If you would like to be added or dropped from the Michigan ping list, please freepmail me.
I bike without a helmet, as do my kids. I've never even been on a motorcycle, though.
Posted on 10/12/2007 5:41:50 AM PDT by ShadowDancer
Let me give you an analogy. Suppose gold-plating of cars became the thing to do for really rich people. Now suppose that when you got in a fender-bender with one of those cars, it'd cost $150,000 to fix. If enough people started gold-plating their cars, insurance rates would skyrocket, because what had been a $3,000 repair job would now be a $150,000 repair job. Speed limits would also probably be reduced.
How is a helmetless motorcycle any different? Yes, I know drivers have to exercise caution and there's a personal responsibility issue, but right now, if I get in a wreck with another normal car, the chance of injury is much much lower than if I get in a wreck with a motorcycle. And since no one is perfect, wrecks do happen. But if someone gets in a wreck with another car, their insurance rates go up a few hundred bucks per year, the drivers get rental cars for a few weeks, but the chances of injury or death are much less than with a motorcycle. There's no manslaughter charges brought in a normal wreck, but there is if you do the exact same thing against a motorcycle.
I feel the same way about really expensive cars as I do about motorcycles or really tiny cars that are unsafe: I don't really care if you go off and hit a tree, I care that some other normal motorist has a normal wreck and therefore has his life ruined because of it. If some CEO of a tech company is driving a McLaren to work, doesn't that sort of put everyone who might hit him at the risk of losing their house and all their assets because the repair bill will certainly be larger than what their insurance covers? With a motorcycle, not only are you puting your life on the line (and hey, that's your business), but you are also putting other drivers' livelihood on the line by there mere fact that by being on the road, you can subject them to much more liability than normal. If your brake light goes out, and a motorcycle rear-ends you and the guy wasn't wearing a helmet and he dies, are you really guilty of manslaughter?
A few years ago in Massachusetts, there was an old really frail lady in a car at a round-a-bout. Someone rear-ended that car going about 10 mph. The old lady died, and the driver was charged with manslaughter. I'm sorry, but even if the driver was at fault, those actions normally wouldn't result in manslaughter, and I thought that that case was very similar to the way motorcycles are.
Ijust think that roads are a shared entity, and you have the potential to subject people to massive liability.
The reason I care if people like Britney Spears drives her car with the baby on her lap isn't only for the baby, but also for the other drivers on the road who could cause serious injury from a minor accident. That's why I think car-seat laws are a good idea.
Agreed. As I drive down I80 in Nebraska at 75-80 MPH I often see helmetless bike riders. The way the bugs are hitting my windshield, I cannot imagine how the bikers can stand the pelting on their faces. I would think a nectar-filled bumblebee at 80 MPH would not feel very good.
My comment wasn't aimed at motorcyclists in general. Jut those who don't wear helmets, which increases the likelihood of destroying the brain and leaving the other internals intact.
You miss my point. Nothing should be mandated. Everybody should be free to do as they please and take the consequences. If you ride a bike on a public road, being hit by a car is a possible consequence. It may be the car driver’s fault, but you’re still hit. Same thing as if you are hit by a truck while driving a car.
the flaw in the argument is that in no fault states, motorcycles are not part of the auto insurance system.
In other states they are not part of the auto insurance pool.
Keep in mind also that there has been an explosion of motorcycle ownership in the last decade.
There are two solid dominating factors in people involved in motorcycle caused accidents. 1. The person was riding for LESS than six months without any motorcycle training course. (iow they just obtained a license via test) and/or 2. the do not have a motorcycle endorsement at all and have had their motorcycle for less than six months. (which means they were driving with no license, a criminal violation)
I think the question of intent really answers your hypotheticals. If the tail light just burned out, no manslaughter. If the tail light burned out last week and there is a citiation from a cop for no tail light then there is an argument for manslaughter.
it is the old eggshell skull theory. The defendant finds the plaintiff as is. You don’t get to choose who sues you.
If you would like to be added or dropped from the Michigan ping list, please freepmail me.
I bike without a helmet, as do my kids. I've never even been on a motorcycle, though.
Starting with damn near all of MI gubmint. I wonder how many of them are cyclists?
‘It is facinating the sheer vitriol from people who don’t ride or care to ride.’
Amen.
‘That being said, I’m in favor of letting people do what they want concerning helmets. Now whenever I see someone riding a bike in shorts, flip-flops, a T-shirt and no helmet I cringe inside.’
The shorts and flip flops I agree with.
The T shirt is no big deal.
A helmet is a tool. And depending on where and how you ride, it can be an impediment. I live in a very rural area, its much more likely I’ll have a deer v bike, or Deere v bike ‘accident’ riding these country roads.
I’ve found its much better that I have an unrestricted field of view, AND as much hearing as possible under these specific cicumstances.
You only have one option as a rider. Avoidance. Helmet or no helmet, you end up in ICU otherwise, as in your case.
I’m very glad you survived, and very glad you recovered.
I began riding at age ten on mini bikes in 1968 or so. I’ve had one (1) accident, and that was an Iranian pulling out in front of me in heavy traffic in 1983. Fortunately, I was in second gear, and not travelling that fast.
‘As the mother of a non-survivor, I feel even more qualified to say that you might as well just go out and shoot yourself in the head now and be done with it.’
I’m so very sorry for your loss.
But it doesn’t give you ‘moral authority’ to speak catagorically on the topic at hand. I mean no offense in saying this, but this is a decision best left to those that ride. circumstances differ depending on where and ‘how’ you ride.
‘Of course it is idiotic to ride with out a helmet.’
Thats simplistic at best.
75%+ motorcycle accidents are the fault of the automobile
Oh really?
Really.
‘As a Harley-riding friend told me, “A helmet is the difference between an open or closed casket service.”’
Was he trying to fix the Harley when he said it?
(chuckle)
Sorry, couldn’t help it....
yay! here goes the legislature passing bills that are guarunteed veto, while still not having passed final budget bill.
I’ll try to remember that next time some butt head showing off on his two-wheeled rice burner cuts me off doing 75 MPH.
‘I’ll try to remember that next time some butt head showing off on his two-wheeled rice burner cuts me off doing 75 MPH.’
I’m not defending the small minority that are clearly idiots. I’m noting the national statistics, and they support the 75% claim you disputed.
I ride a 1500cc Suzuki Intruder, and I do so completely and totally ‘defensively’. And I do wear a helmet on occasion, depending on the circumstances and conditions.
A dame can dream, after all
“The T shirt is no big deal.”
I really, really wish I’d been wearing my leathers. I was wearing a T-shirt because it was so hot. The loss of skin should keep me cooler in the future, but then again the scar tissue may insulate me. Lesson learned. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.