Motorcycle helmet laws...where do you stand?

[JulesMaximus]

Please give reasons for your answers in the thread.

I am really curious to see what people think on this issue. I ride and I wear a full face helmet everytime I ride. It is the law that you must wear a DOT approved helmet to legally ride a motorcycle in California but even if it wasn't I would still wear one.

I've seen statistics that show when there are no helmet laws only about 50-60% of motorcyclists will wear a helmet. With the law there is near 100% compliance. Without the law, motorcyclist fatalities and head injuries rise dramatically. Without the law, heathcare costs rise dramatically for uninsured riders.

When people start out riding motorcycles and they don't have the benefit of decent training or instruction they don't fully grasp the dangers involved. They largerly learn by doing, and if they see everyone else riding without helmets and proper safety gear they are more likely to do the same. Does that make them stupid? Or worthy of a Darwin award? Or worth less compassion? I don't think so.

Many times, especially on a motorcycle, your first real experience of learning comes when you fuck up...that's a really bad time to figure out that you should be wearing a helmet IMO.

I support mandatory helmet laws.

 

[rasczak]

so many voted but none have spoken...

I also support the laws. I eventually would like to purchase a motorcycle.

 

[xanis]

I don't ride a motorcycle, but I don't support mandatory helmet laws. By not wearing a helmet you're only endangering yourself, so making it mandatory is stupid. If you don't want to wear one then go for it. You'll only be hurting yourself.

 

[Ns1]

Does the helmet do more damage to my car? If YES then no I do not support mandatory helmet laws.




Seriously, bicyclists should know the risks. If they don't want to wear it that's their own choice

 

[HardcoreRobot]

It is a personal choice and should not be dictated by law.
As far as the healthcare cost argument goes, a motorcycle accident survivor is going to cost the system orders of magnitude more than a motorcycle accident fatality. If anything, the healthcare cost argument works the opposite direction.

I would still wear one, regardless of the legality, but I feel that is my choice to make, not someone elses.

 

[blackdogdeek]

i used to ride a motorcycle. in NY/NJ i would wear a helmet. in CT, i would sometimes NOT wear a helmet.

i don't support mandatory helmet laws. i should be able to choose whether or not i risk my own life needlessly.

 

[Baked]

If they don't wanna wear a helmet, that's their problem. Not like it matters anyway, their brain's gonna pancake whether they're wearing a helmet or not. Only difference is whether the content's gonna explode all over the place or inside the can.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: Baked
If they don't wanna wear a helmet, that's their problem. Not like it matters anyway, their brain's gonna pancake whether they're wearing a helmet or not. Only difference is whether the content's gonna explode all over the place or inside the can.

goddamnit I lol'ed because of that

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Xanis
I don't ride a motorcycle, but I don't support mandatory helmet laws. By not wearing a helmet you're only endangering yourself, so making it mandatory is stupid. If you don't want to wear one then go for it. You'll only be hurting yourself.

It's funny, because I've read that roughly 80% of people support helmet laws (higher with women but still 70% of men also support this) yet when there is no law only about 50% of the riding public will wear a helmet. Is this just apathy? Is this the, "it'll never happen to me" mentality? A decent full face helmet can be purchased for about $150...maybe it's the cost? I can't imagine anyone thinks their brain or their life isn't worth $150.

 

[alexeikgb]

Yes I ride
Yes I would wear a helmet even if I did not have to
The last one, im on the fence.... if you don't want to wear it, fine by me..... Darwin FTW

 

[MotionMan]

If the law said you cannot accept any insurance, charitable contributions or other such help or support for treatment of head injuries if you fail to wear a helmet, then I would support helmet optional laws.

All minors should be required to wear helmets.

MotionMan

 

[dudeman007]

Originally posted by: blackdogdeek
i used to ride a motorcycle. in NY/NJ i would wear a helmet. in CT, i would sometimes NOT wear a helmet.

i don't support mandatory helmet laws. i should be able to choose whether or not i risk my own life needlessly.

It's not just your choice when your huge ass medical bill gets sent out to all tax paying americans.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

People should be able to kill themselves in what ever way they see fit. The cost of the loss of even a TINY amount of freedom far outweighs ANY economic benefit.

As an aside I think laws should never be designed with the idea that they make a potentiality illegal.

If you do not wear a helmet, you only potentially endanger yourself. If you drive while intoxicated you only have the potential to harm someone. All criminal laws should be based on actual harm done. We don't need drunk driving laws when it is already illegal to kill and injur others and damage property.

We live in a crazy society of runaway self-absorbtion with making every aspect of life safe, when there are in actuality zero aspects of life that are safe.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
It is a personal choice and should not be dictated by law.
As far as the healthcare cost argument goes, a motorcycle accident survivor is going to cost the system orders of magnitude more than a motorcycle accident fatality. If anything, the healthcare cost argument works the opposite direction.

I would still wear one, regardless of the legality, but I feel that is my choice to make, not someone elses.

Actually, it doesn't.

Text

7 | How do helmet use laws impact health care costs?

Unhelmeted riders have higher health care costs as a result of their crash injuries, and many lack health insurance. In November 2002, NHTSA reported that 25 studies of the costs of injuries from motorcycle crashes "consistently found that helmet use reduced the fatality rate, probability and severity of head injuries, cost of medical treatment, length of hospital stay, necessity for special medical treatments, and probability of long-term disability. A number of studies examined the question of who pays for medical costs. Only slightly more than half of motorcycle crash victims have private health insurance coverage. For patients without private insurance, a majority of medical costs are paid by the government."

Among the specific findings of several of the studies:

A 1996 NHTSA study showed average inpatient hospital charges for unhelmeted motorcyclists in crashes were 8 percent higher than for helmeted riders ($15,578 compared with $14,377).
After California introduced a helmet use law in 1992, studies showed a decline in health care costs associated with head-injured motorcyclists. The rate of motorcyclists hospitalized for head injuries decreased by 48 percent in 1993 compared with 1991, and total costs for patients with head injuries decreased by $20.5 million during this period.20
A study of the effects of Nebraska's reinstated helmet use law on hospital costs found the total acute medical charges for injured motorcyclists declined 38 percent.
A NHTSA evaluation of the weakening of Florida's universal helmet law in 2000 to exclude riders 21 and older who have at least $10,000 of medical insurance coverage found a huge increase in hospital admissions of cyclists with injuries to the head, brain, and skull. Such injuries went up 82 percent during the 30 months immediately following the law change. The average inflation-adjusted cost of treating these injuries went up from about $34,500 before the helmet law was weakened to nearly $40,000 after. Less than one-quarter of the injured motorcyclists would have been covered by the $10,000 medical insurance requirement for riders who chose not to use helmets.

Studies conducted in Nebraska, Washington, California, and Massachusetts indicate how injured motorcyclists burden taxpayers. Forty-one percent of motorcyclists injured in Nebraska from January 1988 to January 1990 lacked health insurance or received Medicaid or Medicare. In Seattle, 63 percent of trauma care for injured motorcyclists in 1985 was paid by public funds. In Sacramento, public funds paid 82 percent of the costs to treat orthopedic injuries sustained by motorcyclists during 1980-83.22 Forty-six percent of motorcyclists treated at Massachusetts General Hospital during 1982-83 were uninsured.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: dudeman007

Originally posted by: blackdogdeek
i used to ride a motorcycle. in NY/NJ i would wear a helmet. in CT, i would sometimes NOT wear a helmet.

i don't support mandatory helmet laws. i should be able to choose whether or not i risk my own life needlessly.

It's not just your choice when your huge ass medical bill gets sent out to all tax paying americans.

...and you probably support socialist healthcare too. Either you do, or you are a walking political contradiction.

 

[dpert1]

I ride
I wear despite laws
I do not support the laws, wearing one only affects you, or maybe the guilty conscience of the tard who doesnt look both ways before pulling out of a driveway. Should be up to the biker.

 

[slayer202]

for the most part I support the law, but I can see why someone might not want to wear a helmet on a quick 2 minute drive, especially in a quiet town.

 

[Gooberlx2]

I'm on the fence. I'm not so sure it's something that should be mandated by law (same goes for bicycle laws and all that), but I do feel that people who ride without helmets are complete morons.

 

[pyonir]

I don't ride, but for our second poll question...i can't really answer. If i did ride, i'd always wear one, regardless of what the law is.

 

[imported_Imp]

I'm planning to get a bike in the next year or two (already learned), and would wear a helmet regardless. In my province, it is required by law, and I fully support it. I'm sorry, but most people are too stupid to take care of themselves.

If you google this issue, lots of statistics come up, and they do save lives. IIRC, concussions and neck injuries go down with helmets. Not every accident skips between death and paralysis just cause of a helmet. There's also the harmless tip over where you face-plant into the road, the highside where you faceplant or you lowside and bump your head. Without a helmet, you have no face or brain in the first two cases, the last one you probably get brain damage, no death. If you had one on, chances are you would just need to get a new helmet or a concussion. FYI, I've experienced number 1. First time on a bike, tipped over, hand didn't break fall quick enough, so I bumped by full-face on the pavement. Could have ended up with a few teeth missing. The health care arguement does have meritt.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Perhaps the problem isn't the cost but the fact that we already do indeed have a socialist healthcare system in place in the USA. I would rather see the laws and the socialist healthcare system that I have to pay for go away. If you get sick or hurt and can't afford it, tough. This is a capitalist society and NO ONE has any excuse for being poor here. As someone already pointed out, Darwin ftw.

 

[hanoverphist]

ive been riding since i was about 12. on dirt, i wear a helmet, leather and all the fixins to keep me safe. on asphalt, i wear leather, steel and gear, but no helmet unless its raining. as i get older, the helmet sounds more inviting, especially when i think of what i stand to lose besides life. here in az under 18 is mandatory helmet. i support that fully, kids are way more reckless and less experienced riders and need every benefit they can get. i think people make their own choices in life, and if they want to go without a helmet, that is their deal not mine. smart people realize the benefit of helmets and dont need to be told to wear one, but it shouldnt be the govt job to tell everyone to be more safe. my stepdad and mom think im nuts and make me wear a helmet whenever i ride one of their bikes, but that is their terms for me to ride their toys.

yes, i basically said i was dumb for not wearing one, but thats my choice to make. i realize the dangers associated with not doing it.

 

[Journer]

i ride (or used to)
i always wore helmet even if it wasn't law (and am alive because of one)
i am against helmet laws

why? because the government shouldn't be telling people how to ride their bikes if it doesn't infringe on someone else's rights. Not wearing a helmet has no effect on the rest of society. And don't pull that rising health cost BS, because the market can always dictate the costs and you have the option to get health care from somewhere else. if your insurance is too high, go with someone who doesn't insure risky people like motorcyclists. if you cant find one then 1) your are SOL 2) start your own insurance company that caters to safe people and you'll make an ass load.

however, i fully support the right of insurance companies to deny insurance payment if the rider wasn't wearing if they include a mandatory helmet clause. it's a private company and they can do what they want. hell, they can include a mandatory jerk-off clause forcing men to jerk it every day to reduce stress or something. it's their company, if people don't like it, go with someone else.

if the rider is uninsured, then everything has to be negotiated with the hospital. he cant pay, he lives in debt or dies. this is the risk you take when riding, especially without a helmet.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Imp
I'm planning to get a bike in the next year or two (already learned), and would wear a helmet regardless. In my province, it is required by law, and I fully support it. I'm sorry, but most people are too stupid to take care of themselves.

If you google this issue, lots of statistics come up, and they do save lives. IIRC, concussions and neck injuries go down with helmets. Not every accident skips between death and paralysis just cause of a helmet. There's also the harmless tip over where you face-plant into the road, the highside where you faceplant or you lowside and bump your head. Without a helmet, you have no face or brain in the first two cases, the last one you probably get brain damage, no death. If you had one on, chances are you would just need to get a new helmet or a concussion. FYI, I've experienced number 1. First time on a bike, tipped over, hand didn't break fall quick enough, so I bumped by full-face on the pavement. Could have ended up with a few teeth missing. The health care arguement does have meritt.

Once again, Darwin ftw. Why spend any amount of time, effort, or money in support of the stupid? Why should we all be treated as morons when clearly only 90% are?

By the way, the idea that you are smarter than someone, so you will dicatate to them what they should do, is called elitism, and it's quite distasteful, even for a Canadian.

 

[hanoverphist]

Originally posted by: Ns1
Does the helmet do more damage to my car? If YES then no I do not support mandatory helmet laws.

i saw a service body work truck make a left turn in front of a guy on a motorcycle with no helmet... he went over the handlebars and face first into the work box on the back. it made a dent about 5" deep and bigger around than a helmet is. id say its safe to say it wont change the damage done to your vehicle much. the guy didnt die, but i bet he wished he had. snapped his neck and crushed his face. broke the front end of the bike too, but that was fixed for less than a grand.