Helmet Law

[William T]

Hi, lets see if I can stir up some dust. In Michigan we have done away with the mandatory helmet law. This was not supposed to affect those who continue to wear their helmets since an extra $50 charged on insurance for those who would not be using helmets was supposed to cover the insurance. My experience has shown this to be untrue since I will always wear a helmet and my insurance was raised almost $100 dollars and after going to two other companies I was never asked if I wear a helmet. I did give them that fact after their quotes but it made no difference. Some will say not wearing a helmet is their personal freedom but I say I should not have to pay for their decisions. I have spilled my motorcycle in my younger days and a helmet probably saved me from serious injuries. I ride all terrain and have had cigarette butts, rocks, asphalt and bugs and rain hit my helmet and have always been glad I wore one. The law may be repealed some day but my bet is the rates will remain. We have people here who ride in shorts, sandals no helmet and in some cases no eye protection. Should the rest of us have to pay for this also? (MAN IT IS PERSONAL FREEDOM) I'm interested in your pros and cons, so let me have it, if you wish. This is not a thing of youth since sense bald pates and flowing white hair seems to rule.

[gn2]

In the UK helmets have been compulsory for a very long time.
People here complain more about taking them off at petrol stations than having to wear them in the first place.
Pros: it protects your head and eyes
Cons: none
As far as the politics goes, here in the UK we have a National Health Service funded from National Insurance Contributions, basically a tax.
Everyone gets healthcare, everyone must pay NICs.
Not wearing helmets would increase healthcare costs to the NIC payers
Given that most NIC payers don't ride motorcycles it follows that its only fair helmets are compulsory.

[SECoda]

Maybe it would kill more and save cost.

[Kermit]

Move to Missouri. They're still required here, and our insurance (mine and my husband's) is super-cheap.

You do bring up a good point. I'm a fan of helmets myself, and I really hate seeing riders on the interstate with no helmet and wearing shorts, t-shirt, and sandals (or flip-flops, which I think should be completely outlawed on or off the bike, but that's a completely different conversation). But I had never given any thought to paying higher insurance rates to support the people who choose not to wear them. That would p!$$ me off.

[SECoda]

I know - I live south of St. Louis myself. When you cross the river it is very rare to see someone actually wear a helmet in Illinois.

[Kermit]

I know - I live south of St. Louis myself. When you cross the river it is very rare to see someone actually wear a helmet in Illinois.

I often see riders pull off the road just across the river so they can remove their helmets. You probably do, too.

[Steph]

I live in Michigan and I think it sucks that the insurance went up because of the new helmet law. I should not have to pay extra and I wear a full face helmet now. Interesting part is you have to have a motorcycle endorsement for two years before allowed no helmet. And when that's over you still have to pay an extra $200 to forego the helmet. Not much freedom if you as me.This is not the only category that I'm paying for others insurance!

I think the helmet is a fantastic idea. But, I don't want to impose my will on others. Also I don't want anyone to impose their will on me by making me pay their way in any regard.

[Mel46]

When I started wearing a helmet back in the '60s it was required on the military base but not off. I rode with 12 other people. We rode all over west Texas, where it gets extremely hot. The other riders would take their helmets off after leaving the base. I wouldn't .I am the only one still alive. All of the others died young from head injuries while riding. That statistic should be a lesson in itself. To add to that, I had a friend who did not wear his helmet and hit an armadillo at night while riding. He became a vegetable. He wasn't in the military, so I have to wonder who picked up the tab for his stupidity. I don't like not having choices in life, but the helmet law was put into place because there are a lot of people who absolutely refuse to believe statistics or physics. Look at any motorcycle accident and the one thing that you will notice is that the rider does not come out the winner. Helmets and padding help but will not change physics....."a body in motion tends to remain in motion"....notice it doesn't say that when the bike stops in a crash, you will stop too. Stopping the motion hurts.

[Kermit]

Nothing personal, Mel46, but I don't think I want to be your friend. Your friends don't seem to have good odds.

All kidding aside, man, those are depressing stories. But very convincing for helmet skeptics, IMHO.

[OriginalRocket]

In the state of Illinois, the only riding restriction is eye protection, and that can be met by wearing sun glasses, or a windshield that goes above the eye sight line (not many know that rule)

I continually see sport bike riders with the helmet strapped to the back of the bike. I can't quite figure the point of that. It's not on your head, so it won't be helping when you crash.

I wear my helmet 100% of the time. In fact I go so far I have 2! one setup for cooler weather (Shoei GT-Air). and a hot weather modular (HJK IS-MAX) and I have a few visors with anti-fog and another sun shade layer (my commute is due East in the morning, and due West late afternoon!)

I'm so paranoid in trying to reach an old age and be functional when I'm old I wear hearing protection 100% of the time. Even if I'm just tooling around town at 25 mph.

I wear armored Jacket, armored gloves, armored pants, and strong above ankle boots 100% of the time I swing a leg over a motorcycle. I have 2 of everything, 1 for cooler weather, 1 for hot weather. Sure was pricey to get everything, and I bought quality, but they will last, and my safety is priority and then comfort.

All you have to do is look at published motorcycle accident statistics. The last time I looked at Illinois. 3 out of every 4th crash that the rider died, they were not wearing a helmet. (a helmet is the only safety device that is tracked) you know what that means? If you don't have a helmet on, and you crash, you are 75% more likely to die in a accident! I can't believe people would fight for this so called FREEDOM B.S.

http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/mc/states/il.html

http://www.ghsa.org/html/publications/p ... es12.5.pdf

Your freedom ends at the tip of your nose. I shouldn't have to pay for your failures.

[AustinPCX]

All you have to do is look at published motorcycle accident statistics. The last time I looked at Illinois. 3 out of every 4th crash that the rider died, they were not wearing a helmet. (a helmet is the only safety device that is tracked) you know what that means? If you don't have a helmet on, and you crash, you are 75% more likely to die in a accident! I can't believe people would fight for this so called FREEDOM B.S.

Your freedom ends at the tip of your nose. I shouldn't have to pay for your failures.

Where is the study that shows how many auto fatalities could be prevented if people in automobiles were required to wear helmets? Why stop at cyclists?

How come the freedom to not wear a helmet in a car outweighs a cyclists freedom to do the same? Much more to be gained from auto passengers wearing helmets but good luck with that.

[Steph]

Your freedom ends at the tip of your nose. I shouldn't have to pay for your failures.

I agree completely!

But, Nevertheless, It should always be my decision.

[Mel46]

That would be the same as making seatbelts optional. There is a lot of statistical data that shows how well seatbelts protect us. Yet, there seem to be a lot of people out there who believe that it should be their choice as to whether they live or not, based on their desire to NOT wear seat belts. If you think it is a choice that you should have the right to refuse, then you are being selfish to all of your loved ones. You are saying to them, "I don't care that you love me. I want to die in an accident." Sound stupid? Well, think about how your choice affects them, especially if you did have an accident. You are taking them completely out of the equation , as well as anyone who might spend their time trying to keep your sorry ass alive. Sorry about that part, but I was also, among my many occupations in life, an x-ray technician and I spent many weekend nights working alongside the doctors trying to save people's lives, many of whom decided not to wear seat belts and were thrown threw the windshield. They made that choice not to wear their seatbelt. The family and medical staff paid for that choice.

[SECoda]

Freedoms are not absolute and are normally put to a the test of what a "reasonable person would think" combined with statistics if available if that isn't scary too. A auto is metal shield and motorcycles are pretty exposed. A helmet seems reasonable and the stats support it. I have been in healthcare insurance for 25 years. I really don't care what someone does as long as I don't have to pay for it directly or through raised premiums. That is why they charge the risk takers a premium based on statistics just like they do smokers these days. I think riding w/o a helmet falls into the extreme sports category and I fly homebuilt airplanes as well and feel much safer flying than helmetless given the text and cell phone users. Illinois did add that all cell phone use must be hands-free. That is also a problem with living in a Liberal state. They seem to lose a lot more freedoms faster.

[gn2]

Illinois did add that all cell phone use must be hands-free

Makes no odds if its handheld or fitted to the vehicle, the cognitive distraction is the same either way.

[Steph]

Sorry to offend. But, to impose the will of others onto me is incorrect. Even if the dumb choose poorly I should still be allowed to choose and not have that right removed. I know that to wear a seat-belt or helmet is to choose wisely!

I like what SECoda had to say: "That is also a problem with living in a Liberal state. They seem to lose a lot more freedoms faster."

[SECoda]

Only true if the state of Illinois lied about the statistics they used to pass that. (and they are fully capable of lying - it is Illinois )

Illinois did add that all cell phone use must be hands-free

Makes no odds if its handheld or fitted to the vehicle, the cognitive distraction is the same either way.

[AustinPCX]

Helmets only provide a statistically minute measure of safety. The biggest measure of safety is the 6 inches between your ears. All the safety gear in the world won't save you if you are an idiot. Making idiots wear helmets is nothing more than another do gooder law. Surviving an accident is mostly luck, avoiding accidents is mostly skill.

[kcpcx]

I hate to even get into this subject because it fires people up...

All I can go by is what I see on a weekly basis.

I work in the ED in a decent sized hospital. We see a fair bit of motorcycle and ATV traumas.

I can say from what I see that people wearing full face helmets tend to do a lot better on average than the people who ride with the little bowl style helmets some of the cruiser guys wear. People wearing leather or textile suits do pretty well, a lot better than people wearing jeans and a tshirt. Boots wearers tend to do better than those wearing regular shoes.

I've worked there for 8 years. It has made me a better rider in that I pay a lot more attention to my surroundings than I used to. Still, no matter how diligent I am, eventually it's entirely possible I go down or get hit, and if so, the more gear I'm wearing that day, the better off I'll be judging by the stuff I see come in via ambulance every weekend.

I wouldn't say surviving an accident is mostly luck. Some of it is. Some of it is being prepared, too, and not riding a sportbike wearing shorts, a t-shirt, and flip flops like I see guys do all the time. Riding skill can only protect you from a certain percentage of idiots in cars.

I've been tempted from time to time to get a 3/4 open face for riding in town. But then I think of all the helmets I see that come in with road rash so bad they aren't curved anymore, they have a flat spot worn into them from the head sliding on asphalt. A lot of those chin bars are torn up pretty bad. From what I can tell, that plastic or resin or fiberglass or whatever it is withstands being ground into the pavement better than the human face does.

But hey, to each their own. I don't really get too worried about what anyone else does until it starts costing me a bunch of money or hassle because they were foolish. As long as I'm not footing the bill when someone is in ICU for two weeks, whatever. I'm all for freedom to choose until a poor choice by someone else puts an exorbitant financial burden on me.

[AustinPCX]

Only the people who have "accidents" are included in the statistics. Lot of "accident" prone people out there who shouldn't be allowed out of their living room. Let Darwin's Law sort them out. Here in the States it's now against the law not to have health insurance.