NTSB Urges Mandatory Helmet Law for all States

[Racey]

Yet another example of the federal government trying to protect citizens from themselves, one more peice of freedom on its way to being taken from us. What's next, trying to mandate all boaters must wear life jackets in boats?
My guess is within 5 to 10 years this will be a reality......
By KEN THOMAS – 2 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — States should require motorcycle riders to wear proper helmets, government investigators urged Tuesday as part of several recommendations that seek to stem a steady rise in motorcycle deaths.
Members of the National Transportation Safety Board unanimously approved the motorcycle safety recommendations, wading into a contentious issue that has pitted motorcycle rights' groups against safety organizations in many states.
"The simple act of donning that helmet can begin the process of preventing that type of fatality and serious injury," said NTSB chairman Mark V. Rosenker.
As motorcycle riding has become more popular, motorcycle deaths have more than doubled since 1997. In 2006, motorcycle deaths increased for the ninth straight year, to 4,810 motorcycle deaths, compared with 4,576 in 2005.
NTSB officials noted that non-helmeted riders were three times more likely to suffer a brain injury in a crash than those wearing a helmet.
Motorcycle groups questioned the ability of helmets to provide complete protection and prevent internal injuries in a crash. They said more rider education programs are needed.
"If a truck pulls out in front of you and runs a stop sign, how is that helmet going to prevent an accident?" asked Steve Rector, state coordinator for ABATE Iowa, a motorcycle rights' group. He also noted that motorcycle registrations and the number of miles traveled by motorcyclists have increased in recent years.
Judith Lee Stone, president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, said there was "no scientific evidence that motorcycle rider training reduces crash risk and is an adequate substitute for an all-rider helmet law."
Currently, 20 states and the District of Columbia require riders to wear protective helmets, a significant change since the late 1970s, when nearly every state required helmet use. Twenty-seven states only cover some riders, typically those under 21.
Three states — Iowa, Illinois and New Hampshire — have no helmet laws.
In six states that repealed their universal laws beginning in 1997 — Arkansas, Texas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Florida and Pennsylvania — helmet use plummeted following the repeal of the laws, NTSB officials said. Louisiana reinstated its mandatory requirement in 2004.
The agency also recommended that federal safety officials develop a plan for states and others to improve motorcycle safety and the government develop guidelines for states to gather accurate data on riders.
The NTSB only has the power to make recommendations, but its staff and board members personally lobby for changes the board considers most important.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h_w5pPDghej-eN44GqiVX4G795rg

[Kilrtoy]

You are riding a murdercycle you should use a DOT approved helmet...

[eliminatedsprinter]

Oh crap, now it's really going to be hard to find good organ donors...

[RiverDave]

You are riding a murdercycle you should use a DOT approved helmet...
SHOULD and HAVE TO are 2 very different things!
RD

[Racey]

You are riding a murdercycle you should use a DOT approved helmet...
It should be the choice of the rider, just like wearing a seatbelt, you are only risking your own health by not wearing one, that is a choice an adult should be allowed to make. there is no feeling like riding with the wind in your hair, i've been to sturgis twice, first time i rode with a helmet, second time without, i had a much better time and enjoyed riding alot more without the helmet. Call it stupid, risky, whatever, little pleasures make the difference, i understood the risks in doing so. In a country founded on freedom we have very little of it left. This is turning into a socialist country
Kilr do you wear your lifejacket at all times while driving your boat???
what's the difference??

[YeLLowBoaT]

It should be the choice of the rider, just like wearing a seatbelt, you are only risking your own health by not wearing one, that is a choice an adult should be allowed to make. there is no feeling like riding with the wind in your hair, i've been to sturgis twice, first time i rode with a helmet, second time without, i had a much better time and enjoyed riding alot more without the helmet. Call it stupid, risky, whatever, little pleasures make the difference, i understood the risks in doing so. In a country founded on freedom we have very little of it left. This is turning into a socialist country
Kilr do you wear your lifejacket at all times while driving your boat???
what's the difference??
so when some one gets thier brain scrambled and is now a child in a adult body... who pays to take care of them...
The tax payer.

[RiverDave]

so when some one gets thier brain scrambled and is now a child in a adult body... who pays to take care of them...
The tax payer.
How do you figure the tax payer takes care of them?
Do YOU have health insurance? I do..
RD

[Kilrtoy]

It should be the choice of the rider, just like wearing a seatbelt, you are only risking your own health by not wearing one, that is a choice an adult should be allowed to make. there is no feeling like riding with the wind in your hair, i've been to sturgis twice, first time i rode with a helmet, second time without, i had a much better time and enjoyed riding alot more without the helmet. Call it stupid, risky, whatever, little pleasures make the difference, i understood the risks in doing so. In a country founded on freedom we have very little of it left. This is turning into a socialist country
Kilr do you wear your lifejacket at all times while driving your boat???
what's the difference??
SHOULD, Is what I will stick with...
Even in states wear it is not required by law, I still wear one... But i love my melon the way it is....
Compare apples to apples, not boating to motorcycle riding

[YeLLowBoaT]

How do you figure the tax payer takes care of them?
Do YOU have health insurance? I do..
RD
most health insurances do not cover long term care( might want to check your policy). Also ever hear of SSI and disablity?
Beleave me, when some one gets hurt, we all pay.
besides driving a motor cycle on the street is a privilege not a right.

[HPLavey]

I think they should just ban motorcycles!
There too dangerous and they don't have seatbelts

[RiverDave]

most health insurances do not cover long term care( might want to check your policy). Also ever hear of SSI and disablity?
Beleave me, when some one gets hurt, we all pay.
besides driving a motor cycle on the street is a privilege not a right.
Strange, when this country was 1st founded lots of things were "rights" that are now "priveledges" or in some cases illegal?
If I want to ride a motorcycle off road out in the middle of nowhere without a helmet how is that a priveledge and not a right?
RD

[YeLLowBoaT]

Strange, when this country was 1st founded lots of things were "rights" that are now "priveledges" or in some cases illegal?
If I want to ride a motorcycle off road out in the middle of nowhere without a helmet how is that a priveledge and not a right?RD
depends on what state you live in and rather or not you own/ have the permission of the owner.
The use of goverment properity( and yes roads are goverment properity) are privileges.

[Boatcop]

They should tell the whole story.
Study: 'Supersport' cycles step up risk
Updated 18h 41m ago | Comments 79 | Recommend 11 E-mail | Save | Print | Reprints & Permissions |
By Thomas Frank, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Drivers of high-performance racing motorcycles are being killed nearly four times as often as people who drive standard models, a new insurance study shows.
The study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety blames popular "supersport" motorcycles in part for a dramatic increase in U.S. motorcycle deaths, which have skyrocketed from 2,116 in 1997 to 4,810 in 2006. Such deaths now account for 11% of all traffic fatalities, U.S. Transportation Department figures show.
Some motorcycles are more dangerous than others, according to the study by the institute, an industry trade group.
Supersport motorcycles, which can hit 180 mph, accounted for 28% of deaths of motorcycle drivers in 2005. That year, the bikes accounted for about 9% of motorcycle registrations, the study shows.
The study criticizes manufacturers such as Kawasaki, Suzuki and Yamaha for promoting the speed of supersport motorcycles, which are driven in pro races and force riders into a crouched position.
"The message is clear to people in the market for motorcycles that these are all about speed," said insurance institute research chief Anne McCartt.
On the website for American Suzuki, the $11,400 GSX-R1000, a supersport bike, is described as providing "better lap times on the racetrack, and more fun on the road."
Suzuki spokesman Glenn Hansen said the motorcycle has all the safety features of other bikes and questioned its danger. "Just because it's fast doesn't mean it's unsafe," Hansen said.
Marvin Campbell, a motorcycle expert at the institute, said supersport bikes are dangerous because their acceleration enables riders to go from 0 to 60 mph in two-and-a-half seconds — nearly twice as fast as a sports car. "Drivers are dying because they're on a 20-mph road going 30 (mph) over the speed limit. It doesn't take any time to get over the speed limit," Campbell said.
The institute study also says supersport riders are generally younger than other riders, and suggests that their age and riding inexperience may contribute to higher death rates.
Jeff Hennie, a lobbyist for the Motorcycle Riders Foundation, which promotes safety through rider training, said the institute study underscores that supersport bikes should be driven only by experienced riders. "When you're getting up to 65 mph as fast as you can, things can happen very quickly," Hennie said. "You need to be trained to react."
DEATHS IN HIGH GEAR
Number of deaths for every 10,000 registered motorcycles in 2005, by type of bike:
Cruiser (low seat and center of graity): 5.7
Touring (powerful, heavier weight): 6.5
Sport (lightweight, built for speed): 10.7
Supersport (one-person racing bike): 22.5
Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

[Baja Big Dog]

I think they should just ban motorcycles!
There too dangerous and they don't have seatbelts
THATS WHAT IM TALKIN ABOUT!!!!:mad:

[Kilrtoy]

Another new rider
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2noE-fcwU3M

[Boatcop]

Strange, when this country was 1st founded lots of things were "rights" that are now "priveledges" or in some cases illegal?
If I want to ride a motorcycle off road out in the middle of nowhere without a helmet how is that a priveledge and not a right?
RD
Rights are things that are inherent to every person, and needs no Government intervention to accomplish.
If you need special permission or license to do something it is a privilege, and not a right.
Want to drive a car? You need a license.
Drive a boat? Have to get registration.
Ride a motorcycle or ATV in the desert? You need permission from the land owner (BLM, State, USFS, private, etc.) to do so, in the form of designated areas, and/or express permission for the public use of their land. You also must abide by their regulations or rules. Some jurisdictions also require registration of off-road vehicles.
Those things are privileges, and can be taken away if you abuse those privileges.
If YOU are the land owner, then go for it. But does that give everyone else the "right" to do the same?

[Mandelon]

If we want to protect people, then obviously we should wear helmets while driving or riding in cars as well.....:rolleyes:

[HocusPocus]

i read somewhere that if you are riding a motorcycle without a helmet and get into an accident your insurance may not cover you. same goes for an auto accident without wearing your seat belt. you might want to check your policy to make sure your covered if you plan on exercising your freedom.

[roostwear]

I guess it's not "Land of the free, home of the brave" anymore. More like "Land of the litigious, home of the over-regulated". Used to be freedom involved risk and benefit. The government will slowly, but surely, make sure there is no more risk OR benefit.

[HokeySon]

If we want to protect people, then obviously we should wear helmets while driving or riding in cars as well.....:rolleyes:
No .. not just then .. all the time ... after all you might stub your toe and fall .. we need mandatory helmet laws for all waking hours .... and no one should be allowed to leave their home ... ever ... unless it is to attend a mandatory state indoctrination session in a padded room ... and all safe ideas can be provided by computer, radio and TV by the state ... noone should be permitted to have unsafe thoughts ... any that do should be terminated for the safety of the herd ... er, society.

[MudPumper]

I encourage everybody to ride without a helmet and drive without a seatbelt. Please go kill yourself, this place is getting too crowded anyway. :)

[Baja Big Dog]

I encourage everybody to ride without a helmet and drive without a seatbelt. Please go kill yourself, this place is getting too crowded anyway. :)
YEA...what he said!!! Buy an illegal a motorcycle!!!:eek:

[AirtimeLavey]

Most all bike riders have put their bike(s) down at least once. I used to ride sport bikes (Katana & Ninja), but never put them down. Only time I put a bike down was riding a Harley Lowrider, coming down the 18, had too much speed for the corner on that kind of bike and went of into the marbles. Thought I could save it, but went down over the bars. If I wasn't wearing a helmet, I'd be a lot dumber today, if even here today at all.
It's absolutely the epitomy of stupidity not to wear a helmet on a street bike. I've got at least half a dozen stories of friends/acquaintances that have either died or suffered severely, simply because they didn't have a helmet on. In some cases, they could have just gotten up and walked away like I did and some of my friends who do where helmets and have gone down.
I was in the Mid-west this summer, and was always blown away at seeing the riders w/out helmets.
In addition to my own accident, I witnessed a very bad accident where the guy lived only because he had a helmet on. It was a head on coll. w/a car. He flipped over the car, hitting his head on the corner where the roof meets the windsheild. Without a helmet, that would have been a very different picture. He only suffered a broken hip and wrist.
Just flip the visor up and you can feel the wind just fine. Best of luck to those of you who ride w/o a helmet. My sympathy to your families who will have to deal with the outcome should things ever go bad. Oh yeah, as for it only affects the rider, I guess you're forgetting the friends and families that are impacted as well. It's not just how the medical bills get paid. That's the selfish outlook.
I'm for the helmet laws, but then I also think boaters should be licensed or have training as well. Some rights have to give way to safety even for those too stupid to take care of their own safety. How many boaters would carry lifevests for everyone on board all the time, if it wasn't req'd.? I could go on and on about safety laws that are there for our own protection, but we still manage to have fun and freedom. You have to love the guy riding his Harley w/no helmet, wearing flip-flops. :rolleyes: Darwinism.

[Racey]

so when some one gets thier brain scrambled and is now a child in a adult body... who pays to take care of them...
The tax payer.
most health insurances do not cover long term care( might want to check your policy). Also ever hear of SSI and disablity?
Beleave me, when some one gets hurt, we all pay.
besides driving a motor cycle on the street is a privilege not a right.
This is a Drip in the bucket compared to what we pay for illegals in the hospital system, But our government seems to be more worried about helmet laws than securing the border and rounding them up sendin em back, that's what makes me angry.
Pedestrian Deaths in 2003 were 5,991
Motorcycle Deaths in 2003 were 3,676
(Source: http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm )
So maybe we should have to wear a helmet to cross the street......:rolleyes:
SHOULD, Is what I will stick with...
Even in states wear it is not required by law, I still wear one... But i love my melon the way it is....
Compare apples to apples, not boating to motorcycle riding
SHOULD is fine with me, i'll agree to that whole heartedly.
But if you told a rider back in the 50's-60's that they were going to be forced to wear a helmet to ride, or wear a seatbelt in a car they would most likely be disgusted by the idea of being forced to do so, and while it may not be apples to apples to compare the two, someday the govt WILL try to make all recreational boaters wear PFD's, it sounds stupid today, but maybe not in 20 years, it's a progressive step in that direction. They have already been exploring that Idea, i just read an NTSB report from 2004 examining that very option, it was so overwhelmingly opposed by the public that they decided to drop it...... i'll post the link when i get home.

[skyskier]

No .. not just then .. all the time ... after all you might stub your toe and fall .. we need mandatory helmet laws for all waking hours .... and no one should be allowed to leave their home ... ever ... unless it is to attend a mandatory state indoctrination session in a padded room ... and all safe ideas can be provided by computer, radio and TV by the state ... noone should be permitted to have unsafe thoughts ... any that do should be terminated for the safety of the herd ... er, society.
I for one voted "NO" on the tobacco initiative. I'll also vote "NO" on the new caffeine/alcohol tax, soon to be on the ballot's near YOU :rolleyes:

[YeLLowBoaT]

This is a Drip in the bucket compared to what we pay for illegals in the hospital system, But our government seems to be more worried about helmet laws than securing the border and rounding them up sendin em back, that's what makes me angry.
Pedestrian Deaths in 2003 were 5,991
Motorcycle Deaths in 2003 were 3,676
(Source: http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm )
So maybe we should have to wear a helmet to cross the street......:rolleyes:
.
how many of each were cripled from doing both those activitys?

[HokeySon]

. You have to love the guy riding his Harley w/no helmet, wearing flip-flops. :rolleyes: Darwinism.
That's why I ride a vespa ... flip flop friendly.;)
I do not like wearing a helmet ... it just looks goofy.
But mostly, I do not like bureaucrats telling me they know what is better for me than I do. Even when they are right. Give me the information, let me make the choice and live (or die) with the consequences of my choice.

[disco_charger]

I have no problem with people not wearing helmets. I think it should be mandatory if you refuse to wear a helmet, you will only accept the medical care your insurance will cover, and not hold any government sponsored entity responsible for your medical care. (Insurance will only cover so much.) :)
You want to scramble your brain, your decision, your liabilty.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Why regulate anything? Regulation is not always a loss of freedom, at least not to some. Why build autos that use safety glass, air bags, collision relief points? Why regulate the lead in paint, asbestos, household wiring gauge, etc. I see it as protection for those not smart enough to know better.
Just my .02

[RiverDave]

Most all bike riders have put their bike(s) down at least once. I used to ride sport bikes (Katana & Ninja), but never put them down. Only time I put a bike down was riding a Harley Lowrider, coming down the 18, had too much speed for the corner on that kind of bike and went of into the marbles. Thought I could save it, but went down over the bars. If I wasn't wearing a helmet, I'd be a lot dumber today, if even here today at all.
It's absolutely the epitomy of stupidity not to wear a helmet on a street bike. I've got at least half a dozen stories of friends/acquaintances that have either died or suffered severely, simply because they didn't have a helmet on. In some cases, they could have just gotten up and walked away like I did and some of my friends who do where helmets and have gone down.
I was in the Mid-west this summer, and was always blown away at seeing the riders w/out helmets.
In addition to my own accident, I witnessed a very bad accident where the guy lived only because he had a helmet on. It was a head on coll. w/a car. He flipped over the car, hitting his head on the corner where the roof meets the windsheild. Without a helmet, that would have been a very different picture. He only suffered a broken hip and wrist.
Just flip the visor up and you can feel the wind just fine. Best of luck to those of you who ride w/o a helmet. My sympathy to your families who will have to deal with the outcome should things ever go bad. Oh yeah, as for it only affects the rider, I guess you're forgetting the friends and families that are impacted as well. It's not just how the medical bills get paid. That's the selfish outlook.
I'm for the helmet laws, but then I also think boaters should be licensed or have training as well. Some rights have to give way to safety even for those too stupid to take care of their own safety. How many boaters would carry lifevests for everyone on board all the time, if it wasn't req'd.? I could go on and on about safety laws that are there fr our own protection, but we still manage to have fun and freedom. You have to love the guy riding his Harley w/no helmet, wearing flip-flops. :rolleyes: Darwinism.
AirtimeLavey, let me ask you a simple question to ponder.. and I'd like for you to answer it honestly.
Where are the life jackets on YOUR boat stored?
While they maybe stored on the boat, in a real world panic situation, life jackets under the bow won't do anything, and if any braniac actually tried to run up under there and get them, then they will most likely go down with the ship.
Same goes for under the seat cushions, in the ski locker etc.. etc..
Only place a life jacket is really going to work in a panic situation (collision perhaps?) is if your wearing it, or have enough time to grab it pre situation.
I guess what I'm saying is.. I disagree with your example.
RD

[RiverDave]

I have no problem with people not wearing helmets. I think it should be mandatory if you refuse to wear a helmet, you will only accept the medical care your insurance will cover, and not hold any government sponsored entity responsible for your medical care. (Insurance will only cover so much.) :)
You want to scramble your brain, your decision, your liabilty.
BINGO!!
RD

[AZJD]

SHOULD and HAVE TO are 2 very different things!
RD
Wow. Can you imagine what wearing a helmet is going to do to my hair Dave?:D :D :D

[AirtimeLavey]

That's why I ride a vespa ... flip flop friendly.;)
To each their own.....no comment. ;)
I do not like wearing a helmet ... it just looks goofy.
Nice decision making skill set. At least you're keeping in mind what's important. :rolleyes:
But mostly, I do not like bureaucrats telling me they know what is better for me than I do. Even when they are right. Give me the information, let me make the choice and live (or die) with the consequences of my choice.
So, you live alone, with no family or friends that might ultimately have to care for you if you become a vegetable? Otherwise, I'm sure you're considering the impact of you becoming a vegetable would have on their lives and their rights and freedoms. Then, I'd say you're good to go. Happy riding. :rolleyes:

[AirtimeLavey]

AirtimeLavey, let me ask you a simple question to ponder.. and I'd like for you to answer it honestly.
Where are the life jackets on YOUR boat stored?
While they maybe stored on the boat, in a real world panic situation, life jackets under the bow won't do anything, and if any braniac actually tried to run up under there and get them, then they will most likely go down with the ship.
Same goes for under the seat cushions, in the ski locker etc.. etc..
Only place a life jacket is really going to work in a panic situation (collision perhaps?) is if your wearing it, or have enough time to grab it pre situation.
I guess what I'm saying is.. I disagree with your example.
RD
May not have been the best example, but a simple one for sure. I have the lifevests and throw cushion within an arm's reach right in front of me/driver's seat. The vests are standing up on end, in a row.
I get your point, but I would argue that if I were to have problem, in many circumstances, not all, they would be available in an accident. The question would be how severe the accident and how accessible they become. Most of the time I'm not running over 60, esp. w/people on board. Where I suspect we'd have issues is another boat hitting us (I drive very defensive w/myhead on a swivel, but you never know) or more likely scenario, getting caught out in a monsoon and getting flooded due to mech failure or whatever. Whatever the circumstance, are you saying that chances for survival are not better with the vests on-board, even in the locker?
I'm not annal about following the letter of the law. I firmly and arguably feel the spirit of the law is what should prefail, but I'm big on safety (although I try, I'm sure I'm not perfect to the letter).
A lot of my opinion comes from being an adrenaline junkie in my younger days. Nothing special, but I used to do things like ride the street bikes (very aggressively on Mulholland, etc.), hang-glide, skydive, white-water raft, windsurf, drive race cars, snowmobiles, dirtbikes/quads, fly gliders and small single engined planes, somewhat extreme snow ski, etc. Some of those things I did (and still do) more than others. You learn real quick about the importance of safety.
My comments in this thread relate to my personal experience and friends' experiences on riding bikes of all kinds. Some of my friends are cops with extensive training and still have made mistakes that could have caused severe damage or death if they weren't wearing their helmets.
Bottomline, there are endless laws on the books to protect people from themselves, yet we don't dwell on them. It's important to question the necessity of each law and review the impact positive or negative (like potential loss of rights). Some folks like to blow out everything that comes along as an affront to their rights. That's just not true in every case. There's grey area. The sky's not falling. It's not all or nothing. It's more common sense. Imo.

[beer truck]

I'm not a rider, have many friends who are, and went to ones friends funeral last week. He was wearing a helmet.
I think helmets, and seatbelts should be left to a competent adult to chose if they are to use them or not. (all minors should be required, as well as those not competent to make decision on their own)
That being said I think that if someone is hurt, or killed in a accident, where a helmet, or seatbelt may have saved their life, then they (and their survivors) should lose the opportunity to sue or recover damages from the insurance companies or the other parties who may be involved, or caused the accident.
It is one thing to say I am only hurting myself, if I am in a accident, and not wearing a helmet, (this may be true if you are the only person involved on your own property), but in many cases there are others who survive, and have to live with the guilt, and consequences of causing another to lose their life.
The driver of the car that hit my friend will have to live with this, they were not speeding, had not been drinking, probably never saw the bike. It was an accident that is all. One they will never forget, and will probably change them.
everyone should be responsible for themselves until they involve others, and this is when rules and laws are needed, to protect the others.
I can see regulations for boater to wear life jackets in the near future, I can also remember when seatbelts were a option you had to pay for in a new car.
Not all change is bad, sometimes it is needed to protect us from ourselves.
sorry if this offends anyone, just one mans opinion

[maxwedge]

"Supersport motorcycles, which can hit 180 mph, accounted for 28% of deaths of motorcycle drivers in 2005. That year, the bikes accounted for about 9% of motorcycle registrations, the study shows.
The study criticizes manufacturers such as Kawasaki, Suzuki and Yamaha for promoting the speed of supersport motorcycles, which are driven in pro races and force riders into a crouched position."
What an idiotic load of shit!- First of all the person that wrote this clearly dosn't know a god damn thing about motorcycles, as it should be pretty obvious that "Super Sport Racing bikes" are seen on the streets just about as often as Indy cars and Top fuel Dragsters.
Secondly, if "Super Sport racing bikes", which I take to mean sport bikes(and there are hugly varying classes among them) accounted for 28% of all the fatalities then why the Fuk are we trying to call them out Vs. the other 72% of Cruisers, Touring bikes, and Harleys that clearly killed far more people. I can think of a few times when those huge sport bike brakes, saved my life, were as if I had been riding say a Road King, I would be dead maybe.
Thirdly It's generally accepted that helmets would only save about half of the dead people, as it seems the rest of your body is also important. So basically maybe 2000 lives possibly saved (about 560 of whom were oddly riding their race bikes on the street). Now lets see how that fits in with the number of total dead people.
Deaths/Mortality
(Data are for U.S. for year indicated)
Number of deaths: 2,398,343
Death rate: 816.7 deaths per 100,000 population
Life expectancy: 77.9 years
Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
Heart disease: 654,092
Cancer: 550,270
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 150,147
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 123,884
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 108,694
Diabetes: 72,815
Alzheimer's disease: 65,829
Influenza/Pneumonia: 61,472
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 42,762
Septicemia: 33,464
Looks to me like the government needs to start regulating what we eat. That would save a lot more people than a helmet law.
By the way I Always ride with my helmet, but I believe it's complete horse shit to force that on people. Also there is the whole DOT Vs. Snell helmet rating system . Should we maybe force everybody to wear the same helmet as the Highway Patrol? Because personally I value my chin and the lower half of my face almost as much as the top, so I would rather wear a full face helmet thanks.
Anyway, I could rant for hours. I could post up a very large reasearch paper I wrote on the subject a few years back in college, etc etc. But let me me just sum up with some words from the revolution.
LIVE FREE OR DIE!

[BADAXE]

I've had many motorcycles (street and dirt) over the years and even worked in the industry for many years. I really don't care whether there is a law or not, i would NEVER ride without a helmet. When I rode street bikes I was run into by cars twice and without a helmet both would have been terminal. The only law that needs to be applied is the law of common sense. If you go down without a helmet your chances of being dead are greatly increased. Not worth the feeling of the wind in my hair (what's left anyway) if you ask me. Be safe Racey, we don't need any BC people dying on us.

[Ultrafied]

Helmets, - mandatory for anyone driving or passenger under 18. Other then that, you are an adult. The cost incurred for a person brain dead is a spit in the buck for health care compared to other preventable costs (i.e. loved the illegal example).
I understand if you feel that a person is an absolute idiot for not wearing a helmet, but if the law does require it, it is his/her choice. Come on, you are not their mother or father, don't "make" them do something. Your beliefs are your beliefs, their beliefs are their own. Imposing upon someone is just plain rude.
The pain and suffering that another's family "may" go through in a serious accident could be burdensome, could be hard to understand, could be extremely difficult for you to bear, but .... it is not your family. Who made everyone someones big brother? Of course it is well past 1984 .. maybe it is time Big Brother comes out of the closet. :D

[hoolign]

That's why I ride a vespa ... flip flop friendly.;)
I do not like wearing a helmet ... it just looks goofy.
But mostly, I do not like bureaucrats telling me they know what is better for me than I do. Even when they are right. Give me the information, let me make the choice and live (or die) with the consequences of my choice.
Since your not running with any common sence in your head, you obviously need someone to tell you. :rolleyes:

[TCHB]

Motorcycles have more risk of injury and a helmet should be worn. I raced for many years and would never think of going to the start line without a helmet. If I think about it is safer on the track than out in traffic with no helmet.
Brain injuries are real and require $$$$$$$ for a long time. Individual insurance will run out quickly and then tax dollars take over. A helmet reduces the risk!!!!!!!

[hoolign]

Motorcycles have more risk of injury and a helmet should be worn. I raced for many years and would never think of going to the start line without a helmet. If I think about it is safer on the track than out in traffic with no helmet.
Brain injuries are real and require $$$$$$$ for a long time. Individual insurance will run out quickly and then tax dollars take over. A helmet reduces the risk!!!!!!!
Should helmets be worn on treadmills?? :confused:

[DILLIGAF]

I don't wear a helmet if the law doesn't dictate I do. Just my preference and choice.
Riding to Sturgis whenever I would cross a state line that allowed you the choice I took my helmet off.
To each his own......

[Phat Matt]

I don't ride street, only dirt, but couldn't imagine not wearing a helmet. I have had my bell rung while I had a helmet on. I could only imagine what it would have been like without it. :eek:

[HM]

I wear helmet when I post on ***boat. Granted it is made of tin foil and used mainly to block out JBB from trying to control my mind. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[boatnam2]

I would say the sport bike death high rate is because there are being ridden by young guys which have big ball and little brains.Not much a helmet is probaly going to help except for maybe the open casket dealio will get a little more play.I can remember a least 5 guys i went to high school with that all died in late teens riding not because they didnt wear a helmet,not becuase they rode a sport bike,but because they were young and dumb.

[LOWRIVER2]

Count me in the should category. And I'd rather the guys wearing the novelty ones just man up and ride without one and face a ticket. Novelty helmets are the dumbest things ever invented. Those guys should wear shirts with seat belts painted on too so they don't have to wear them when driving.
I've seen enough carnage on numerous collisions over the years to realize helmets save lives. Broken limbs, road rash can heal, brain injury, try years to recovery if you're lucky.
As mentioned, many (majority) of the long term brain injured rarely are insured enough for all the costs of years of recovery/permanent rehab/care. Maybe they'll win a lawsuit, most don't . If you think fellow Ca. citizens are'nt picking up those bills, you are'nt paying attention, you are.
Back to novelty helmets, had a good friend get broadsided, he almost died, he's coming back, but one hell of a price in the loss of short term memory, motor skills, speech therapy.
The simple act of wearing a real helmet would of prevented this buddy from the long road to recovery of his brain. Everything has risks, I guess I don't have to wear my vest at work either, but I do for a damn good reason as well. It's called being prepared and putting the odds for survival in your favor.
Then again, I agree with Mudpumper on thinning the herd out, as long as they die/sign a do not revive waiver.

[brianthomas]

I have no problem with people not wearing helmets. I think it should be mandatory if you refuse to wear a helmet, you will only accept the medical care your insurance will cover, and not hold any government sponsored entity responsible for your medical care. (Insurance will only cover so much.) :)
You want to scramble your brain, your decision, your liabilty.
So as he sits in the institution for the rest of his life playing with himself do we still have to pay to raise his kids out of the federal treasury, SSI?
Sign away everything for yourself and your kids and you can do as many dangerous things as you want. Just don't complain when your personal money runs out and we carry you out of the hospital and stuff you into your very own refrigerator box. Oh, move over a little, your kids have to fit in there too.

[Jbb]

I wear helmet when I post on ***boat. Granted it is made of tin foil and used mainly to block out JBB from trying to control my mind. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Resistance is futile.....

[HM]

Resistance is futile.....
No way. Tom Brown just sold me an upgraded foil that is shiny on both sides and is applied with an advanced self-adhesive polymer laminate. Tom supplies it in a scotch tape dispenser to keep it on the dl. Tom's next step to independence is quite peculiar...he says I should castrate myself and drink some koolaid so we can catch a ride on the mother ship when it returns in the tail of Haley's Comet. Who am I to question Tom?

[Kilrtoy]

Novelty helmets are the dumbest things ever invented. Those guys should wear shirts with seat belts painted on too so they don't have to wear them when driving.
.
Wholly shit, You do have a sense of humor.....
Im still laughing at this one...:D

[HM]

Wholly shit, You do have a sense of humor.....
Im still laughing at this one...:D
When I drive, I like to where a tuxedo t-shirt with seat belts painted on them because it says I'm formal, but I like to party.

[CAHotRodBoy]

You know it's only a matter of time before the safety nazis make PFD's mandatory while boating. You can use all the same arguments for PFD's as you can for helmet laws. No one can say mandatory PFD laws wouldn't reduce the number of boating deaths. I'm sure most of you in favor of the helmet laws will feel differently about mandatory PFD laws.