Motorcycle helmets

[emmett]

Chime in everyone! Where do you stand?

Do you believe that a motorcyclist should be forced to wear a motorcycle helmet?

Why?

[darin]

Motorcyclists under the age of 18, sure. All others? Probably not. I'd support over-turning motorcycle (and bicycle) helmet laws in most cases.

<-- Social Libertarian. :)

[LiberalNation]

No, not forced.

[waterrescuedude2000]

Ok for Helmets and Seat belts it should be my choice. I don't think that there should be laws regulating either if I want to drive without my seat belt I know the risks. As far as helmets I usually wear mine and my padded jacket just to be safe I don't want to look like Swiss cheese

[manu1959]

my wife used to pick people up off the road that decided helmets and seat belts were optional....

as for me ..... i don't care how you die ....

[Kathianne]

Chime in everyone! Where do you stand?

Do you believe that a motorcyclist should be forced to wear a motorcycle helmet?

Why?

So far IL does not require. Seems to me if one is idiotic enough to ride a bike without helmet and other hear, well a life insurance claim waiting to be claimed.

In any case, I think the government should be silent on this.

[Nukeman]

I live in a state that has mandatory seatbelt laws but helmets are optional after age 18 and with a valid license.

Personally I wear my helmet 98% of the time, only don't when cruising around the lakes here at home. I also almost always wear my padded leather jacket except when it is really hot.

I am really torn as to whether or not helmets should be mandatory or not. I do believe if a minor they should be mandated but fro adults making a decision for themselves it a toss up.....

[gabosaurus]

I don't understand why motorcyclists are forced to wear helmets. You don't have to wear a helmet to drive a car. I can understand the seat belt law. That has been proven to save lives.

[avatar4321]

People should be free to choose. Even if their choice is stupid.

[actsnoblemartin]

excuse me, who said you could ignore me :slap:


People should be free to choose. Even if their choice is stupid.

[avatar4321]

excuse me, who said you could ignore me :slap:

no one had to. I just did.

[Little-Acorn]

Motorcyclists should not be forced... by government.

Or by anyone else.

But insurance companies should offer an OPTIONAL wavier in their motorcycle policies, that says if the motorcyclist is injured in a crash and was not wearing a helmet, then his deductible goes way up for any medical care he needs. And they offer a big discount on the premiums for the policy, if the motorcyclist decides to sign up for it.

The bikers who sign up for it will, of course, wear their helmets, so they can make sure they are covered. But they are free to not sign up for that extra wavier - they can sign up for the policy without it, and pay much higher premiums. Then they can ride without a helmet all they want. All helmet laws would have to be repealed, of course. It's now completely the biker's choice, whether he wants to wear a helmet or not. Cops won't ticket him for not wearing one - cops no longer care, since it's not a law-enforcement issue any more.

But if a biker signs up for the wavier so he can ride while paying low premiums, and has a wreck when he is not wearing a helmet, and makes a claim with his insurance company.... instead of having to pay the first $500 of the medical bills he gets, suddenly he has to pay the first $5,000.

That was his choice.

Strikes me as a VERY fair, equitable... and freedom-oriented... system.

[emmett]

no one had to. I just did.

OK, I read the feedback. My position is a helmet does not save your life. If you crash into something because you are an inexperienced uniformed rider, you are going to die rather you have a helmet on or not.

As for big brother mandating it. I don't believe in that of course as I am a Libertarian and don't believe in mandating anything concerning your personal safety. If that be the case, why aren't drivers of cars required to wear body armor. I mean, you would be safer if you had armor on, right?

The answer to safer motorcycle operation is education. States that have helmet laws don't necessarily have safer motorcyclists. States with mandatory skills classes do. Hmmm!!!!

Idiots are always going to figure out a way to get hurt, rather it be on two wheels or four, with all due respect to three and none (watercraft).

[Little-Acorn]

Insurance companies have a lively interest in examining how much they have to pay out, for various kinds of accidents. It's the nature of their business, after all. And they often subsidize the kind of driving that they have seen makes them pay out less, whether for repairs, medical bills, or etc.

They can probably tell you pretty accurately something like this:

For all the motorcycle accidents in the year 2005, some riders were wearing helmets and some weren't.

For the accidents involving helmeted riders, we had to pay out an average of $xxxx.xx for medical bills of the rider.

For the accidents involving unhelmeted riders, we had to pay out an average of $yyyy.yy for medical bills of the rider.

Some injuries were to other parts of the body, of course, where a helmet would make no difference. But some are for head injuries. It would be interesting to see which figure was higher.

My guess is, of course, that helmeted riders had lower medical bills than unhelmeted ones.

Would it be worth it for insurance companies to offer the waivier I described in my earlier post, offer lower premiums for policies where the rider agrees that he will pay a MUCH higher deductible if he's in a wreck while not wearing a helmet?

[manu1959]

Insurance companies have a lively interest in examining how much they have to pay out, for various kinds of accidents. It's the nature of their business, after all. And they often subsidize the kind of driving that they have seen makes them pay out less, whether for repairs, medical bills, or etc.

They can probably tell you pretty accurately something like this:

For all the motorcycle accidents in the year 2005, some riders were wearing helmets and some weren't.

For the accidents involving helmeted riders, we had to pay out an average of $xxxx.xx for medical bills of the rider.

For the accidents involving unhelmeted riders, we had to pay out an average of $yyyy.yy for medical bills of the rider.

Some injuries were to other parts of the body, of course, where a helmet would make no difference. But some are for head injuries. It would be interesting to see which figure was higher.

My guess is, of course, that helmeted riders had lower medical bills than unhelmeted ones.

Would it be worth it for insurance companies to offer the waivier I described in my earlier post, offer lower premiums for policies where the rider agrees that he will pay a MUCH higher deductible if he's in a wreck while not wearing a helmet?

based on my wife's first hand experience picking these darwin award winners up....

the ones without helmets generaly died.......so their medical costs were pretty low.....

[Little-Acorn]

If you crash into something because you are an inexperienced uniformed rider, you are going to die rather you have a helmet on or not.

Really? I'm an extreme novice a motorcycles. Suppose I get my bike up to maybe 20mph, wobbling around on the street, miss a shift because I'm a klutz and dump it, and whack my head on a curb. You're telling me that having a helmet or not, makes NO difference???

[emmett]

Really? I'm an extreme novice a motorcycles. Suppose I get my bike up to maybe 20mph, wobbling around on the street, miss a shift because I'm a klutz and dump it, and whack my head on a curb. You're telling me that having a helmet or not, makes NO difference???

Thank You for your question! It is a good one......and I have an answer.

First of all, before you are ready to operate a motorcycle functionally on the open road you SHOULD most certainly wear a helmet. This is why I am a big supporter of an educational class being a requirement to have a motorcycle license. Before you could graduate from this class you would have gotten far past the wobbly 20mph stage.

The point you make is great however. Most accidents do occur and involve inexperienced riders traveling at low speeds. A helmet will of course help protect you from bumping your head when you fall. That is why even in states where helmets are not required for experienced riders they are for learners. It just makes sense. Now understand, if a student rider wanted to not wear his/her helmet in my class, fine! I don't advise it though.

An experienced rider on the open road with no helmet can hear! That's right hear! Hearing is a defense. Most car to motorcycle accidents (that are the motorcyclist's fault) occur when a hot rod driver flies down a faster lane than a motorcycle and the motorcycle rider does not hear them coming. A lane change occurs into the path of the car.

The most common motorcycle accident overall is someone pulling into the path of a motorcycle. This accounts for about half of all motorcycle accidents. A helmet dosen't really help you much in a frontal impact accident. Of course not having a helmet isn't good either, what is good, is AVOIDING the accident. EDUCATION.

A more informed public prevents more accidents than anything. The very first billboard you see when you travel to Florida is an ABATE of Florida, Motorcycles are everywhere advertisement. It features a woman with a bandana on standing next to a motorcycle. Everyone see's it. This is the kind of thing I am talking about. EDUCATION.

EDUCATION not LEGISLATION.

An informed rider is a safer rider. If you wreck a motorcycle at 50 something mph speeds, you are going to get hurt, with or without a helmet.

Riders over 50 are 25 times less likely to be injured on a motorcycle than riders under 30. Hmmm!!!! Sort of says something huh?

Then there is the liberty question. OK, I don;t want you to climb mountains. You may get hurt and I would have to pay your medical bills if you didn't have insurance. I don't want you skydiving, waterskiing or fishing. That's right, fishing. Well, maybe if you wear mandatory eye goggles that wrap around your head. I also want you to wear body armor when you drive your car. It's just pure non sense to MAKE someone wear a helmet when they are an experienced rider of a mature age who has adaquate insurance.

[emmett]

Oh, and by the way, if you are a klutz, don't ride a motorcycle. It really isn't for klutzes.

[Little-Acorn]

Scenario No. 2:

Suppose I'm a very experienced, cautious, safe rider. I've been riding for 30 years, my bike is in excellent shape, as safe as it can be, I'm always alert and watching, etc. I'm riding on a 40mph road (not a freeway). I come up to an intersection where the light is green my way. I slow down a little, check to cars that may be moving into the intersection, see they're all standing still, and so I proceed thru the intersection at about 30mph. Just then the drunk in one of the cars that was stopped, who has been blearily looking in my general direction, decides there's no one coming, so he steps on it and zips out in front of me, turning right into the leftmost lane and putting his car broadside to me, less than 6ft from my front wheel. I've got less than a quarter second, not even time to lay the bike down or swerve before I hit him. I get the bike slowed slightly and bang, I broadside him, go over the handlebars, and my head thumps his roofline, followed by my shoulder blades and the rest.

When a cager does something that stupid, the best motorcycle rider on earth, on the best bike, cannot possibly avoid the crash.

A helmet will make no difference?

Tossing off casual disclaimers like that won't get the problem solved. It will only indicate that you aren't serious about dealing with it.

The plain fact is that motorcycle helmets will cut down on some injuries, including a lot of serious ones that can get you killed and/or rack up millions in medical bills.

The same is true for ultralight aircraft pilots, of which I am one. I would be safe if I used a helmet. But I have never flown with one, and probably never will - it's just too much fun out in the free air.

That's my choice, as it should be. Same should be true for motorcycles. Even though motorcycles spend a lot more time (like all of it) close to large, hard, unyielding objects than ultralight aircraft do.

I hold that there should be no helmet laws, for motorcycles, ultralight aircraft, or other such. The operator should be free to evaluate the risks and decide for himself whether he wants to wear one or not. If he is asking someone else to pay for whatever injuries he might sustain in a crash, whether motorcycle or aircraft or etc., then it wouldn't be out of line for that somebody to offer him an incentive to wear a helmet. He doesn't have to take it, of course. But it becomes part of his choice.

To say that helmets on a motorcycle (or aircraft) NEVER help, though, is sheerest fantasy.

[emmett]

Scenario No. 2:

Suppose I'm a very experienced, cautious, safe rider. I've been riding for 30 years, my bike is in excellent shape, as safe as it can be, I'm always alert and watching, etc. I'm riding on a 40mph road (not a freeway). I come up to an intersection where the light is green my way. I slow down a little, check to cars that may be moving into the intersection, see they're all standing still, and so I proceed thru the intersection at about 30mph. Just then the drunk in one of the cars that was stopped, who has been blearily looking in my general direction, decides there's no one coming, so he steps on it and zips out in front of me, turning right into the leftmost lane and putting his car broadside to me, less than 6ft from my front wheel. I've got less than a quarter second, not even time to lay the bike down or swerve before I hit him. I get the bike slowed slightly and bang, I broadside him, go over the handlebars, and my head thumps his roofline, followed by my shoulder blades and the rest.

When a cager does something that stupid, the best motorcycle rider on earth, on the best bike, cannot possibly avoid the crash.

A helmet will make no difference?

Tossing off casual disclaimers like that won't get the problem solved. It will only indicate that you aren't serious about dealing with it.

The plain fact is that motorcycle helmets will cut down on some injuries, including a lot of serious ones that can get you killed and/or rack up millions in medical bills.

The same is true for ultralight aircraft pilots, of which I am one. I would be safe if I used a helmet. But I have never flown with one, and probably never will - it's just too much fun out in the free air.

That's my choice, as it should be. Same should be true for motorcycles. Even though motorcycles spend a lot more time (like all of it) close to large, hard, unyielding objects than ultralight aircraft do.

I hold that there should be no helmet laws, for motorcycles, ultralight aircraft, or other such. The operator should be free to evaluate the risks and decide for himself whether he wants to wear one or not. If he is asking someone else to pay for whatever injuries he might sustain in a crash, whether motorcycle or aircraft or etc., then it wouldn't be out of line for that somebody to offer him an incentive to wear a helmet. He doesn't have to take it, of course. But it becomes part of his choice.

To say that helmets on a motorcycle (or aircraft) NEVER help, though, is sheerest fantasy.

You said it! A helmet will make no difference.

Also, motorcyclists in every state requiring use that have attempted to have the law repealed have offered to have extra insurance, even though those in cars do not for not wearing one. Where it is much more likely to have a head injury as you well know.

You are right about judging for yourself.

Frankly, I think you should be required to carry a pogo stick in your ultralight in case of crash landing.:laugh2:

[Mr. P]

my wife used to pick people up off the road that decided helmets and seat belts were optional....

as for me ..... i don't care how you die ....


based on my wife's first hand experience picking these darwin award winners up....

the ones without helmets generaly died.......so their medical costs were pretty low.....

Same experience as your wife...IMO if you ride and don't wear a helmet yer a F'ng MORON!

Should you be forced to wear one? If you have insurance coverage that will maintain you on life support or in a long term care facility until you die, no, otherwise HELL YES, cuz I don't wanna pay to keep yer dumb ass alive!

[darin]

Along those lines - anyone advocate mandating full-face helmets?

[Mr. P]

Along those lines - anyone advocate mandating full-face helmets?

I think they should be recommended, only because of the additional jaw protection.

[Little-Acorn]

You said it! A helmet will make no difference.

Also, motorcyclists in every state requiring use that have attempted to have the law repealed have offered to have extra insurance, even though those in cars do not for not wearing one. Where it is much more likely to have a head injury as you well know.

You are right about judging for yourself.

Frankly, I think you should be required to carry a pogo stick in your ultralight in case of crash landing.:laugh2:

OK, I guess you're not listening, just here to proselytize against helmets regardless. Sorry I wasted the bandwidth.

[emmett]

OK, I guess you're not listening, just here to proselytize against helmets regardless. Sorry I wasted the bandwidth.

No I'm not, just against the mandating of them. I'm listening very well. You make good points. I just didn't realize your sense of humor had been left in the other room.

Have a nice evening!

[retiredman]

So far IL does not require. Seems to me if one is idiotic enough to ride a bike without helmet and other hear, well a life insurance claim waiting to be claimed.

In any case, I think the government should be silent on this.

the brain injured vegetable will be a drain on all of society... but THAT sort of socialism seems to be just dandy for the conservatives.

[red states rule]

the brain injured vegetable will be a drain on all of society

You are not really a drain - just a pain in the ass

War injury?

Did you fall from your desk while fighting a typewriter ribbon?

[retiredman]

You are not really a drain - just a pain in the ass

War injury?

Did you fall from your desk while fighting a typewriter ribbon?

I was never injured while on active duty. Why can't you address my point instead of simply insulting me? IS it that hard?

[red states rule]

I was never injured while on active duty. Why can't you address my point instead of simply insulting me? IS it that hard?

It's fun

It's relaxing

and payback is a bitch

[retiredman]

It's fun

It's relaxing

and payback is a bitch

payback? all you are really succeeding in doing is validating my low opinion of you and of your intellect.

but enjoy it while it lasts....

[red states rule]

payback? all you are really succeeding in doing is validating my low opinion of you and of your intellect.

but enjoy it while it lasts....

You have the same opinion of most people here since he humilate you and expose you for the dishonest, disloyal, lying political hack that you are

[Kathianne]

the brain injured vegetable will be a drain on all of society... but THAT sort of socialism seems to be just dandy for the conservatives.

Right, so the answer for all bad, but now legal activities is to regulate or make illegal. Sigh

[red states rule]

Right, so the answer for all bad, but now legal activities is to regulate or make illegal. Sigh

Kathianne, are you not aware by now the government is the answer to all our problems, wants, needs, and desires?

Ask any liberal if you doubt me

[retiredman]

Right, so the answer for all bad, but now legal activities is to regulate or make illegal. Sigh


of course not. as long as you don't have a problem with society covering the costs of keeping vegetables alive. I think that there should merely be a waiver of all insurance liability if a helmetless cyclist receives a debilitating head injury. Send the vegetable home to his family and let them plant him in the back bedroom and keep him alive. Sound fair?

[red states rule]

of course not. as long as you don't have a problem with society covering the costs of keeping vegetables alive. I Send the vegetable home to his family and let them plant him in the back bedroom and keep him alive. Sound fair?

We are keeping you alive. Do you want the funding cut?

[emmett]

of course not. as long as you don't have a problem with society covering the costs of keeping vegetables alive. I think that there should merely be a waiver of all insurance liability if a helmetless cyclist receives a debilitating head injury. Send the vegetable home to his family and let them plant him in the back bedroom and keep him alive. Sound fair?

Would that be the case for injured vegatables in car accidents also. Or better yet, if that be your stance on a person who had become indigent bt "accident" why would we want our tax dollars taken from us to "support" someone who won't work or elects to have too many children. Shouldn't we also "send them home" to be taken care of by their families.

Let the rep fly folks!!!!

[retiredman]

Would that be the case for injured vegatables in car accidents also.


it is no "accident" that they decided to not wear a helmet, is it? I suppose that the same rule could apply to seatbeat usage. ;)

[red states rule]

it is no "accident" that they decided to not wear a helmet, is it? I suppose that the same rule could apply to seatbeat usage. ;)

Somehow I think you were accident

[retiredman]

Somehow I think you were accident

that sounds like an offensive insult at my parents. keep them out of this.

[red states rule]

that sounds like an offensive insult at my parents. keep them out of this.

Not at all. The accident is the type you have in your pants :laugh2:

Only you bring family memebrs into the discussion

[retiredman]

Not at all. The accident is the type you have in your pants :laugh2:

Only you bring family memebrs into the discussion

how could I have been an accident? WHose accident was it that produced me in that case?

[5stringJeff]

I agree that seatbelt and helmet use should be optional, although one certainly should wear one.

[Kathianne]

I agree that seatbelt and helmet use should be optional, although one certainly should wear one.

I was going to post the same thing. I'd never go without a seat belt, but don't think it should be mandated. My dad never got used to them, he'd pay the $75 fine when stopped, he felt it was worth it.

[red states rule]

how could I have been an accident? WHose accident was it that produced me in that case?

You were the accident that leaves a yellow streak in your pants that also matches the one down your back

[darin]

RSR & MFM - Please Stop. No more. Kay?