Posted on 11/16/2010 3:37:26 PM PST by WOBBLY BOB
There's the rub. If it becomes okay to pass laws that restrict behavior because it "might" cost the public money then there is no behavior that cannot be regulated. People who push the old "You gotta wear a helmet because if you're hurt I have to pay for it" argument are too shortsighted to see the inevitable consequence. The best way to eliminate motorcycle rider fatalities is to ban motorcycles altogether.
The most dangerous device is an automobile. Most deaths in auto accidents are caused by head injuries too. Make the caged drones wear helmets. I don't want to have to pay for the cagers' medical costs. Better yet. Let's ban cars altogether.
Bulls-eye! And that’s the argument of most of my full-face helmet wearing friends: “My wife wants me to look good in the casket.”
“My body - My choice”. Is only valid if you want to kill your unborn child. All other uses of the phrase/right whathaveyou, are invalid.
I am sure they had open pipes to protect them.
For starters, it takes a lot less space to write 'head injury' than list the accompanying crushing injuries to the torso from another nitwit driving a SUV who was talking on the phone and looking at the GPS wholefailing to yield the right of way...
Why is it the NTSB doesn't reccommend helmets for air passengers?
Oh, that's right, they're trying to prevent the airplane crash, not 'protect' you from bonking your head when it happens.
How many motorcycle accidents did they study before they came to this tired conclusion? (I believe the answer is "six").
Did anyone ever stop to consider that most of the people who spend upwards of $7-8000 on an motorcycle (often $15-25,000.00) just might carry insurance in case they are injured?
(Note: the bottom line on Obamacare is that when the 'gubmint' pays for it, you lose rights to the bean counters in the gubmint.)
One more thing, junk science did not originate with the global warming issue. I have had the opportunity to dig through many of the older studies which are likely referenced by the newer studies and have found them to be full of holes, miscalculations, and even conclusions not supported by data.
Last year saw a decline in Motorcycle fatalities for the number of miles travelled, so I guess the nanny-staters had to jump in before the trend showed.
FMVSS (federal motor vehicle safety standard) 218 only rates helmets to a a speed of 13mph. There are no neck standards.
Were they in multivehicle accidents (got creamed by a cager or nailed by someone making a left turn in front of them (failure to yield).
Who hit them? Why weren't they carrying enough insurance to pay the bills?
Without knowing anything but the result, and not the causative agent, you propose that it is "reasonable" to impose a law on the people who are, two times out of three, the unwilling recipient of traumatic injury from some negligent automobile operator.
IF the NTSB would apply the same standards of investigation to highway accidents as they do to plane crashes, the overwhelming cause of "accidents" would be pilot error.
While helmet use might be reasonable, legislation is not.
hmmm. Are you sure?
June 12, 2008 -- Head injuries from motorcycle crashes rose after the repeal of motorcycle helmet laws in Pennsylvania, a study shows.
The study's researchers found a 66% increase in motorcycle-related head injury deaths and a 78% increase in head injury hospitalizations from motorcycle crashes since the repeal of Pennsylvania’s motorcycle helmet law in 2003.
"Our study shows that since the repeal of Pennsylvania's motorcycle helmet law, helmet use has gone down, while head injuries from motorcycle crashes have gone up, even after increased motorcycle registration," researcher Kristen Mertz, MD, MPH, assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, says in a news release. "The relatively large increase in head injury deaths and hospitalizations after the repeal suggests that the law was protecting riders."
Researchers say the findings strengthen the argument for more comprehensive helmet laws to help protect motorcycle riders. Motorcycle helmet laws have weakened across the U.S. since 1975, when the federal government stopped withholding highway money from states without universal motorcycle helmet laws. Only 20 states have laws that require all riders to wear helmets.
Head Injury Risks Rise Without Helmets In the study, published in the American Journal of Public Health, researchers compared motorcycle-related head injuries in Pennsylvania when motorcycle helmet laws were still in effect from 2001-2002 and after the repeal in 2004-2005.
They found helmet use decreased among motorcycle riders involved in reported crashes from 82% to 58% after the repeal of the motorcycle helmet laws. During the same time period, head injury deaths from motorcycle crashes increased 66%.
Motorcycle-related head injury hospitalizations also increased 78% after the law was repealed, and the number of motorcyclists with head injuries requiring further treatment at rehabilitation facilities and long-term care centers increased 87% after the repeal.
In comparison, non-head injury-related deaths and hospitalizations that were motorcycle-related rose by much smaller margins, 25% and 28% respectively.
Finally, researchers found total hospital charges arising from treating motorcycle crash-related head injuries increased 132% in the two years following the repeal of the motorcycle helmet law, compared with a rise of 69% for non-head injuries.
www.webmd.com
For the speeds involved, bicycle helmets make more sense (protection from low-speed impact trauma).
BMW and Honda are both working on air bag systems for motorcycles.
Sounds like the MN tobacco lawsuit.
They didn’t want to hear about cost savings from people dying younger (due to smoking.)
Figures lie and liars figure and the biggest liars work for the gubbamint.
Head injuries from motorcycle crashes rose after the repeal of motorcycle helmet laws in Pennsylvania, a study shows.
Apples and oranges, FRiend. You are comparing "fatalities" stats against "head injury" stats, not the same set of data.
The study's researchers found a 66% increase in motorcycle-related head injury deaths and a 78% increase in head injury hospitalizations from motorcycle crashes since the repeal of Pennsylvania’s motorcycle helmet law in 2003.
Still doesn't refute the claim, as this is only one class of deaths/injury.
Don't fall for the old 'bait and switch' which talks about one cause of death rising without addressing the number of fatal crashes overall.
The reality is that the motorcyclist's advantage in traffic is the ability to assess threats by seeing and hearing better, and then using the superior maneuverability and power to weight ratio of the motorcycle to avoid the threat.
While there are those who will argue helmets don't impair that ability, I'll disagree. Anything which increases the moment of inertia of my head affects my ability to look around and assess threats in the traffic stream.
Avoiding "accidents" is the key to avoiding fatalities, period.
Motorcycle helmet laws have weakened across the U.S. since 1975, when the federal government stopped withholding highway money from states without universal motorcycle helmet laws. Only 20 states have laws that require all riders to wear helmets.
No, they haven't "weakened", they have been modified or repealed through the efforts of motorcyclists.
That hasn't been done because we have some sort of death wish, but because for many of us the freedom to weigh the lack of encumbrance and enhanced ability to avoid crashes takes precedence over legally requiring someone to wear "protective equipment" which may actually cause more harm than good. Even motorcyclists who ride with helmets agree with the aspect that those who ride should decide, not some lawmaker elsewhere.
the honda system preliminary results showed the gas tank bag threw the rider up and over causing farther distance traveled and more injury (fatal) and the leg bag had a tendency to trap the legs and rip one off.
You must not be referring to Harley riders!
I can't find all the data but 1999 to 2003 fatalities were up by about 50% and non-helmet fatalities (as a percentage of all motorcycle fatalities) went from less than 15% to almost 60%.
Motorcyclists who ride with helmets agree that helmets save lives.
meanwhile...”Experts Say CAFE Still Kills Despite Congressional Support”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2619721/posts
The final tests must have been better or they would not be selling it to the public.
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.