2am and im kinda tired.

you are exactly right, i dont see where people say they are paying for someone elses mistake? we pay insurance that is what insurance is for.
and if you hit someone and its your fault whether or not they are wearing a helmet you hit them so your insurance company pays for it anyways thats why you have insurance as well.
i dont see where people are saying we have to pay for other drivers. insurance premiums arent that high.

[weaselnoze]

i dont know about it not being high, but i do think it is higher than it should be.  its a business.  people profit.  there is competition to keep it down but just like everything else (excluding homeless shelters) someone is making money.  and probably more than a 'moral' amount.   again, its late..

[Blueknyt]

I'm in Florida

our choice is wear one that is DOT approved or Carry proof of medical insurance of 10K or better if you dont wear one.  now, they cant pull you over JUST to check if you have it, but they Bust alot of folks for not wearing eye protection, or sunglasses at night.

frankly that 15mph wreck i had that didnt hurt the bike a bit, i would have died dueo to massive head trauma, if not, i would be just like the book, johny got his gun. missing my entire face from forehead to lower jaw if it werent for my simpson.
sorry the thought of not being able to eat as a normal human again, or see my family, or smell, or even the ability to Verbally comunicate as i did just isnt an acceptable tradeoff for lack of helmet hair, or looking cool.

[alexXx]

let's play wit analogies...

seatbelts are to cars just as ________ are to motorcycles...

fill in the blank


- alex

[Susuki_Jah]

I think we have already established that most of us here would wear a helmet even if the law said we didnt have to. and I agree with those who say young riders should have to wear a helmet, thats how it is in myrtle beach I believe, you have to be 21 and up to have the choice.
and here in VA if you are above the age of 16 and you dont want to wear a seat belt while riding in the back seats then you dont have to.

any smart person could see the devastation of not wearing a helmet, i dont think we really need a law about it. I got pulled over and almost had a ticket for pulling my bike across a small back city street to park it from one side to the other because i didnt want the college kids messing with it. the cop gave me such a hard time for not wearing my gear just to park it. ok I always ride with my gear but basically pushing the bike across a small ass st with no traffic , im talking about 100 feet here at the most, does not constitute me riding without my gear. another example of the state just wanting to screw another person over.

[cay]

I'm living in upstate NY right now, and can't help but immediately judge folks I see riding motorcycles wearing shorts, sandals and tank tops.   I'm just that sort of person, I guess.

That said, I have fairly strong libertarian leanings and think we've got far too many laws on the books.  Ten years ago I'd probably argue that seat belt laws, helmet laws, etc., are crap and this sort of thing belongs out of the hands of cops, being firmly in the realm of personal responsibility...  But I think I'm slowly changing my mind.

Personally, I don't feel comfortable riding without leg protection, there's no way I'd go anywhere on roads without a helmet.

[Anonymous]

All these personal safety laws are on the books for one reason...  The government is ultimately responsible for paying for everything.  Think about it.  When your insurance runs out, when your money runs out, the taxpayers foot the bill.  NOBODY dies in the streets in America from lack of care.  If you crash your car/bike, the hospital CAN'T turn you away and they have to take care of you until you're better.  Thats the law.  They say 50% of people have no insurance.  These same people have no money.  So, to cut losses the government MAKES you act as safely as possible.  I'm really surprised that states are repealing helmet laws.  Maybe it's cheaper to have you die than take care of you while you heal.  Must be.

Just my opinion...

[RedShift]

Why not carry the insurance thing a bit further...if you wreck and are severely injured as a result of speeding or racing on the street the insurance company doesn't have to pay for your injuries.    Love the Baby bike and what a forum!

C.......

This is close to how I feel.  There are smokers and non-smokers life insurance premiums -- why not the same for MC riders?

Michigan also has a Helmet Repeal Law stuck in the legislature, perhaps never to come out of committee.  Would suit me fine.  The wording is the kind that really cheeses off the cops as it has clauses to repeal based on age and experience.

It can go through and I wouldn't care.  I'll keep wearing my full-face for the reasons Kerry mentioned that saved him.  I fear though that it would make the ABATE and Harley riders even more obnoxious to be around.

Hey, it's a risky sport -- you choose your protection and you take your chances...

Roy...

PS. If you've got 20 minutes to spare, follow the link I provide and see what some folks have posted.  Rather good psychological study found there as to the thinking and personality of the anti-helmet crowd.  

[juggernaught]

Simple answer for me...i was t-boned 2 years ago May by a guy with no license in a cage who ran a stop sign in Brooklyn. I was airborn for about 30' and landed on my back with the back of my head slamming on concrete.  My helmet had a crack that went from the back of it's base to the crown on my head.  I basically hopped away with a broken foot.

I will never be without a helmet.  EVER...!!!

[Larry]

Helmet laws don't solve the problem. Education about risk management and making good choices is better. I just got back into riding after 25 years off. Bought an HJC AC-11 full face, nice helmet!

[geekonabike]

Most agree that it is the safe thing to do, wearing a helmet.  Many even say it is stupid not to wear them (I generally agree).  Now many also believe that young kids are likely to do more stupid things if stupid things are legal, so OK make it illegal for kids not to wear them.  This is related to my main point:

As for the adults, one can still justify such a law without refering to costs at all.  Here's my logic on that.  When you see people riding these inherently relatively dangerous motorcycles down the road without helmets, what you are seeing can be perceived by the community as at least bordering on wanton recklessness.  I may not want my kids seeing that any more than I want them to see thongs on the beach, lewd behavior or public drunkenness.  Some would call those expressions of individuality, but if my community or state wants to ban those (they're not inherently political (or everything is!)), or roof antennas, or whatever it should be fine for them to do it through the political process.  If South Dakota and Sturgis want to set their standards, such as they are, fine too.  I can and do avoid them for that reason.

I seem to recall there were old stories of travelers being sold drinks when their planes were in one airspace, and told they couldn't buy any when in another airspace, etc.  If guys on bikes want to travel through areas where there are helmet laws, and aren't wearing one, they should be stopped and warned to put one on.  Next time through they should be ticketed.

But admittedly it's a hard case, these motorcycle helmets.  Reasonable people can disagree, as we've seen very well displayed here.

--Mike D.