The pleasure of riding without a helmet?

[scqtt]

all this chatter and speculation about what helmets and gear bring to riding is academic for me... The guy who lives literally across the street is right now in a body brace and recovering from a hit and run (t-bone) at an intersection where a woman in a mini-van wasn't paying attention and ran the red light.... he is alive today because he was ATGATT... doctor said he just barely made it. Helmet took the brunt of the ground impact.

Understood......and I always wear a helmet myself, but..........

To you this is a clear indicator of why you should always wear a helmet......TO A HUGE PERCENTAGE of the American population....they are simply shaking their head and thinking.....this is why you should not ride motorcycles.

I do not smoke, but I have sex with women that have questionable reputations.

I do not do drugs, but I eat massive hamburgers a couple of times a month.

I do not drink (much) but I run with scissors.

I am not a birdwatcher, but I have been known to hang out with BMW riders.


Ride your own ride, accept the risk that you are comfortable with.

 

[roborider]

I never ride long rides w/o a helmet because I ride aggressively. And I've seen the damage a helmet takes--my head couldn't take that damage.

But sometimes around the neighborhood, especially if I'm working on the bikes and just need to test something out, or dry one off after a wash, I will go w/o a helmet. I enjoy the feel of the air with only a pair of sunglasses. It's nice. Then a dragonfly will smack my cheek at a mere 20 mph and it convinces me the helmet has a purpose extending beyond crash protection.

I vacillate with mandatory laws for safety. I can say that I at least support these laws (like seatbelts) for those under 18. After that, I lean towards choice. But I don't get too worked up over it since my choice agrees with the current laws.

 

[K1600_gtl]

Understood......and I always wear a helmet myself, but..........

To you this is a clear indicator of why you should always wear a helmet......TO A HUGE PERCENTAGE of the American population....they are simply shaking their head and thinking.....this is why you should not ride motorcycles.

I do not smoke, but I have sex with women that have questionable reputations.

I do not do drugs, but I eat massive hamburgers a couple of times a month.

I do not drink (much) but I run with scissors.

I am not a birdwatcher, but I have been known to hang out with BMW riders.


Ride your own ride, accept the risk that you are comfortable with.

I understand your libertarian perspective and in some respects I agree with it (though I'm more of a middle of the roader in terms of government)... however, until you can get the cost of insurance and medical care for those who are not wearing their helmets out of my premiums, I think as a voting citizen of my state, I have the right to require you to wear one.

 

[05Train]

I understand your libertarian perspective and in some respects I agree with it (though I'm more of a middle of the roader in terms of government)... however, until you can get the cost of insurance and medical care for those who are not wearing their helmets out of my premiums, I think as a voting citizen of my state, I have the right to require you to wear one.

I understand your libertarian perspective and in some respects I agree with it (though I'm more of a middle of the roader in terms of government)... however, until you can get the cost of insurance and medical care for those who are riding motorcycles out of my premiums, I think as a voting citizen of my state, I have the right to require you not to ride one.

 

[K1600_gtl]

I understand your libertarian perspective and in some respects I agree with it (though I'm more of a middle of the roader in terms of government)... however, until you can get the cost of insurance and medical care for those who are riding motorcycles out of my premiums, I think as a voting citizen of my state, I have the right to require you not to ride one.

cleaver, but too much of a slippery slope to be a good argument. Motorcycle insurance rates are predicated on motorcycle riding and have no effect on other insurance rates for car, life or property that I'm aware of.... they have no direct effect (other than being a registered motor vehicle) to the rates on cars; moreover, one could prove they have a less than normal harm rate against other cars in two vehicle accidents involving one of each... so if anything the auto rates are being subsidized..

 

[05Train]

cleaver, but too much of a slippery slope to be a good argument. Motorcycle insurance rates are predicated on motorcycle riding and have no effect on other insurance rates for car, life or property that I'm aware of.... they have no direct effect (other than being a registered motor vehicle) to the rates on cars; moreover, one could prove they have a less than normal harm rate against other cars in two vehicle accidents involving one of each... so if anything the auto rates are being subsidized..

You'll have to demonstrate that in order to make that stick.

I pay insurance based on the fact that I ride a motorcycle. Insurance companies aren't stupid, and understand the laws of the land. Whether or not I wear a helmet (or gloves, or boots, or a jacket) has nothing to do with anyone but me. It's a contract between my insurance provider and I. If I end up a vegetable and needing expensive care for the next 30 years, that has no bearing on your finances.

Unless you're planning to argue that if I break my back while riding that does something to your rates as well, in which case I refer you back to the whole, "motorcycling is dangerous and ought to be outlawed" argument.

 

[roborider]

I read somewhere, and I'll never be able to find it, that the 'vegetable' argument doesn't hold. That the actual cost of these veggies is a small fraction of the overall cost of a premium, like less than 0.1%. How many veggies do you know? I know of none from motorcycle accidents. None. I'm not saying they don't exist, but I know of NONE and I ride with a lot of people, and read a lot of forums, etc.

Also, the article said that people are more likely to outright die w/o a helmet, and survive permanently injured with a helmet, so no helmet actually save you money on your premium!

I don't make the above statement to say "don't wear a helmet." The guy with a helmet is much more likely to survive a moderate accident unharmed than the guy w/o a helmet. No helmet means good chance of dying.

 

[05Train]

I read somewhere, and I'll never be able to find it, that the 'vegetable' argument doesn't hold. That the actual cost of these veggies is a small fraction of the overall cost of a premium, like less than 0.1%. How many veggies do you know? I know of none from motorcycle accidents. None. I'm not saying they don't exist, but I know of NONE and I ride with a lot of people, and read a lot of forums, etc.

Also, the article said that people are more likely to outright die w/o a helmet, and survive permanently injured with a helmet, so no helmet actually save you money on your premium!

I don't make the above statement to say "don't wear a helmet." The guy with a helmet is much more likely to survive a moderate accident unharmed than the guy w/o a helmet. No helmet means good chance of dying.

Exactly, and even if it was the case, it's still a specious argument. Should we outlaw all old cars without seat belts, airbags, ABS, or ASC too?

Again, I agree that you're generally better off wearing gear. But I draw the line at the gummint telling adults what they have to wear.

 

[scqtt]

I understand your libertarian perspective and in some respects I agree with it (though I'm more of a middle of the roader in terms of government)... however, until you can get the cost of insurance and medical care for those who are not wearing their helmets out of my premiums, I think as a voting citizen of my state, I have the right to require you to wear one.

Perhaps I should have the right to vote on your activities and decide what I think you should or should not do.

Your left coast is showing.

 

[K1600_gtl]

You'll have to demonstrate that in order to make that stick.

I pay insurance based on the fact that I ride a motorcycle. Insurance companies aren't stupid, and understand the laws of the land. Whether or not I wear a helmet (or gloves, or boots, or a jacket) has nothing to do with anyone but me. It's a contract between my insurance provider and I. If I end up a vegetable and needing expensive care for the next 30 years, that has no bearing on your finances.

Unless you're planning to argue that if I break my back while riding that does something to your rates as well, in which case I refer you back to the whole, "motorcycling is dangerous and ought to be outlawed" argument.

well then it's sort of odd that they don't provide a "Helmet" discount then, isn't' it?

Or are you implying that they don't want you in a helmet?

Insurance underwriting is complex and releases heavily on statistics and aggregate numbers, not individual data... this is why I don't get a discount for having ABS and traction control on my bike vs the guy on the Chopper "cruiser" with not front brakes and no abs.... in effect, I carry his premium since he's far more likely to have a problem stoping his bike... If insurance companies weren't so lazy they'd have to charge more to compute the premiums, so it's a catch 22.. The burden of proof isn't on me as to weather helmet wear is cheaper on rates, it's on you... since there is clear evidence that it's safer.

 

[K1600_gtl]

Perhaps I should have the right to vote on your activities and decide what I think you should or should not do.

Your left coast is showing.

You do have that right.... my ownership of guns is regulated by the voter, as is my drinking of alcohol, and my use of medications and drugs... that's called being in a "Society" ... works great, try it.

 

[05Train]

well then it's sort of odd that they don't provide a "Helmet" discount then, isn't' it?

Or are you implying that they don't want you in a helmet?

Insurance underwriting is complex and releases heavily on statistics and aggregate numbers, not individual data... this is why I don't get a discount for having ABS and traction control on my bike vs the guy on the Chopper "cruiser" with not front brakes and no abs.... in effect, I carry his premium since he's far more likely to have a problem stoping his bike... If insurance companies weren't so lazy they'd have to charge more to compute the premiums, so it's a catch 22.. The burden of proof isn't on me as to weather helmet wear is cheaper on rates, it's on you... since there is clear evidence that it's safer.

No, that's not the case at all, as your bike's premium is computed based on the options it has, the class of bike, the size of the motor, etc. Hence the reason I pay different premiums for each of the different bikes I ride.

Nice try though.

You do have that right.... my ownership of guns is regulated by the voter, as is my drinking of alcohol, and my use of medications and drugs... that's called being in a "Society" ... works great, try it.

So then it wasn't a slippery slope I referred to above regarding your ability to ride a motorcycle.

Glad we cleared that up.

 

[K1600_gtl]

I think if some here got their way, we'd just live in the 1900's Wild West again, fair enough... anyway, I've said my piece, peace out.

 

[05Train]

I think if some here got their way, we'd just live in the 1900's Wild West again, fair enough... anyway, I've said my piece, peace out.

Care to substantiate that, or are you just going away in a huff because you realize you don't have a leg to stand on?

You and I have never met. You know nothing about me. What makes you think that you should have any say how I live my life? What sort of hubris makes you think you know better than I?

Your insurance rates are not effected one bit by whether or not other riders wear any gear, that's just a convenient way for you to try to get other people to do things the way you want. There's no mandatory glove law, you know. Are you going to complain that that effects your rates too?

 

[roborider]

So is it fair to say we all think helmets are the best, and most safe way to ride, and that the debate is purely regarding whether or not the government should be able to mandate their use?

 

[AKsuited]

You said, "a white or brightly colored helmet will help you avoid accidents". That is patently false, and there is no study extant that says anything of the sort. By posting this, you risk a new rider thinking that he's getting some sort of active safety from a white helmet. He is not.

Every single motorcycle accident study out there refutes what you are trying to say. Every single one, from the Hurt Report, the MAIDS report, and the Wells report are unanimous in finding that low conspicuity of riders plays a role in increasing accidents and every one is unanimous in finding that wearing white helmets and/or bright colors and reflective material lowers accident rates among riders.

What is so hard to comprehend about that?

And this is not my opinion, it is the findings of reputable accident studies.

You seem to have an axe to grind. I do not. I am merely presenting the findings of reputable studies. Draw your own conclusions.

You seem to be drawing the wrong conclusions, but that's your problem, not mine.

Wear whatever you like or don't like, it makes no difference to me.

You can download the MAIDS report here: http://www.maids-study.eu/

It's not my report, I didn't write it. But what I am saying as typical findings of accident studies can be verified by actually reading the report. I'm confident you won't.

Harry

 

[Delaware.Dave]

Every single motorcycle accident study out there refutes what you are trying to say. Every single one, from the Hurt Report, the MAIDS report, and the Wells report are unanimous in finding that low conspicuity of riders plays a role in increasing accidents and every one is unanimous in finding that wearing white helmets and/or bright colors and reflective material lowers accident rates among riders.

What is so hard to comprehend about that?

And this is not my opinion, it is the findings of reputable accident studies.

You seem to have an axe to grind. I do not. I am merely presenting the findings of reputable studies. Draw your own conclusions.

You seem to be drawing the wrong conclusions, but that's your problem, not mine.

Wear whatever you like or don't like, it makes no difference to me.

You can download the MAIDS report here: http://www.maids-study.eu/

It's not my report, I didn't write it. But what I am saying as typical findings of accident studies can be verified by actually reading the report. I'm confident you won't.

Harry

Well said. It should also be noted that formal rider training plays a major part in whether a rider is involved in an accident, and if so, the severity of his injuries. MSF has a great program for continuing rider's education.

 

[05Train]

Every single motorcycle accident study out there refutes what you are trying to say. Every single one, from the Hurt Report, the MAIDS report, and the Wells report are unanimous in finding that low conspicuity of riders plays a role in increasing accidents and every one is unanimous in finding that wearing white helmets and/or bright colors and reflective material lowers accident rates among riders.

What is so hard to comprehend about that?

And this is not my opinion, it is the findings of reputable accident studies.

You seem to have an axe to grind. I do not. I am merely presenting the findings of reputable studies. Draw your own conclusions.

You seem to be drawing the wrong conclusions, but that's your problem, not mine.

Wear whatever you like or don't like, it makes no difference to me.

You can download the MAIDS report here: http://www.maids-study.eu/

It's not my report, I didn't write it. But what I am saying as typical findings of accident studies can be verified by actually reading the report. I'm confident you won't.

Harry

Harry, you're either a liar or you utterly fail to understand written English. There is nothing in any of those studies which states that a white helmet will help you avoid accidents. A white helmet is more visible and could (as the part of the study I quoted states) help you be more visible and reduce your chances of getting hit. You're clearly not understanding the difference here, and that's a real problem, especially if you're at all involved in rider training.

Let me repeat, since you're clearly not getting it. Wearing white or hi-viz garments or helmets generally makes you more visible to other motorists. That's a good thing, and it can help to keep them from hitting you. What those white or hi-viz garments won't do is help you avoid accidents. That implies that the garments are taking an active safety role, which they are not.

You are doing the people on this forum, your students, and yourself a disservice by spreading false information. You are going to get someone hurt or killed.

 

[K1600_gtl]

Harry, you're either a liar or you utterly fail to understand written English. There is nothing in any of those studies which states that a white helmet will help you avoid accidents. A white helmet is more visible and could (as the part of the study I quoted states) help you be more visible and reduce your chances of getting hit. You're clearly not understanding the difference here, and that's a real problem, especially if you're at all involved in rider training.

Let me repeat, since you're clearly not getting it. Wearing white or hi-viz garments or helmets generally makes you more visible to other motorists. That's a good thing, and it can help to keep them from hitting you. What those white or hi-viz garments won't do is help you avoid accidents. That implies that the garments are taking an active safety role, which they are not.

You are doing the people on this forum, your students, and yourself a disservice by spreading false information. You are going to get someone hurt or killed.

 

[roborider]

Wearing white or hi-viz garments or helmets generally makes you more visible to other motorists. That's a good thing, and it can help to keep them from hitting you. What those white or hi-viz garments won't do is help you avoid accidents. That implies that the garments are taking an active safety role, which they are not.

OK, now you lost me. If you are more visible, you should not have as many accidents (over a large population) that are caused by people not seeing you. I think it is safe to say, and that the studies support, that high viz gear reduces accidents. I would suspect that painting your bike and clothing camouflage would increase accidents.

But if were talking safety, the single most valuable law we could have is to require responsible rider training. A 16 year old kid can pass a written test, get his motorcycle permit, and ride off on a S1000RR HAVING NEVER RIDDEN ANY MOTORCYCLE BEFORE. No helmet, gear, or high viz can prevent the disaster in progress in this scenario.