• Welcome, Guest! We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMW MOA forum provides. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please click the 'Log in' button above and enter your BMW MOA username and password.

    If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMW MOA offers?

Tragedy

Status
Not open for further replies.

motodan

Active member
Coming out of Lafayette, Indiana this morning I witnessed a tragedy. All I can say is...whatever you are doing and it calls for a helmet...wear one.
 
Preaching to the choir on this issue, but I hear you. I was behind a pair of Harleys in a small New Hampshire town. Neither was wearing a helmet. There was some gravel on the road at a 4-way stop. One of the riders blipped his throttle as he made his turn from a feet down stop. The rear slid out on the gravel and the rider's temple impacted the hard edge of the granite curb. Couldn't have been going more than 2-3mph at the time. He was gone. Husband, father of two, only son of loving parents. Gone
 
Preaching to the choir on this issue, but I hear you. I was behind a pair of Harleys in a small New Hampshire town. Neither was wearing a helmet. There was some gravel on the road at a 4-way stop. One of the riders blipped his throttle as he made his turn from a feet down stop. The rear slid out on the gravel and the rider's temple impacted the hard edge of the granite curb. Couldn't have been going more than 2-3mph at the time. He was gone. Husband, father of two, only son of loving parents. Gone

I seriously think the BMW MOA should consider the option of being a lobbying political force for a mandatory federal helmet law. Just saying...
 
I followed them out of Lafayette, what appeared to be a later model Victory bike. We were traveling a well maintained divided four lane, in the country highway, one could see for miles. A dad, no helmet and what appeared to be a 10 or 11 year old daughter with full face helmet. They were moving faster than me, probably a mile ahead. A large dog ran across the highway then darted back, bike hit it, father came to rest in middle of the two north bound lanes, face down with massive head injury. Daughter questionable. A beautiful warm Saturday morning with dad and daughter on an outing...and it all changed in the dash of a dog. Be careful out there...protect yourself.
 
I live near a national park. Every weekend I see literally hundreds of Harley riders rumble past. I'd guess about 2% have helmets on, and then only those useless half helmets. Many times there are women on the back, their blond hair blowing in the wind. The stupidity and arrogance can drive me crazy if I let it, which I try not to. I often wonder if they were to go down, and were laying in a hospital bed, after coming out of the coma, whether they would finally say, "Yeah, I guess that was kinda dumb."
 
I seriously think the BMW MOA should consider the option of being a lobbying political force for a mandatory federal helmet law. Just saying...

I don't think that is going to happen. It would take a large organizational change for the MOA to do any lobbying.

I'm ATGATT, I'm also for letting others make their choice on this issue.
 
I don't think that is going to happen. It would take a large organizational change for the MOA to do any lobbying.

I'm ATGATT, I'm also for letting others make their choice on this issue.

Yeah, I don't think it would either, but that's not going to stop me. Someone needs to counter abate, someone needs to do the right thing, might as well be me.
 
Yeah, I don't think it would either, but that's not going to stop me. Someone needs to counter abate, someone needs to do the right thing, might as well be me.

It needs to be state-by-state and IMHO the approach is to make accidents involving the helmetless uninsurable and always the fault of the helmetless.
 
Yeah, I don't think it would either, but that's not going to stop me. Someone needs to counter abate, someone needs to do the right thing, might as well be me.

You have the right idea, but I fear it will suffocate due to an overdose of indifference via this Forum. :thumb
 
It needs to be state-by-state and IMHO the approach is to make accidents involving the helmetless uninsurable and always the fault of the helmetless.

I'd meet you halfway on this one, Kent.

I don't think its fair or realistic to arbitrarily fault a rider on each and every accident, simply because of the stupidity of not wearing a helmet.

However, denying them insurance or seriously jacking up their rates for being in an accident without one (like insurance companies already do for smokers) could be a path to greater compliance and a better reputation for riders with the non-riding public.

Lobby the Feds? Sure.

Lobby the insurance industry - definitely.
 
Lobby the insurance industry - definitely.

Not that I disagree with the sentiment, but I've been thru the insurance infometrics experience and lifestyle choices like "dumb decisions" aren't asked. Accordingly, it would appear that "dumb decisions" aren't the big factors driving inurance/healthcare costs. Cigarettes, alcohol, medical history, amount of exercise, weight, drug use and are you planning on getting pregnant (in the case of women) were the topics. Interestingly, the infometrics program was abandoned when some upper level female employees decided that their pregnancy planning and choice weren't something they wanted to share with their insurance company/employer.

Lobbying for high standards of conduct by our members is a great idea, but far less marketable than defending the "rights" of any citizen to exercise all the stupidity his creator granted him/her.
 
It needs to be state-by-state and IMHO the approach is to make accidents involving the helmetless uninsurable and always the fault of the helmetless.

I would agree with you, however... Given the latitude for states to make the right decisions regarding this issue... Epic fail! If I was like, "everyone needs to wear a $1000 full face schuberth." Yeah, I'd be barking up the wrong tree, but as my parallel thread demonstrates in its photos of a cheap, lightweight DOT helmet, making a "minimum" federal standard, clearly, would not be asking too much in a nation who's federal charter is to protect its citizens.

image.jpg
 
not be asking too much in a nation who's federal charter is to protect its citizens.

I don't think there's any charter to protect the citizens from themselves. In addition, I'm sure the vast majority of the state and federal politicians from your home state would laugh you out to door, if you made that suggestion, and carry on with their tirades on how OSHA, USDA, etc. federal regulations are killing the nation.
 
I seriously think the BMW MOA should consider the option of being a lobbying political force for a mandatory federal helmet law. Just saying...

Have to disagree. The last thing we need is another organization lobbying the government to impose rules that infringe upon freedom. I live in a no helmet state and wear a helmet. I think if you ride, you should wear a helmet, but i don't believe we need a law to make us wear helmets. All of these events are tragic and needless and could have been avoided with a helmet but i am not willing to allow lobbying to chip away at my freedom. Maybe i'm just selfish...
 
It needs to be state-by-state and IMHO the approach is to make accidents involving the helmetless uninsurable and always the fault of the helmetless.

ONLY if head injury was the cause of the injury, and it was a single vehicle accident. LOTS of injuries can cause death, and lots of other vehicles at fault.
 
You have the right idea, but I fear it will suffocate due to an overdose of indifference via this Forum. :thumb

Not really.

There have been previous discussions about the role of the MOA. It has been made clear that our mission does not include lobbying. Nor does it include pressuring BMW to do things. The current MOA statement about why we exist is: "Our mission is to foster communication and a sense of family among BMW motorcycle enthusiasts."

To begin to be an advocate organization would require a change in our Bylaws, which refer to our Articles of Incorporation, and the Articles of Incorporation as well.

Having had conversations with current and former BOD members and officers, there seems to be no desire to change.

Lobbying costs a lot of money. I doubt most members would be happy with a dues increase to cover the costs.

The few responses to this thread show that there are a wide range of opinions on this issue.
 
Well, regardless of political slants on this general topic...just say a prayer for these individuals and their family. And for those of you who may not...do think of the potential risk.
 
Not really.

There have been previous discussions about the role of the MOA. It has been made clear that our mission does not include lobbying. Nor does it include pressuring BMW to do things. The current MOA statement about why we exist is: "Our mission is to foster communication and a sense of family among BMW motorcycle enthusiasts."

To begin to be an advocate organization would require a change in our Bylaws, which refer to our Articles of Incorporation, and the Articles of Incorporation as well.

Having had conversations with current and former BOD members and officers, there seems to be no desire to change.

Lobbying costs a lot of money. I doubt most members would be happy with a dues increase to cover the costs.

The few responses to this thread show that there are a wide range of opinions on this issue.

Bud,

You are correct relative to the structure of the MOA and the cost of lobbying. If the MOA decided to be a "lobbying" group then the BOD would have to choose the direction of the lobbying. And, in that case, I can't see how the MOA wouldn't, eventually, end-up at the same place as the AMA, placating the rabid fringe, in my opinion.

We have met the enemy and he is us.
 
A futile discussion that will not be resolved in any of our lifetimes.

The proposal to have the MOA become a lobbying organization is naive and if seriously pursued would result in acrimony and disruption within the MOA. I doubt there is a consensus among our members on the issue of mandatory helmet laws.

Let's agree on when the rally should be held before taking on the helmet issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top