Stop Helmet Laws Now...

That sounds rational, but I'd like to see some real figures to back this
up.

 

And no one is outraged at governments and insurance companies trying to
make sure that bikers die?

 

Yes, there are.

http://www.ucsf.edu/daybreak/1998/09/16_helm.html

"The California law that requires motorcycle drivers to wear helmets
saved the state and its taxpayers a significant amount of money during
its first two years, primarily by reducing the number of head injuries
associated with motorcycle accidents, a new UCSF study has found."

LIke I said in othe rplaces, that sounds logical, but it doesn't bear up
to reality.

 

You do realize that we are losing our freedom for safety. How much is
your freedom worth? What about the lost lives of our great military
men who fought to keep this great country of ours free? Does their
loss of life for our freedom we are enjoying today matter to anybody
anymore?You open the door and continue to give the gummint more
control over us eventually we will have no freedom. Motorcycles will
be gone as well. Just think how much money the socialist state of CA
can save if they ban bikes. If CA saved so much money why are they in
debt up to their eyeballs? Whens that huge earthquake supposed to hit
CA and put it under water? What kills me is when the gummint wants
to save money they usually take something from the American people all
the while the gummint continues to grow larger and larger. If the
gummint was so concerned about saving money they would remove the
beruocrats and reduce the size of the gummint by 75%. That would be a
huge money saver. Perhaps we need to vote every one of these career
politicians out of office and get some new blood in there.

Mike

 

It would be interesting to have some actual facts on this. I wonder how we
might be able to get financial information on hospitalization costs related
to major motorcycle injuries, cross-referenced against helmet usage. Maybe
we could break it down by state. Any ideas?

 

Tim: After reading a few more posts, it appears that at least in
California, the medical cost issue in the early 90s showed a reduction in
medical expense thanks to:

1. Increased education
2. Helmet usage

Not necessarily in that order. I would imagine that there are studies
in other states as well, and if I find the time, I'll follow up on them, but
I suspect the result will be the same.

Also, with no information to cite, I also suspect that motorcyclists who
wear helmets probably are more likely to also have private medical
insurance, meaning that they are less of a drag on the State economy than
uninsured motorcyclists. My thought is that people who will spend the time
and money on a real helmet (preferably a full face helmet) probably worry
about themselves enough to also buy medical insurance.

 

http://www.bikersrights.com/statistics/hlfaq.html

ab

 

[....]

Try just a bit of common sense, Larry. Everyone who funds some
statistical study has their own agenda. Reminds me of the smoking
arguments. Smokers die younger which costs less than old cronies being
kept alive through their 60-90's. The doctors feed their own industry
via anti smoking and general longer life spans these days. Old people
are like old cars, they keep the doctors and dentists offices full.

On the helmet laws, I've always worn helmets, seat belts and think air
bags are a good thing. That doesn't mean I believe we should force
feed helmets to the cruiser crowd. As someone else said, funerals are
cheaper than maintenance on veggies or quads.

BTW Larry, how badly were you injured when you augured in that 929?


Bob Nixon
Phoenix AZ
01 Sprint ST "RED"
03 Suzuki ST "SILVER"

 

There may be more:

http://www.bikersrights.com/statistics/hlfaq.html

Also, note that not everyone agrees as to the percentage of cases each
factor contributed to.

ab

 

I believe we've been through this before. The problem with that study
is that simultaneously with the requirement that California
motorcyclists wear helmets was the requirement that minor applicants
for motorcycle licenses pass the MSF course. Cost of injuries went
down, but was it the lids or the education?
Rich, Urban Biker

 

Precisely. Bring back contributory negligence. If you don't wear
your helmet or seatbelt, let the other guy off the hook, unless you
can prove that he set out to hurt you.

It would be a lot cheaper, and utterly consistent with the doctrine
that freedom has its price.
Rich, Urban Biker

 

I'm personally against mandatory helmet laws, despite the fact that when I
was riding, I always wore a helmet, even in the 60s when that wasn't common.
I was just trying to develop a system under which societal costs could be
balanced against personal freedoms. A differential for the higher cost
crowd, in insurance struck me as a method for redistributing risk. The
"death is cheaper than medical care" argument hadn't occurred to me. But
I'm not sure that I like it much, anyway. The harder issue for me is
whether or not riding education is far more important than the entire helmet
issue.

Not at all. That was a new- tires- on -ice low side. Damaged the bike
enough that Denise ended up with race fairings, but I wasn't injured.

However, in 1995, I threw away a Ducati 900 SS CR at 567 miles on it.
Totalled. That time I highsided, and landed on my helmet and left shoulder.
Blew the face plate off my helmet, put a hole in the shell. My rotator
cuff, under both hard and soft armor, came out fine, but the force was
strong enough to break my shoulder blade into five pieces, my clavicle in
half, and three ribs. Despite full armor, and so on.

Bye the bye, I had already taken both the MSF Experienced Rider's Course,
and CLASS racing/safety class. And I had over 12 years prior experience.
So, anecdotally, I don't really fit into the statistics seen so far.

Probably would have been cheaper had I died......but what the heck.... I pay
for insurance, so I figure I'd live. I'm still happier with that decision.

No helmet would have meant dead for me. I'm still against helmet laws.
But I'd never ride without a helmet, preferably a full face.

On the other hand, these days, when I sense that I'm riding beyond my
skills, or in over my head, I get off of the bikes. I didn't find my
skills aboard my 03 Suzuki 1000 GSXR a good match for the bike's
capabilities, and I was getting worried.

As you know, I'm not riding now. Other risk activities seem like enough.

 

Yup. Possibly adopting the similar standards of European countries as
well as PSA's for motorcycle awareness.

Thanks for sharing.

The GSXR1K is overkill for most anyone. It does seem to be a forgiving
beast if you're "not" ham fisted though. I just like having the excess
for a change.

Seems most of AMS is in the same boat. Winter. Low 30's in the canyon
tomorrow morning but I'll brave it on the electric equipped Triumph.


Bob Nixon
Phoenix AZ
01 Sprint ST "RED"
03 Suzuki ST "SILVER"

 

I'm afraid I have no sympathy for those who are "fighting" for the
"freedom" to ride their motorcycles without wearing helmets. As various
freedoms go, that one is pretty far down the list of things I'd invoke
the whole dying-soldiers thing for. Get real. The government wants you
to be a good little consumer of goods so that the rich owners of the
corporations that make them can get richer.

 

Go back and read the last paragraph.

--
Odinn

'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://odinn-frigga.tripod.com/scoot
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Personal Homepage ... http://odinn-frigga.tripod.com
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

Fill in the blanks to reply

 

You forgot the most important thing.
1. Decreased Ridership (by larger margins than the decreased
injuries/deaths

That would make increased education #2, and helmet usage #3, but
considering helmet usage was 99%, how do you still have more fatalities
per mileage ridden?

This may or may not be true. Every insurance company I've talked to has
tried to talk me out of medical insurance on the bike, since I already
have it from work. Some states REQUIRE medical insurance to ride
helmetless. Nothing is holding water, everyone is just speculating, and
no one has any real data to fill in the holes.

--
Odinn

'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://odinn-frigga.tripod.com/scoot
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Personal Homepage ... http://odinn-frigga.tripod.com
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

Fill in the blanks to reply

 

Sorry Michael, I've already proposed a sportbike legislation when Larry
proposed his mandatory helmet law legislation. You're too late.

--
Odinn

'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://odinn-frigga.tripod.com/scoot
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Personal Homepage ... http://odinn-frigga.tripod.com
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

Fill in the blanks to reply

 

....and jetskis, and paragliders, and horses, and hang gliders, and
karate classes, and reptile collections, and rottweilers, and Honda
Civics, and...and...
OH, JUST STAY HOME AND WATCH TEEVEE LIKE A GOOD LITTLE CITIZEN, M'KAY?


BARBZ

 

Especially if he's wearing nothing more than a t-shirt, shorts, and
flipflops! You've seen these guys...slicing through traffic in summer
wear and a full-face helmet. If he goes down, the helmet may save his
life, but he might be wishing it hadn't!

barbz