Posted on 08/08/2005 11:35:42 AM PDT by Crackingham
Five years after Florida told motorcyclists they could ride without helmets, a national study documented more deaths and higher hospital costs. Motorcyclist deaths and medical costs have soared since Gov. Jeb Bush signed a law in 2000 repealing the state's mandatory motorcycle helmet law, a new federal study shows.
According to a survey by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in the three years after the law took effect, the number of fatal motorcycle accidents increased more than 81 percent -- compared with a 48 percent increase nationally. And though only riders older than 21 are allowed to ride helmet-free, the study shows that fatalities among motorcyclists 21 and under nearly tripled after 2000.
The study bolsters critics' claims that the 2000 law would lead to an increase in fatalities.
''The numbers are pretty compelling that Florida has paid a high price,'' said Rae Tyson, a spokesman for the federal agency. ``There is enough here for any state contemplating a [helmet] repeal to realize there are serious consequences.''
Among the findings: In the 30 months after the helmet law was lifted, 4,986 riders were admitted to hospitals -- 40 percent more than the 3,567 admissions during the 30 months before the law was changed. Head-injury admissions were up 80 percent and costs charged to hospitals for motorcyclists with head, brain or skull injuries more than doubled -- from $21 million to $50 million.
The report suggests that some of the increase in motorcycle deaths can be attributed to increased ridership in the state -- but even when that factor is taken into account, the non-helmeted fatality rate per 10,000 registered motorcyclists increased from 0.7 fatalities in 1998 to 6.1 in 2002, the report says.
I hate helmet laws, but you have to be an idiot not to wear one while riding.
And here's the good news...
Your chances of getting a healthy organ donation are much higher in states without helmut laws.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. That law of nature is why it's a complete waste of time for legislature's to try and change the world by passing laws.
Ok So?
Doesn't make any difference to me if some bonehead wants to ride without a helmet. More power to him/her.
I wouldn't personally be caught dead on a motorcycle, not on a highway with 60 mile an hour steel coated missiles flying along beside me. Much less without a helmet. But that's MY choice.
By repealing the law, all the government did was say to adults, "Use your own judgement."
yeah, but for the short trips around town where no one goes more than 25, i'd like to have my choice on whether or not i wear mine.
altho, anything above 25-30, i'd have my helmet on for sure.
What about when the taxpayers incur hospital costs described in the article because of the bonehead's choice? You don't mind footing the bill for his stupidity?
If some fool gets brained while riding without a helmet and he doesn't have health insurance, it's YOUR tax dollars that pay for the emergency surgery to save his life.
Cycles are dying? Is it becuase of all the killer SUVs?
I AGREE with you 100%. It should be your choice to wear one or not.
Kinda like Seatbelts. All of these stupid "nanny state" laws need to go the way of the Dodo bird.
In Texas, you have to show proof of medical insurance before you can get a no-helmet sticker to put on your plate.
Who pays these higher costs? The motorcyclists and their families? No. Primarily taxpayers and consumers of insurance policies. So your taxes and your insurance premiums are both higher because of these idiots who insist on their "choice" to ride around on a death trap without a helmet.
Here we go again!
I didn't see that one coming.
My Tax Dollars are going to be spent on him or illegal aliens, or the sex habits of the Ethiopian Snurgle Werfer or whether or not a rock falls as fast as an Apple or not.
My Tax dollars get wasted anytime they do not go for the functioning of the Military and the Military ALONE. THAT is the purpose of Government.
The problem with Taxes is 100% diametrically opposed to the problem of someone not wanting to wear a helmet. Fix the Tax and Spend Mentality in Washington DC and let people do what the hell they want to do.
Then the person who wants to shoot down the highway at unnatural speeds with nothing on his grape will end up leaving his family with the cost and not you and I. Taxes being spent on the healthcare of others is not the fault of the person in question. It's the fault of the Government and our elected representatives. Fix THAT problem and there won't be a problem.
Wonder what a policy on that costs.
Kinda like Seatbelts. All of these stupid "nanny state" laws need to go the way of the Dodo bird.
I agree with you about 60%. Maybe we could set up a system where people who want to eliminate all the "nanny state" laws regarding helmets/seat belts agree to absorb the higher taxes and insurance premiums caused by the hopsitalization and deaths of idiots who insist on their choice not to wear them.
Hmmm, cracking your head on pavement at 45mph without protective gear might be dangerous.... where's that Captain Obvious image...
Getting the popcorn ready for the big old medical libility argument.
Nanny vs. Choice vs. $$$ vs. Seatbelts vs. Manufacturer vs. Occupation vs. Cellphone use vs. AMERICAN'S "RIGHT" TO DRIVE LIKE ASSHOLES!
Should be a fun thread. :-)
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.