[DataDan]

It's the same old song...

Fortunately, the wholesale carnage that some expect after a helmet law is repealed doesn't occur. Though for the worse, the change is much less serious than predicted.

The most recent example is Florida, which repealed its helmet law effective July 1, 2000. News media and some motorcycle forums on the net anticipated a bloodbath. Didn't happen. Here are the actual Florida motorcycle deaths:

Jan-Jun Jul-Dec Total
------- ------- -----
1999 87 91 178
2000 124 135* 259
2001 143* 144* 287 *post-repeal

To be sure, deaths increased significantly from 1999 to 2000. But much of the increase occurred in January through June, before the law was repealed. Likewise, much of the increase from 2000 to 2001 occurred in July through December, following repeal. Certainly some of the increase was due to decreased helmet use, but Florida was also experiencing a motorcycling boom (as did the rest of the US in 2000), and the casualty count reflects that as well. Interestingly, fatalities in March 2001, which included the first post-repeal Bike Week, actually dropped to 23 from 29 the previous year.

An extensive study of repeal effects can be found in the NHTSA publication, Evaluation of Motorcycle Helmet Law Repeal in Texas and Arkansas. Fatality rate (per registered motorcycle) dropped in Arkansas after repeal and increased somewhat in Texas (but note wild registration count fluctuations). However, the Texas analysis also shows that "the proportion of treated motorcyclists with traumatic brain injuries increased and treatment costs for traumatic brain injury cases increased substantially following the law change."

While it should be crystal clear to anyone who rides—and especially to anyone who's ever crashed—that it's better to crash with a helmet on than without one, I think we tend to overestimate their effectiveness when extrapolating to the riding population. A relatively small increase in safety can be vital to an individual, but still not amount to much when multiplied by the size of the population. And, there are plenty of ways to get hurt or killed on a motorcycle even with a helmet.

[data from the FARS query facility and other resources at the NHTSA website]

 

[GS1100GK]

Althought I am a firm believer in freedom of choice for adults (21 or older) I find it crazy for anyone to ride without a helmet. I understand the thrill of riding with just the breeze in your hair, but the reality is your skull is not made of iron and will break if it makes contact with road, trees, telephone poles, house, or other motorized vehicle. I also do not necessarily buy the idea that society will or should bear the burden of your medical and rehabilitation cost should you mangle your body and/or brain because you decided to ride without a helmet. However, maybe a good compromise is that anyone who wants to ride without a helmet should have a living will established and on file with the state so family members can pull the life support plug on your brain dead body once you screw it up!

 

[ValknMag]

You are assuming, of course, that we think income taxes are a good idea; that we think the government should be paying our medical bills and thus have the right to run our lives; that we agree with seat belt laws, etc. I live in a suburb--you're saying I can ride a dirtbike on my lawn? Nope. But wait--I pay property taxes, so it's the government's land anyhow! On your slippery slope, then, the government has a right to dictate EVERYTHING that goes on in my house, don't they? All the pro-helmet law people begin with the flawed premise that the government is supposed to pick up the check for everything in life, including medical bills. Go to Barnes & Noble, you can get a copy of the U.S. Constitution for $3.95. Medical bills are not addressed in this document. But then, if people like you didn't try to grow our goverment into super-nanny, you wouldn't have any excuse to tell us how to live, now, would you, comrade?

 

[DataDan]

Re: It's the same old song...

Sorry about the table. The preview button allowed me to use the "pre" HTML tag for preformatted text, but it was ignored in the final post. Hope this is readable:

year Jan-Jun Jul-Dec Total

1999 87 91 178

2000 124 135* 259

2001 143* 144* 287 *post-repeal

 

[tumbler]

Re: Helmet Laws Bite!

Smart ass its a typo and since this site isn't called ladders online people of Forest Gump levels of intelligence or higher could probably figure it out. Yes look at Christopher Reeves, fell of a horse at much slower speeds than a motorcycle can travel, wearing a helmet, and landing on soft earth (as compared to asphalt or concrete!) I guess we should stop trying to make your life safe, so we won't try to get stricter laws for car drivers that "accidently" run down motorcyclists because they "didn't see you" because I mean you don't need anyone looking out for your safety.

 

[ValknMag]

Re: Helmet Laws Bite!

I wasn't making fun of a typo (if I were, I would have pointed out 'dimensa'). What I'm pointing out is that there are more risky activities out there. Why couldn't he fall off a roof, or fence, or horse? What laws can we pass to make these activities safer? "I guess we should stop trying to make your life safe" YES! YOU GET IT NOW! CUT IT OUT! STOP! HALT! DESIST! If I want to be safe, I have a 4,300-pound car with airbags.

 

[21684]

Tumbler

I hear the violins playing. Tell me, did gramps even have a motorcycle licence? Tumbler you sound like you need to lock yourself away to protect yourself from life's gamble. It's people like you that I get tired of hearing. Always with the examples of someone getting hurt on a motorcycle. You'd better not ride then. How can you live with yourself knowing what you know? Ever notice that everytime someone is killed at an unmarked intersection that everyone scrambles to erect traffic lights even though for years there had been no problem. You'd think that people had been dropping like flys but no, only emotion involved. The way I look at things is this; this country would still be just English colonies and not the U.S. of A if all the colonist would have been worried about getting hurt and didn't take up arms. They wanted freedom of choice then and a lot of us want it now. Live your narrow view of freedom but let the rest of us to our larger view.

 

[tumbler]

If you don't think income taxes are a good idea then we do you live here? Seriously why? Secondly, elected officials make laws so if you're in the minority T.S. Let see what else, oh yea you and the "freedom to buy a house in the suburbs, the govenment didn't force you to buy that house, but it is letting you use the land that it's on. I'll meet you at Barnes and Nobles and together we'll find in the Constitution were it says citizens of this country we have the "right" to ride motorcycles. You are damn right about the Constitiution not saying anything about medical bills. I agree with you 100%. So does the government providing even a minimum of health care make this a better or worse nation. And before you start in on welfare moms and junkies, etc we're talking about helmets, this is a motorcycle site. You can cram the comrade *****, I love my country for the rights and PRIVLEDGES that I enjoy, but anarchist out there here the expression "free country" and think they should be able to do whatever they want. Oh and if you have a problem with taxes why are you opposed to a law that could lower them. You don't really think the state Pennsylvania is really going to hire more cops to enforce helmet laws do you?

This law is similar to the helmet laws in TX. Basically, it just means you need to have a t least some minimum experience riding before you can ride a bike w/o a helmet. Before I started riding a would have agreed with you about helmet laws being unjust, but after a few years of riding experience I think that Joe Public riding a street bike it is in the real world, Not the theoretical we debate on this site, it is a good idea.

 

[21684]

Probably Bushes relatives

You can't count Texas head injuries since all of Bush's cronies are brain dead already.

 

[bigjames]

Helmets for everybody, in cars...body armour in bright colors for two wheelers!

What are the majority of injuries sustained by Automobile drivers with or without Airbags/seat belts? Head injuries.

What are most of the injuries sutained by motorcycle riders? Oddly enough, abdominal.

So I say head helmets for car drivers (all of them) and bright ass orange and kawi green full body armor for motorcyclists and bicycle riders!

To hell with rider and drivers education, most states have or are in the process of saving money by gutting these programs anyway!

Legislate, don't educate! Best way to educate is to incarcerate! (Quote from Former Ga Gov Roy Barnes)

Let everybody eat, drink and talk on cell phones while riding (yeah, I've see that) or driving a big ass SUV with the TV and GPS on!! What the hell, we are all responsible for our own actions, right! This is still America, ain't it?

Yes I am kidding, just tired of the BS about this crap....I wear a helmet even though a friend was killed by one (Broke his neck when he turned around too quickly when his drunk wife fell off the back of the bike. She was uninjured except for scrapes and bruises.)

Don't even get me started about the Georgia State Flag...

BigJames

Macon, Ga

 

[3917]

Even though I always wear a helmet I don't agree with Laws requiring people to wear helmets. It's going to take a while to change old habits. Just the other day I was sitting on my bike (without a helmet on) and the little 4 year old neighbor kid screamed at me "get your helmet on!" When I was a kid I didn't wear a helmet and now I see kids on bikes/rollerblades with tons of protective gear. Hopefully this change in today's youth will follow them to adulthoods. Ok enough of my mushy soap box.

 

[3917]

PS Join the AMA!

 

[longride]

Hey Puck!

I think I see the horse wigglin'. Ya better whack it again!

 

[ValknMag]

I live here because, presently, it's the best choice. And I'm trying to get rid of income taxes. "If you're in the minority T.S." The majority opinion doesn't need protecting, the minority does. This is why all states have equal representation in the Senate, so Rhode Island doesn't get steamrolled by California. "I'll meet you at..." I already have my copy. Amendment X : "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." "So does the government..." Worse. Freedom to fail is as important as freedom to succeed. Do you think that your government providing health care or unemployement makes you a better person? Do you consider it charity? Let's put it in these terms : If you are robbed at gunpoint by someone who needs the money, is it charity? No, you think, because it is compulsory. You did not give to someone of your own free will. Now, if I don't pay my taxes, sooner or later guns will come into play, to imprison me or take my house or whatever. Taxes are compulsory, so don't feel good about helping people with your tax dollars. It does not make you a better person. I also object to my tax money going towards the National Endowment for the Arts, but I buy art works I like and support those artists whose work I like. "Oh and if you have a problem..." what law is going to lower taxes?

 

[bigjames]

and folks who smoke are not a burden?



and folks who drive and have accidents with injuries are not a burden?



and folks who get old and end up using Medicaid are not a burden?



and kids in school are not a burden?



and corporations that go belly up making many folks go on unemployment are not a burden?



and folks on unemployment through no fault of their own are not a burden?



and the investigations as to why those companies went belly up is not a burden?



and Iraq is not a burden?



and the MANY federal protective services are not a burden?



and electoral costs are not a burden?



and subsidising medical reasearch for companies that then rip off Americans is not a burden?



and the Interstate Highway system is not a burden?



and indigent care is not a burden?



and fortifying our border with Canada (man, that one is sad) is not a burden?



Excuse me, that is why we pay taxes. Everybody and everything is a burden. Most, as in the large majority of riders, do have medical insurance because WE HAVE JOBS because motorcycling is not a cheap sport. I was a statistical programmer in the insurance industry for too long to buy into the social burden theory. We had another word for statistics - lies.

 

[tumbler]

Re: Tumbler

I get tired of hearing people like you who came seem to grasp the idea that a country has to have laws and regulations. Period, there is no way around. You are making a generalization about my belief based on my ideas on a helmet law. If you really think wearing or not wearing a helmet, or law that makes a select few riders have to for awhile, is larger view of expressing freedom read some history. The colonists fought and didn't for freedom of religion and speech, essentially (yes I know there were more, but those were the two main ones). Okay no smart ass retort, all seriousness, where do you draw the line, no speed limits, no limits on the amount of alcohol you can drink before you drive. You really think that I should be able to ride 100mph on one wheel through a school zone. Yes these are extreme examples, but not near as much as your's previously stated. And I'm not emotional about this as you and others have pointed, I'm pointing out consequences of someone not wearing a helmet, because some of you don't seem see how this legislation affects the public in general, which is what the government has to, only ahout how it affects you or a small minority like you. I say this without any personal attack, but to me that seems to be a narrow view a freedom.

 

[bigjames]

member # 617641, renewed the other day, awaitiing new membership card

 

[ValknMag]

Re: Tumbler

Drinking and driving can kill people besides the rider. Speeding through school zones can kill someone besides the rider. Laws should exist to protect people from one another. I object to laws to protect me from myself. We agree that I should not drink ten ounces of Jim Beam and get in my car and drive around, right? Now, should I be allowed to drink that Beam in my own house? How about 20 ounces? 40? Eventually, I get to a point where I become sick from alcohol poisoning. Is the answer to create Government Alcohol centers, where I am given a safe portion of booze and forced to consume it there (so I can't stockpile it)? Or, should I assume the risk associated with alcohol?

 

[ogre23]

I do complain about that. In fact, I have a nice bright yellow sticker with black lettering (which shows up well against the flat black paint) on the rear fender of my motorcycle which says "I miss freedom."



Ok, I guess I don't really have a point. I just wanted to talk about my sticker.



-Kawazuki

 

[longride]

Re: Tumbler

With all due respect, speed limits and school zones and drinking laws are for protecting others. My not wearing a helmet isn't going to hurt anyone but ME if I have a problem. If I speed or get drunk and drive, I could easily kill or maim someone else. These laws are necessary from stopping someone from killing others. Helmet laws are a "for your own good" type that does not fit with the other examples you gave. There are seat belt laws and others that fit into the same type of catagory, but none are as intrusive as a helmet law. The same government that is so hell bent on saving lives also sponsors abortions. It's called live and let live.