Motorcycle Forums banner

U.S. DOT Announces 2006 Seatbelt & Motorcycle Helmet Use Stats.

9222 Views 50 Replies 24 Participants Last post by  The_AirHawk
Is wearing a helmet a good thing? What if I ride a cruiser?
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
To be fair, that's only a popular survey. In order to really understand what The People are doing, an electoral college must be vote acccordingly.
Oh, then you'll never go fast enough to Crash and Die. Nothing to worry about, we'll just make you exempt from the Laws of Physics(tm).

Right Hawk!. In addition, according to seruzaweasel your brakes on a cruiser are superior to sport bikes so you won't be running into anything. Enjoy
And don't forget, my hair will be perfect at the bar.
I admire a man who has his priorities (and his hair) straight.
It is with a heavy heart that I am informing you that one of the BMW motor officers that wrecked during the escort of GB, has passed away. Regardless of what gear you wear, please be careful.

John Burns, I subscribed to Motorcyclist after reading your Bitter Little Man column, and stopped my subscription when they fired you.

I joined MO when you started here and I understand and sometimes appreciate what you have to say. As far as the BMW/Cop story goes, I'll have to tell you to kiss my a$$ on this one.
living where helmets are mandatory 100% countrywide ..i still do a double take when i see someone without one ...personal freedom to do anything you like aside at least for me the graph is going in the right direction...
Reminds you of Warren Zevon, no?
Don't discount....

.... the impact resistance of Do-Rags. Especially during the suspension of the Laws of Physics.

Some things just make sense........

aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh oooooooooooohhhhhhh- WEREWOLVES OF LONDON
I'm so tired of hearing about this helmet debate when the solution is SO simple. If you don't have enough brains to be wearing a helmet and sustaining head injuries while riding, then you are required to have extra insurance. If not, then the treatment you receive will only be covered up to a certain dollar amount--kind of like how it works even if you ARE wearing a helmet...which is how it works now--doh!
No helmet = Darwin in action. Glad to see "some" people are actually wearing their lids... I know all the arguments, but all you have to see is one person's brainpan shaved open and their gray matter all over the road (been there, seen that) to know a little DOT & Snell is worth a case of helmet hair. Personal choice is the only valid argument, but given the rise in power and performance of modern machines I'm happy to don a helmet to rides such exciting vehicles.
How about if you're not wearing a helmet they just drag you off to the side of the road and go through your pockets....
I just don't get this not wearing a helmet thing. It's amazing how uncomfortable people will make themselves just to prove their point, or stupidity.

I like to tell my MSF students that if all of that wind in your face was such a good thing you would see a lot people driving their cars down the freeway at 70 mph with their head sticking out the window like a dog.
even our dog will pull his head back in the car if you go over about 50 mph... wind is too much.
I would use a penalty formula that included the vehicle's weight and velocity. Therefore an SUV weighting 6,000lbs doing 20 over the speed limit would get the same fine as a sportbike weighing 400lbs and doing more like 300mph.

That demonstrates the relative dangers of speeding bikes vs cars, light trucks, SUVs, etc. There is so much propaganda out there that people completely overrate the danger of a bike doing 100 vs a Camry doing 80. Part of this is the purposeful concentration by law enforcement and various municipalities and States on lazy, but highly remunerative, speed enforcement. Speed enforcement does nothing to make the sreets safer but it sure keeps the police retirement fund nice and fat. How do you think that cities pay for all those paramilitary toys they love so much?

Anyone who believes that "speed kills" should also be against life flights on helicopters and speeding ambulances. As usual slogans are lies.

But I'm betting that these sorts of articles are preparatory to massive lawsuits against dealers and manufacturers. Apparently the latest twist in "legal" shakedowns is to sue companies for daring to sell fully regulated and completely legal products. They've been doing this to gun makers for years. Anyone noticed the latest shakedown of automakers by that nazi, Lockyer, in Kalif? Bike companies just might be next. Each shyster assault on legal companies from tobacco on forward has been preceded by a black propaganda media blitz.
See less See more
Dang it wrong thread again. Sheeesh. Sarnali? Why do you make me do this?
seruzawa supports big brother monitoring,using the wrong measure i.e. Speed does kill

Interesting idea but the only way it could be enforced is with the addition of a black box "ride recorder". I thought you were against these nanny state type ideas. By the way using momentum il.e mass time velocity is probably inferior to using kinetic energy which uses square of the velocity times the mass times a half. Kinetic energy is more important measure in ballistics and collision damage.
So speed in fact does kill
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.