Helmet Law!

[Thinker62]

For those who said that they would vote for a law, I assume you figure that the government should protect us from ourselves. Well how 'bout taking that one step further. It is clear that cages are safer than motorcycles, so why wouldn't the government go the next step and just ban motorcycles?

Or, take Howlin's question,
"I would agree but who pays medical bills of people severly injured?  Only so much is paid by the person's insurance.  Taxpayers pay the rest. "
Couldn't the same question be asked about motorcycles in general? If the government regulated helmets, where who is to say that is where the line would be drawn? For those who would offer data supporting the fact that tax payers would save money if we had a helmet law, couldn't you also offer data suggesting that tax payer dollars would be saved if there was a law against motorcycles in general?

Now I know that if the poll asked how many here would wear a helmet if there wasn't a law, the % would be very high. That really isn't the question. Plus, Busa riders are smarter than average anyway.

 

[SLEEPERBUSA]

Marc,
I don't understand that statement.
MY health insurance pays 80% and "I" pay the rest.
Maybe some providers are different???

I am against it, BUT, ONLY if the person is covered by health insurance.
Shouldn't make BIKE insurrance go up. If you are gonna crash, you're gonna crash with, OR without the helmet on.

What I am saying is for those who can't pay there own bills!  I was in the hospital for 12 hours and it cost $21,000 dollars.  I was told that I payed for the next 2 people who couldn't.  That was from the doctor.  So that is what I mean by the taxpayer paying it.

Marc

I got ya now!

Thats why Texas has a health insurance stipulation attached to their helmet law.
No helmet, ONLY if you are covered with health insurance.

 

[Kento-Moto]

I have gotten used to wearin my lid here in Cali. However a slow poser beach cruise on a hot day with just a ball cap on is way cool. Hawaii has no lid law and you still see lame-o's rippin down the freeway ... hair in the wind at high speed.

I voted for lid law, I'm with Howlin on who pays ... and some dumb asses, kids usually, have to be told how to...

Just my view.

 

[Big_E]

Saved my head from getting a beating when i crashed.

 

[Big_E]

Saved my head from getting a beating when i crashed.

 

[VaBusa]

Unfortunately, there are some really dumb people that need protecting from themselves.  Sounds silly to you perhaps, but I cringe when I see kids being tossed all around the back seat of a car, hanging out the windows, etc...car seat laws save kids lives...I hate car seats!  Ever installed 2 in the back seat of a Mustang?!  But I wouldn't want to ride without my kids in one...policing parents that don't use car seats is mandatory to help save the lives of those that don't have a choice in the matter...

The same can be said of passengers on bikes...let's say 21 year-old "Bubba" wants to show off his Busa to his little brother...they live in a state without helmet laws, so they both hop on for a ride...Bubba might know the risks, but because he's caught up in showing off to the little bro, nothing is said of a helmet...the bike is wrecked and Bubba's brother's dead...might have been saved by a helmet, but since Bubba's stupid, and his brother wasn't aware enough, who's to blame?  Sometimes rules have to take precedence over our liberties...

Yeah, it sucks that laws and rules have to be in place for the "dumber" ones, but I guess I like looking at it from the "look how many lives have been saved" stand point...

I know, it's a stepping stone to complete control...Big Brother is watching...I wouldn't be against, at the very least, making it mandatory to wear helmets if riders/passengers are under a certain age...at the very least, wouldn't that be beneficial?

I'm definitely not for gov't taking control of my life, but I do appreciate some of the laws I see in place to keep the majority as safe as possible...

And I was kind of hoping that opinions wouldn't be bashed, but it seems that if you don't vote for "let Darwinism reign", you're absolutely wrong?  Let's all drink and drive then, damnit...or, screw speed limits...pass me the bong...I want to ride on the left side of the road instead of the right...my kid wants to ride on the hood of my car...poop, the list could go on and on...

That's just my .02 worth...getting ready for the backlash...go ahead...

 

[Thinker62]

Unfortunately, there are some really dumb people that need protecting from themselves.  Sounds silly to you perhaps, but I cringe when I see kids being tossed all around the back seat of a car, hanging out the windows, etc...car seat laws save kids lives...I hate car seats!  Ever installed 2 in the back seat of a Mustang?!  But I wouldn't want to ride without my kids in one...policing parents that don't use car seats is mandatory to help save the lives of those that don't have a choice in the matter...

The same can be said of passengers on bikes...let's say 21 year-old "Bubba" wants to show off his Busa to his little brother...they live in a state without helmet laws, so they both hop on for a ride...Bubba might know the risks, but because he's caught up in showing off to the little bro, nothing is said of a helmet...the bike is wrecked and Bubba's brother's dead...might have been saved by a helmet, but since Bubba's stupid, and his brother wasn't aware enough, who's to blame?  Sometimes rules have to take precedence over our liberties...

Yeah, it sucks that laws and rules have to be in place for the "dumber" ones, but I guess I like looking at it from the "look how many lives have been saved" stand point...

I know, it's a stepping stone to complete control...Big Brother is watching...I wouldn't be against, at the very least, making it mandatory to wear helmets if riders/passengers are under a certain age...at the very least, wouldn't that be beneficial?

I'm definitely not for gov't taking control of my life, but I do appreciate some of the laws I see in place to keep the majority as safe as possible...

And I was kind of hoping that opinions wouldn't be bashed, but it seems that if you don't vote for "let Darwinism reign", you're absolutely wrong?  Let's all drink and drive then, damnit...or, screw speed limits...pass me the bong...I want to ride on the left side of the road instead of the right...my kid wants to ride on the hood of my car...poop, the list could go on and on...

That's just my .02 worth...getting ready for the backlash...go ahead...

So your logic would support a law against motorcycles altogether right. They are just too dangerous, and we need protection from ourselves. Isn't riding with a helmet still more dangerous than driving a car without a belt? Why not protect us all against these 150mph+ death machines? Where do you draw the line? We would draw it at helmets, but why not full leather suits? I believe the DO have such a law in Germany.

The focus on age also bothers me. An adult is an adult. Perhaps we should up the age for a license. But to me, if they are old enough to vote, and to gop to war, they are old enough to drink and make the same choices I make.

 

[VaBusa]

Welcome to a lawmakers nightmare Greg...I can't imagine how they ever decide on anything...
No, I wouldn't and couldn't see them banning bikes...they haven't banned cars yet, but they've continually tried to make a dangerous weapon more safe with safety belts and air bags, roll cages, etc...that's how I view helmets...

Think guys/gals that race bikes could even enter the track without the proper gear?  Think race car drivers are so arrogant that they don't care to use the 5-pt safety harness, or the neck protection, the helmet, the firesuit?  Think it would be okay for some racers to wear protection while others wear just a t-shirt and shorts?  Rules are in place for their safety...that's spilling over in to all us regular "joes" as well...

My point is that 1) yes, we have to have some laws for people that wouldn't know any better otherwise, and 2) that the initial question was whether or not we'd vote for or against a helmet law...there's always debate on either side of any loaded question like that...I've read everything everyone has said, and I can say I can agree with it all...I offered my opinion "for" the helmet law, and I'm being made to feel wrong for answering that way?

I agree with the fear of Big Brother or losing rights, but I was asked my opinion, not the majority rules, right?  I'd hate to see how far gov't could go toward banning this and that, hitting hard the things we love most in life, but I can see a clear argument either way...my opinion just differs from yours...doesn't make me wrong, does it?  (that's another loaded question, by the way )

 

[Thinker62]

Unfortunately, there are some really dumb people that need protecting from themselves.  Sounds silly to you perhaps, but I cringe when I see kids being tossed all around the back seat of a car, hanging out the windows, etc...car seat laws save kids lives...I hate car seats!  Ever installed 2 in the back seat of a Mustang?!  But I wouldn't want to ride without my kids in one...policing parents that don't use car seats is mandatory to help save the lives of those that don't have a choice in the matter...

The same can be said of passengers on bikes...let's say 21 year-old "Bubba" wants to show off his Busa to his little brother...they live in a state without helmet laws, so they both hop on for a ride...Bubba might know the risks, but because he's caught up in showing off to the little bro, nothing is said of a helmet...the bike is wrecked and Bubba's brother's dead...might have been saved by a helmet, but since Bubba's stupid, and his brother wasn't aware enough, who's to blame?  Sometimes rules have to take precedence over our liberties...

Yeah, it sucks that laws and rules have to be in place for the "dumber" ones, but I guess I like looking at it from the "look how many lives have been saved" stand point...

I know, it's a stepping stone to complete control...Big Brother is watching...I wouldn't be against, at the very least, making it mandatory to wear helmets if riders/passengers are under a certain age...at the very least, wouldn't that be beneficial?

I'm definitely not for gov't taking control of my life, but I do appreciate some of the laws I see in place to keep the majority as safe as possible...

And I was kind of hoping that opinions wouldn't be bashed, but it seems that if you don't vote for "let Darwinism reign", you're absolutely wrong?  Let's all drink and drive then, damnit...or, screw speed limits...pass me the bong...I want to ride on the left side of the road instead of the right...my kid wants to ride on the hood of my car...poop, the list could go on and on...

That's just my .02 worth...getting ready for the backlash...go ahead...

Sorry for the repeat of part of this, but didn't think I hit the post button before.

So what would you do if law makers wanted to ban motorcycles on the basis of safety? "They are just too dangerous, and we need protection from ourselves!", lawmakers would proclaim. Isn't riding with a helmet still more dangerous than driving a car without a belt? Why not protect us all against these 150mph+ death machines? Where do you draw the line? WE (riders) might draw it at helmets, but why not full leather suits? Why not require boots? I believe they DO have such a "Protective Gear" Law in Germany.

The focus on age also bothers me. An adult is an adult. Perhaps we should up the age for a license. But to me, if they are old enough to vote, and to go to war, they are old enough to drink and make the same choices I make. If not, lets keep them off bikes, out of elections, out of bars, and for God's sake, take the guns out of their hands!

But I must say that the example of drinking or doing drugs does not exactly apply. In those cases, the users endanger the lives of people who have no say in the matter. To wear or not wear a helmet doesn't endanger others.

Last, I hope people don't feel bashed. We are just talking here, presenting both sides of an interesting question. The vote is 55% to 45%, so obviously no one is standing alone anyway. There are no winners or loosers here. We all win by listening to each other.

 

[VaBusa]

My question is not whether you wear a helmet. Nor is it whether you would wear it if there wasn't a law in your state.  

My question is how would you vote on a national helmet law? Assume that if it failed, all state helmet laws would be wiped out, and if it passed, all states would abide by the helmet law.

Please, no lectures. We have all heard it all many times. This is more a question on opinions regarding personal choice and freedoms. How would YOU vote?

It's not fair of you to assume that my voting in favor of a helmet law means I would also vote to ban motorcycles all together...I'm a rider, Greg...not looking to lose that right...I wouldn't expect to lose my right to carry my kids in my car because kids die in crashes; I wouldn't assume cars would one day be banned because they're in accidents...I know your point is that there could be a natural progression from "you must wear helmets" to "you can't operate a motorcycle anymore"...point taken, but I don't agree with it...

To wear or not wear a helmet could endanger a rider that doesn't know any better...as I stated earlier (children/pillions)...I suppose my biggest worry is for passengers on bikes, in the hands of those that might not feel the need for helmets...those people could benefit from a "law" stating they must wear a helmet, but it's just the tip of the iceberg on a subject that can be debated forever...

All anyone can do on this subject is agree to disagree...I would never try to change your view on the matter, and I respect how you feel about the topic at hand...

My point about drugs and alcohol is that there'll always be people arguing valid/invalid points on just about anything...you might feel like your rights are being taken away if forced to wear a helmet, just as anyone could argue they can't do the things they want to do...I wasn't trying to infer that the two are any where near the same...that was a bad example on my part  

Lastly, your original post stated no lecturing, and I guess that's how I took your post aimed at those that would vote "yes"...felt kind of like a bashing of sorts to those that would vote for a helmet law...

Truce...Uncle...whatever...

 

[boney1]

Pa just passed the no helmet law, ive had my helmet save my life in a me vs. lincon t-bone at 60. so when on my sport bikes its fullface helmet no exceptions+ gloves and joe rocket jacket. on my harleys crusin id rather not wear one just my two pennys

 

[Thinker62]

My question is not whether you wear a helmet. Nor is it whether you would wear it if there wasn't a law in your state.  

My question is how would you vote on a national helmet law? Assume that if it failed, all state helmet laws would be wiped out, and if it passed, all states would abide by the helmet law.

Please, no lectures. We have all heard it all many times. This is more a question on opinions regarding personal choice and freedoms. How would YOU vote?

It's not fair of you to assume that my voting in favor of a helmet law means I would also vote to ban motorcycles all together...I'm a rider, Greg...not looking to lose that right...I wouldn't expect to lose my right to carry my kids in my car because kids die in crashes; I wouldn't assume cars would one day be banned because they're in accidents...I know your point is that there could be a natural progression from "you must wear helmets" to "you can't operate a motorcycle anymore"...point taken, but I don't agree with it...

To wear or not wear a helmet could endanger a rider that doesn't know any better...as I stated earlier (children/pillions)...I suppose my biggest worry is for passengers on bikes, in the hands of those that might not feel the need for helmets...those people could benefit from a "law" stating they must wear a helmet, but it's just the tip of the iceberg on a subject that can be debated forever...

All anyone can do on this subject is agree to disagree...I would never try to change your view on the matter, and I respect how you feel about the topic at hand...

My point about drugs and alcohol is that there'll always be people arguing valid/invalid points on just about anything...you might feel like your rights are being taken away if forced to wear a helmet, just as anyone could argue they can't do the things they want to do...I wasn't trying to infer that the two are any where near the same...that was a bad example on my part  

Lastly, your original post stated no lecturing, and I guess that's how I took your post aimed at those that would vote "yes"...felt kind of like a bashing of sorts to those that would vote for a helmet law...

Truce...Uncle...whatever...

You just have to get to know me. I voted against a law, but don't really feel strongly either way. In fact you would be hard pressed to find where I said "I feel either way."

I ask questions to stir thought and conversation. But if you take a look at my posts, I never say one opinion is right or wrong (well never say never), I just ask what about this? Or did you ever think about that?

Very often we have comments about how irresponsible young people are with motorcycles, and I always jump on that one. Not that I dissagree, but I just can't handle the hypocracy of our society. How can a young person be responsible enough to decide who will run our country (vote) and be responsible for deciding who lives and dies (war), but not be responsible enough to drink? Or to make any other adult decisions.

Once again, I don't dissagree that young people do stupid things with motorcycles. I just say lets be consistant across the board. As a society, lets decide what the age of adulthood should be, and stick to it. If it should be 25, so be it.

 

[Thinker62]

Pa just passed the no helmet law, ive had my helmet save my life in a me vs. lincon t-bone at 60. so when on my sport bikes its fullface helmet no exceptions+ gloves and joe rocket jacket. on my harleys crusin id rather not wear one just my two pennys

When I lived in PA over 3 yeares ago, they had a helmet law. OH did not. Am I off base here?

 

[race24x]

You have to remember that everything revolves around money. The government needs the money from writing tickets IE no cars and bikes that only do 65. If they where really concerned about your average Joe they would have cars and bikes do 65 take peoples licenses away for good on your second DUI. They would check more motorists than truckers for driving to many hours. How many of you have or know someone that has fallen asleep at the wheel, but wasnt driving a big truck. They know who has the deep pockets so they go after truckers. Plus the fine is much steeper. The helmet law and seat belt law for all people over the age of 18 is the government taking away our right to choose. That crap about the tax payers having to kick in after our insurance stops paying is horseshit too. I work for the Social security administration. Do you realize how many refugees Somalians Cubans only come to the US so they can collect from our welfare system. I have lived here all my life and payed alot more than most in taxes between my parents and myself and I should hope if anyhting happened to me regadless of if I was wearing a helmet or not I could get some of what I pay for back. I wear my helmet and jacket etc. more now than I ever have but that doesnt mean I want my rights infringed on by some cage driver in congress that has never felt the open road under his wheels or the wind in his hair.

 

[VaBusa]

race24x -
I agree that fueling/feeding the big gov't wheel plays a huge part in lawmaking...can't deny that...

I did a lot of thinking about this topic last night, and I could easily vote against a helmet law just so those that want the choice can have it.  I can certainly see why people wouldn't want that taken away...and I don't know that I'd want to be the one that plays a part in taking your rights away...

The flip side in my mind is that I believe the auto industry strives to make their cars safer, whether it's because they truly care about the consumer or due to pressures from insurance companies to do so...bottom line is that I believe we are all safer for the efforts, and so I have to use a seatbelt now, my kids have to be strapped in safety seats, we have airbags, etc...it's a natural progression from where we started with the old Model-T's...

With motorcycles, there's nothing to modify for safety purposes to protect the passenger(s) on the bike.  The only option is to turn to protective gear for the passenger him/herself.  I guess I see bikes as the ultimate freedom; can't be a bike if the gov't makes manufacturers put roll cages and 4 wheels on them, so they have to try and do their part by making the rider as safe as possible.

Right now, you can almost view your right to own/ride a bike as the most non-regulated mode of transportation...two wheels, and engine and no worries, right?  The only cap I know of in recent years is that they can't go over 186 mph, right?!  That's a very wide open sport...I can see why bikers would like to keep it that way...but, you can't assume gov't won't see a problem with that (or see a huge money maker in regulation)...good and bad to both arguments...

 

[Thinker62]

First of all, the vote is around 56% to 44%. Did I call it or what?

Anyway, helmet laws don't bother me too much. It is the progression that scares me. I think it is Germany that requires full gear...approved jackets, pants etc. That would be safer, but I wouldn't like that.

It is all interesting anyway. Someone post a list of the states that still do not have a helmet law:

IL
OH
IN
FL?

I thought it was about 6 of them. It would be interesting to see statistics on insurance, number of injuries, types of injuries etc for these states.

 

[gararnett]

Ky effectively doesn't have a helmet law, like FL. My understanding is that the number of states with modified helemt laws to allow riding without a helemt in some way is around 17. There are a few states that actually have no law whatsoever on the books about helmets, 2-4 states.

SC allows lidless riding too, as does TX. Iowa may be one with no law at all about helemt use. NH may be lidless.

 

[VaBusa]

Here's a list of all States...some already have age specific laws...didn't know there were any on the books...

Helmet Laws - US

 

[mcoyote]

For those who said that they would vote for a law, I assume you figure that the government should protect us from ourselves. ...

The gub'mint has been making, and the people have accepted, laws to protect themselves from their own stupidity for, like, centuries. That's the way it is, and it won't change.

Most folks are too numb to drive a car responsibly. In addition, almost nobody is bright enough to handle a firearm safely in a tense situation, or at least enough to only use it for what it was designed and not matte-finished jewelry.

But everybody thinks -- at least some of the time -- that they're entitled to both of those and more, and that once endowed with same they're only a threat to themselves (if anyone). They're wrong, and I'm glad the government steps in once in a while.

We KNOW that head-damaged bikers use up public resources, if only the ambulances, helicopters, doctors, etc. that could be doing something else with their time. On top of that, however, everyone ELSE doesn't like seeing our hauling-ass-and-soon-to-be-dead butts all over the place.

Yeah, we also might get bikes banned...

...IF we -- as a community -- don't police OURSELVES a little better. Fewer squids in flip-flops and tank tops slathered all over the interstate, fewer bad-boy-biker wannabe accountants blasting our eardrums with their chrome lawnmowers, etc.

In short, the politicians step in when a group of people demonstrate, conclusively, that they are numbskulls, and do so loudly enough that everyone notices. Motorcycle riders are unpleasantly close to this boundary, and are actually getting closer as the years go by.

 

[Thinker62]

Thanks VA, that is what I was looking for...gonna save that link!