[MRRiley]

Having narrowly survived a head injury from a bicycle crash late last year I do have some trouble understanding the dedication to being helmetless on two wheels. 25 years ago, my head stayed in one piece after motorcycle accident as a result of a helmet as well. I'd never be without one.

I'm more mixed on whether it should be law. Let's face it, motorcycling is not as safe as traveling by car no matter what you do.

Gene,

Glad you made it through OK Gene, this forum would not be near as interesting without you.

Good point about the relative safety of cars vs motorcycles. Funny thing is this actually adds to my "personal choice" argument. Motorcyclists willingly forego the myriad of safety devices provided by a car (the cocoon, seat belts, air bags, crumple zones, sheer mass, etc) yet the government and society tolerates this choice. The choice to ride without a helmet simply takes things a step farther.

Mike

[ChrisPlatt]

Motor vehicle accidents by nature almost always involve more than one motorist.
By compromising your own safety you become a danger to others sharing the road.
IMO no one has a "right" to do that...

Chris

[Parallax]

Motor vehicle accidents by nature almost always involve more than one motorist.
By compromising your own safety you become a danger to others sharing the road.
IMO no one has a "right" to do that...

Chris

Right. If they are involved in a collision that was the other driver's fault their "personal decision" to not wear a helmet may destroy someone else's life by turning what may have otherwise been a property damage/injury accident into a major injury or fatality.
I would support the freedom of choice premise IF the law would specifically exempt other drivers (and their insurers) from any legal or financial responsibility for loses due to head injury, or death from head injury.

[MRRiley]

Motor vehicle accidents by nature almost always involve more than one motorist.
By compromising your own safety you become a danger to others sharing the road.
IMO no one has a "right" to do that...

Chris

This is such a flawed argument that I cannot even think of a response.

And it really doesn''t matter. I'll never convince you because your mind is already made up that it's OK to impose your own morality on everyone else. Go right ahead and lobby for mandatory helmet use and I will go ahead and lobby for the free choice to go without.

Mike

[johnmflores]

Motor vehicle accidents by nature almost always involve more than one motorist.
By compromising your own safety you become a danger to others sharing the road.
IMO no one has a "right" to do that..

Chris

Then why are motorcycles legal at all since they are clearly less safe than cars, helmet or no?

[jogiba]

While I’m pretty sure that this doesn’t fit the strict definition of irony, it’s probably a pretty good example of Alanis Morissette’s version of the term. Philip Contos was a guy who really didn’t like rules. “He’s a rebel,” said his older brother, who lives in Liverpool. “That’s what he felt like doing. He protested everything.”

Contos’ latest expression of governmental distaste was his participation in the 11th annual Helmet Protest Run, an event that was organized by the Onondaga County of New York chapter of American Bikers Aimed Towards Education. Unfortunately, Philip had a bootstring malfunction that got caught in his ride’s chain and he wound up flipping over his handlebars, which of course caused his untimely death - a death that, yes, probably would have been prevented by wearing a helmet.

Embrace Your Right to be Stupid! - The Morton Report


I bet without a helmet Evel Knievel would have died at Caesar's Palace in 1967.

You Tube

You Tube

[MRRiley]

I like this comment from a reader in that article...

According to the CDC, 28 times more car/truck/SUV drivers will suffer traumatic brain injuries than motorcyclists in 2011, yet none of the safety nazis are screaming for mandatory helmets for cagers. Why? Because they don't want to wear them either.

It's so easy to dictate what others should do when you don't have to play by the same rules.

Let those who ride decide.

I haven't checked to see if that is the actual statistic but the argument is sound. And seems strangley to echo something I said much earlier in this thread that passed without rebuttal or even criticism.

Mike

[jogiba]

•Motorcycles are the most dangerous type of motor vehicle to drive. These vehicles are involved in fatal crashes at a rate of 35.0 per 100 million miles of travel, compared with a rate of 1.7 per 100 million miles of travel for passenger cars.
•Motorcyclists were 35 times more likely than passenger car occupants to die in a crash in 2006, per vehicle mile traveled, and 8 times more likely to be injured.
•Although motorcycles account for only 2% of vehicles on the road, they make up more than 10% of all crashes.
•Motorcycles accounted for nearly 3% of all registered motor vehicles and 0.4% of vehicle miles traveled in 2006.
•Motorcycle fatalities have more than doubled in 10 years to 4,810 in 2006. Helmets saved the lives of 1,658 motorcyclists in 2006—and could have saved an additional 752 lives if all riders had worn helmets compliant with federal safety standards.

Motorcycle Related Injuries and Fatalities – trafficsafety.org

[ChrisPlatt]

I haven't checked to see if that is the actual statistic but the argument is sound.

Motorcycles account for only 2-3% of motor vehicles registered, and drive far fewer miles.
So the rate for motorcyclists is actually much higher than for drivers of other vehicles.

Chris

[MRRiley]

Chris, the rate or ratio shouldn't matter. Isn't it more important to protect people from all possible injuries if possible? Making automobile drivers and passengers wear helmets, say something similar to a bicycle helmet at a minimum, would prevent lots of injuries. Isn't it stupid not to wear a helmet in a car if it means it would protect you in minor or moderate accidents?

[jogiba]

The New York chapter of American Bikers Aimed Towards Education should read the following unless they want to look like a bunch of brain dead bikers:
•Motorcycles are the most dangerous type of motor vehicle to drive. These vehicles are involved in fatal crashes at a rate of 35.0 per 100 million miles of travel, compared with a rate of 1.7 per 100 million miles of travel for passenger cars.
•Motorcyclists were 35 times more likely than passenger car occupants to die in a crash in 2006, per vehicle mile traveled, and 8 times more likely to be injured.
•Although motorcycles account for only 2% of vehicles on the road, they make up more than 10% of all crashes.
•Motorcycles accounted for nearly 3% of all registered motor vehicles and 0.4% of vehicle miles traveled in 2006.
•Motorcycle fatalities have more than doubled in 10 years to 4,810 in 2006. Helmets saved the lives of 1,658 motorcyclists in 2006—and could have saved an additional 752 lives if all riders had worn helmets compliant with federal safety standards.

Motorcycle Related Injuries and Fatalities – trafficsafety.org

[MRRiley]

•Motorcycles are the most dangerous type of motor vehicle to drive. These vehicles are involved in fatal crashes at a rate of 35.0 per 100 million miles of travel, compared with a rate of 1.7 per 100 million miles of travel for passenger cars.
•Motorcyclists were 35 times more likely than passenger car occupants to die in a crash in 2006, per vehicle mile traveled, and 8 times more likely to be injured.
•Although motorcycles account for only 2% of vehicles on the road, they make up more than 10% of all crashes.
•Motorcycles accounted for nearly 3% of all registered motor vehicles and 0.4% of vehicle miles traveled in 2006.
•Motorcycle fatalities have more than doubled in 10 years to 4,810 in 2006. Helmets saved the lives of 1,658 motorcyclists in 2006—and could have saved an additional 752 lives if all riders had worn helmets compliant with federal safety standards.

Motorcycle Related Injuries and Fatalities – trafficsafety.org

No need to post this twice.

Yes, motorcycles are inherently more dangerous to operate than automobiles. No one is disputing that. In fact this very danger plays into my argument. Society lets motorcyclists accept the risks associated with two fewer wheels, lack of a safety cage, lack of protection from debris, lack of an airbag or other impact protection. Society allows this so why is it not logical to allow the rider to make his own decision about a helmet?

I also have some problems with the objectivity of this organization and with the consistency of their figures... to whit...

•...<motorcycles> are involved in fatal crashes at a rate of 35.0 per 100 million miles of travel, compared with a rate of 1.7per 100 million miles of travel for passenger cars.

That is a rate or 20.6 to 1, yet in the very next bullet they say...

•Motorcyclists were 35 times more likely than passenger car occupants to die in a crash in 2006, per vehicle mile traveled...

Which is it? 20.6 times or 35 times?

•Although motorcycles account for only 2% of vehicles on the road, they make up more than 10% of all crashes.
•Motorcycles accounted for nearly 3% of all registered motor vehicles and 0.4% of vehicle miles traveled in 2006.

Which is it? 3% or vehicles or 2%

I also notice that you left out a couple of bullets from their"article."

•Some 104,000 motorcycles were involved in crashes in 2006, including property damage-only crashes.

This figure, when combined with the 4,810 number (fatalities) in the 5th bullet which you quoted above yields a .046% rate of fatalities per accident. Yet in the very next bullet they claim.

•Approximately 80% of motorcycle crashes injure or kill a motorcycle rider,...

80% of 104,000 is 83,200. Subtract the 4,810 fatalities which yields an injury total of 78,390. This yields a fatality percentage of slightly less than .058% (slightly higher than their figures show). Subtract the 752 they claim could have been saved by a helmet (we'll give them the benefit and assume they are correct) and the fatality rate would drop to slightly less than .049%. That's less than one percentage point folks. It is also completely within the realm of RANDOM CHANCE.

I'm no math whiz by any means so I hope these figures are right, but even simple math shows that the vast majority of motorcycle accidents do not involve fatalities despite the motorcycle's increased degree of danger.

And none of this changes my contention that is the individual rider's right to decide!

Mike

[adr1an]

Mike; Its like trying to explain how blunt kitchen knives are more dangerous than sharp ones....
Its going to take a major shift in thinking process... until that happens, its just not going to come together for you unfortunately despite your efforts ....

[jogiba]

Look at the helmet ad that states the worthless German helmet is DOT Certified !!

Syracuse Motorcycle Accident Attorney Says New York Helmet Law Saves Lives - Press Release - Digital Journal

Someone at the DOT is brain dead also.

[Jeff Bennett]

I don't ride anymore but I did a lot as a kid and young adult. I'm fairly certain there is a pretty good chance that if I could have some pretty devastating head injuries from a couple of spills I took were it not for a helmet. I'm also pretty certain that if Darwin was right the discussion about personal choice will be a moot point in a few generations as natural selection should ensure that only the pro helmet faction will be passing on their genetic material. ;-)