[ofreen]

Unfortunately, about all of JB's arguments against those who believe they have the right to decide could be used against motorcycle riding in general, by those that don't like motorcycles. Wearing a helmet doesn't reduce the risks of riding motorcycles that much, really.

 

[fwalters]

Think about it; if you bounce your head off of the road at more than 20 mph you are probobly going to die.



How does this make insurance go up? And, if the bonehead is dead he isn't going to be living on social security, now is he?



To accuse those who ride without "brain buckets" of making insurance more expensive is stupid. The fact of the matter is we all now ride faster and more expensive machinery than a decade ago, and aluminum frames and plastic fairings don't do well in low speed crashes, let alone a squid induced high speed wheelie accident.



I say shut up and ride. If your neighbor wants to ride his retro-bike without protection that's cool, just don't forget to wave!



Learn to ride well. Statistics show that most accidents victims are uneducated riders, and a large percentage of them don't have a riding endorsment on their drivers licence. Instead of being upset and pointing fingers at the other camp we need to encourage new riders to get rider training, and help them think about the downside of not wearing riding gear.



Arguing about helmet laws really cuts into riding time!! Shut up and ride...

 

[SeanAlexander]

Are Guns are killers too?



Motorcycles don't kill people... PEOPLE kill people. I've crashed at well over 100 MPH three times in the past year and a half. If I crashed even once, at anything near 100 MPH, while wearing chaps, boots, vest and 1/2 helmet, what would the outcome have been? If I had survived this hypothetical "cruiser" crash (highly doubtful), how would the medical bills have compared to my THREE roadracing crashes (under $1,500 total)? Nobody knows the EXACT answer to these questions, but simple logic tells us that MEDICAL bills are going to be HIGHER when you are wearing LESS protective gear.

 

[TheFox]

Re: John Burns: an exercise in contradiction

Technically, since Burnsie is outdoors and presumably in California, it really is illegal for him to be smoking in that picture.

--Foxy

 

[crimsontiger6]

skid lids are good ok? I've headbutted the road at 50mph and survived nearly unscratched because of all my protective gear. Not even a graze, just deep bruising. My bike was a total write off.

My bro in law headbutted a truck at an estimated impact speed of just under 60mph and totaly split his US$300 kevlar and fiberglass Shoei open but it saved his scone.

Its not even a freedom issue just common sense.

You have to be a wanker not to wear one.

 

[33129]

Sure looks like you got 'em thinkin' Johnny. Full of sense or full of *****, there sure are some diverse issues being kicked around. And that is what makes this a neat place to live. Have an opinion! (mine is that you should have the right to make a mistake)

 

[Eddyirish]

Re: John Burns: an exercise in contradiction

Count me among the Burns numbers. Anything else is no doubt some fat toothless Harley rider whose demise wouldn't be missd that much anyway.

 

[Robitaillex]

Your argument is exactly where helmet laws will take us next. First we need to require helmets because riding without is inherently dangerous. Then we need to restrict riding at night since it's apparent that the majority of bike accidents happen at night. Any idiot can see the rational in that. Finally we outlaw the inherently dangerous two wheeled motorized cycle. What brand of stupid do you have to be to ride one of those death traps? Doing so onlt raises poor Johnny B's taxes!

 

[WindWarrior]

Incomplete work, John. Who is going to pay for your lung cancer treatments? Sure, you should wear helmets, but not for the financial burdens you complain about. Don't debase human suffering into financial arguements. You are more important than dollar amounts.

 

[21684]

Re: Democrats and Socialists......

Iowa had a helmet law for all of 1 year back around 1975 while I was in the Marine Corps. They haven't outlawed motorcycles. In fact when they implemented the helmet law in Nebraska the writing of new motorcycle registrations plummeted because people didn't want to wear helmets. It follows that more motorcycles are sold in states that don't legislate helmet laws. More people riding bikes means a larger pro-motorcycle voice. So stuff it johnnyb.

 

[Hipshot]

I s'pose its all according to how much your head is worth to you. In those professions that don't require too many gray cells to rub together, like motojournalist and bureaucrat, it doesn't matter. I always do wear a lid, but its primarily because "she who must be obeyed" cuts me off for a spell out of spite if she catches me riding without one. Besides, I've worn one so long, I just ain't comfortable without one.

 

[spombe7]

Great article!!!



The so called "freedom" as often used by the lobbyists is a cover up for their belief that wearing a helmet will slow down the sale of motorcycles because people do not want to be bothered with the "hassle" of wearing one and the cost of buying one. Haven't we heard the same argument and seen the strategy before. Why ban smoking--it is our freedom to smoke and get cancer. Why force me to wear seat belt, Why force me to get a driver license, ... The govenment is giving the rich a tax cut in the name of giving money back to the "people," whereas the money can be better to improve our road, education, care for our aging parents and young children. Why are we so stupid!?