The pleasure of riding without a helmet?

[mika]

My answer wasn't sarcastic either, I just think you misunderstand what I'm saying. "Clean" air refers to an airstream unmolested by a windshield or fairing, not air without bugs. Bugs, wind, and noise are part and parcel of riding.

Though you feel the wind blast without a helmet, what you don't get is any sort of head bobble from air currents catching parts of the helmet. It's also (with earplugs) much quieter than riding with a helmet (with earplugs). Bugs are bugs, and it can suck getting hit by them. If I wanted to get to my destination without any discomfort, I would have taken my truck.

To use one of those annoying riding slogans I hate, "If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand". There's something about riding helmetless that utterly defies explanation. I know I'm putting myself at risk, and I know I'll be less comfortable without it. Doesn't matter though, and since it doesn't effect anyone but me and mine, it's a choice I should be able to make.

While I agree with you that the pleasure of riding without a helmet defies explanation, your description of helmet v no helmet does not ring true to my experience of the comfort and trade offs between the two. My initial reaction is you have an ill fitting helmet. Be that as it may the analysis is a personal one.

With all due respect, I find your closing paragraph is another example of one of the lamest arguments that is put forth by many. The extent of regulation by government in any industry or activity should be the critical discussion of elected representatives and the people.

The end result of that process starts another round of the discussion. The cycle of implementation, repeal, reinstatement and... that some states have gone through with helmet laws is a process I am more than willing to go through in a representative democracy. There are remedies for dissenters this process allows. I accept this legislative cycle drives both sides of the debate crazy; however, I find it a reassuring statement of the 'representative' process we cling to.

Anarchy and freedom may take us on a trip which ends up in the same place. The anarchy implied in your closing sentence asks us to accept that you possess a level of clairvoyance and judgement that leaves me far more uncomfortable with than an open debate of freedom v regulation within a state.

 

[05Train]

While I agree with you that the pleasure of riding without a helmet defies explanation, your description of helmet v no helmet does not ring true to my experience of the comfort and trade offs between the two. My initial reaction is you have an ill fitting helmet. Be that as it may the analysis is a personal one.

That's why there's 31 flavors. Don't tell me that your favorite has to be mine, and I'll grant you the same courtesy.

With all due respect, I find your closing paragraph is another example of one of the lamest arguments that is put forth by many. The extent of regulation by government in any industry or activity should be the critical discussion of elected representatives and the people.

And I find your willingness to give up your right to choose disturbing. We're not talking about an industry which impacts millions, nor are we talking about an activity which impacts others. We're talking about a personal choice that impacts no one other than the chooser.

The end result of that process starts another round of the discussion. The cycle of implementation, repeal, reinstatement and... that some states have gone through with helmet laws is a process I am more than willing to go through in a representative democracy. There are remedies for dissenters this process allows. I accept this legislative cycle drives both sides of the debate crazy; however, I find it a reassuring statement of the 'representative' process we cling to.

And I find it nothing short of heinous that the government thinks it can tell people what to do with their bodies.

Anarchy and freedom may take us on a trip which ends up in the same place. The anarchy implied in your closing sentence asks us to accept that you possess a level of clairvoyance and judgement that leaves me far more uncomfortable with than an open debate of freedom v regulation within a state.

I claim no such clairvoyance; only dominion over my body. Nor do I endorse anarchy. I believe that adults can make their own choices about how they live their lives, and I'm disgusted by people who try to legislate their version of morality or common sense.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again....Any argument for legislating mandatory use of helmets can, by replacing a few words, be be used to argue for outlawing motorcycles.

 

[K1600_gtl]

..Any argument for legislating mandatory use of helmets can, by replacing a few words, be be used to argue for outlawing motorcycles.

if for whatever reason the public sentiment reached a point where they wanted to do so, and it was thru the democratic process we have in place today, the so be it. So long as we're not living in a country like China where the Government isn't accountable to the people, I don't' care what law is passed as long as it's the people's will (and as long as it doesn't undermine the constitution).

 

[mika]

Who was telling you you need to do anything? My opening paragraph referred to your observations about comfort and offered an alternative explanation given the current state of helmet design and development.

You erroneously draw the conclusion that I am willing to give up rights easily. My quoted comment is an observation of the legislative citizen interaction applies equally to all sides of the argument. The process to enact, limit or repeal any legislation is not for the faint of heart yet requires all of us to be continually involved as citizens. Your apparent presumptions of where I stand on this topic seems lack any reading or understanding of my previous observations in this thread or have written about in others. Your observation of how I engage in the political process are way off the mark. You have no way of knowing that because you did not ask nor did I share them.

Doesn't matter though, and since it doesn't effect anyone but me and mine, it's a choice I should be able to make.

First, your closing sentence reminded me of the old story of a new rider asking an old hand which piece of safety gear (if any) to buy first. “Tell me what you next accident will be and I will be able to answer that” was the old hands reply. Secondly, I am a firm believer in the law of unintended consequences. In both cases, to my eye, a clairvoyance , I lack, seems to be implied. Obviously YMMV

And I find it nothing short of heinous that the government thinks it can tell people what to do with their bodies.

I can envision a variety of discussion in which you an I would be on the same side of the argument. I can also envision other areas we could be on opposite sides and others where I might be calling on you to inform you about a topic and the implications in either direction. It is incumbent on all of us to be aware and engage is this debate. I think that is best done with serious critical thinking and not it is my ball and I will play with the way I want - no matter speakers side.

I will make these observations to the OP, thread participants, lurkers and moderators.

I enjoyed the twist of the original question and its invitation to discuss the pleasures of ridding helmetless. The op made his predisposition to wear a helmet clear. He warned that many on this forum would have a predictable response given previous helmet threads he has read. Yet, to my eye, he posed a question in a non trolling manner we have, for the greater part, failed to pickup and engage in.

I have fond memories of riding with out and with a helmet in the OP's question context. In a real discussion of those experiences other sides, helmet designers and all forum members could have learned from. Instead we have managed to turn this into the time worn head banging issue that splits the riding community.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again....Any argument for legislating mandatory use of helmets can, by replacing a few words, be be used to argue for outlawing motorcycles.

There are so many threats to motorcycling we can not afford to waste time beating each other up. Local State and Federal DOT spending,or lack of, are critical to keeping the roads safe for ALL riders. Insurance red lining and company HR policies threaten ALL riders no matter how much or how little ATGATT you choose. These are but a few serious issues we never get to because we get into this fractious helmet debate.

 

[HONDARIDER]

I do it from time to time...like around the campground on a little dual sport or down to the corner store...when I ride my Springer, I've got a non-DOT beanie helmet that does nothing more than stop sunburn on my bald head. Is it risky? Absolutely. My only caveat is that I rarely break 35 mph in those scenarios...generally much slower. I've gone 180 mph with a helmet, full leathers, armor, back plate, etc and that felt much riskier despite all the protective gear. Most of my favorite recreations are risky. Therein lies the excitement in some cases. There's nothing that I'm going to say that will convince the ATGATT Faithful that I'm anything other than stupid, but I do enjoy riding without a helmet from time to time. There's really no image or street cred involved when you're riding a '74 Honda CL200 to the camp store...it's just fun to hop on and go for a spin without a helmet or any other riding gear...I picture myself in a "You Meet The Nicest People On A Honda" ad.

 

[brownie]

Excellent thread...

Excellent discussion folks....jeez...at least we all have opinions....and it is our right to have them....

The only item I'd like to add is that a given state's voters & legislators, have no idea how stressful it is on the LEO's & First Responders to work a serious motorcycle crash....usually worse when no helmet is involved....

These folks are not making 6 figures.....and they have to deal with the really negative side of the crash trauma, often body removal.......vent over....

 

[WEZUL]

Guilty!

On my Vespa!

 

[mika]

On my Vespa!

Another crazy Vespa rider with a hot chic hanging on behind him?

 

[05Train]

if for whatever reason the public sentiment reached a point where they wanted to do so, and it was thru the democratic process we have in place today, the so be it. So long as we're not living in a country like China where the Government isn't accountable to the people, I don't' care what law is passed as long as it's the people's will (and as long as it doesn't undermine the constitution).

A nation that allows people to vote away the personal choices of others is a nation I don't care to live in.

That is the crux of the helmet debate, and can easily be expanded to riding in general. It's all about risk assessment, and if the same metric that's being applied to helmets is applied to riding, then riding looses every time.

I wear boots, armored jacket and pants, gloves, and a helmet every time I ride. If anyone were to ask, I'd suggest they do the same, and I'd point them to several reports online which help quantify the benefits of wearing gear. I'd also show them pictures of me in the hospital after I got hit. I draw the line at being a gear apostle. I get downright militant when people start talking about the value (or the legitimacy) of legislating gear.

 

[K1600_gtl]

A nation that allows people to vote away the personal choices of others is a nation I don't care to live in.

I can't think of too many other nations (western and modern at least), that gives individual states the right to decide on helmet laws... , it's 100% Helmets most of Asia (China, Japan and Taiwan).

I assume Canada is but I've not been there.

 

[05Train]

I can't think of too many other nations (western and modern at least), that gives individual states the right to decide on helmet laws... , it's 100% Helmets most of Asia (China, Japan and Taiwan).

I assume Canada is but I've not been there.

"Everyone else is doing it" has never been good rationale.

 

[henzilla]

Moderator AGAIN

OK folks...let's get back on the original posters intent. If you look at the original question, it is way beyond that.
He asked me not to close it the other day...some seem intent on making it happen. The biggies are personal attacks, politics and flaming.

The Mod Team has tried to allow a lot of wiggle room and to let folks nicely debate topics. If you want to duke it out...there are other websites to beat a very dead horse on. And remember it's OK to agree to disagree...then go for a ride...

This definitely has crossed several lines and may be a great opportunity to re read the posting guidelines or maybe check them out for the first time. They are located at the top of every thread page and linked below.

http://forums.bmwmoa.org/faq.php?faq=vb_faq#faq_postingguidelines

PM's being sent ...look to see if you have one in the banner next to the MOA logo

Thanks in advance

Oh in the short term, this is going over to the Campfire...don't burn it down

 

[BCKRider]

from the OP

The question still stands: what is the pleasure of riding without a helmet? Here are few questions that should NOT be debated on this forum.
1. HELMET LAWS: Whether a state or other governing body should enact or repeal laws governing mandatory helmet use is VERBOTEN because it is clearly a POLITICAL topic. I would wager that the Mod's would be happy to have anyone refer us to other sites where this topic is discussed. We can go there or not.
2. GOVERMENT TELL US WHAT WE CAN DO IN GENERAL: A good topic, in my opinion, but again banned on this forum because it is political. I would hope that the Mod's would take a kind eye to folks referring others to websites while not violating the "feel" of this one.

I started this thread because I was genuinely perplexed at why people would ride without a helmet, even if they could do so legally. So far, it seems to come down to convenience (for short low speed trips,) looking cool to your peers or girls, a way to assert your individuality, there is something about having the wind in your ears and face that is inexplicable to those who have not experienced it. (I'm having a hard time with this one.)

As if it matters, I am against mandatory helmet laws. Educate and let us all chose the level of protection we want.

 

[hexkopf]

This is a conundrum and I struggle with it as well. I also don't get people who ride with shorts, t shirts and flip-flops, but perhaps that is for another thread.

To understand it I tried it once and it freaked me out and made me super paranoid, so the helmet went on and stayed on for good. Maybe Jimi Hendrix said it best, "I'm the one who has to die when it's time for me to die." Maybe these folks feel the same way, or they are in denial...who knows.

Why do people smoke? Why do people drink and drive?

To me this is really more than politics or regulations. There is a deeper philosophical need to understand this on a personal level by those of us with like minds who wear helmets. Aside from "looking cool" or wanting the wind in your face, we are talking about a piece of equipment that could protect your brain and thus your life, and is arguably the most important piece of riding gear we strap on when we ride. I don't get it either.


"We have met the enemy and he is us." -Walt Kelly

 

[scqtt]

Excellent discussion folks....jeez...at least we all have opinions....and it is our right to have them....

The only item I'd like to add is that a given state's voters & legislators, have no idea how stressful it is on the LEO's & First Responders to work a serious motorcycle crash....usually worse when no helmet is involved....

These folks are not making 6 figures.....and they have to deal with the really negative side of the crash trauma, often body removal.......vent over....

Their job, their choice. Just like everyone else. If it is so stressful they should quit. I'm guessing there are perks and benefits that keep them somewhat happy or they would make a change.

 

[brownie]

Poor clothing choices, helmetless

...actually I can agree that is IS the riders choice......what is disturbing tho' is that I'll bet 99% of the t-shirt crowd, really doesn't know what "road rash" means......the ER community calls it "flesh being scraped from the bone,"...if a rider understands this...he is well informed.....same thinking for sans hard-hat!! My opion only.....

 

[frontiercat]

I absolutely dig riding without a helmet. I love the way the wind feels in my hair. Ask anyone who sails how it feels...cool wind through the hair, feeling the wind change directions; its a hoot.

I like being able to look up at the stars and moon on a cool late night ride without looking through the tiny face shield of a helmet. Watching a sun set while riding is remarkable...

I don't ride without a helmet much anymore. I rode so many miles without a helmet that I will call myself fortunate to never have had a crash that would have injured my head. Also, I'm tired of getting my face sunburned....

Now I am a self admitted helmet-whore...love my helmets.

 

[ezec]

I don't have any hair so I just wear my helmet.

 

[braddog]

So Brad, do you favor mandatory helmet usage laws?

No.

 

[mika]

I absolutely dig riding without a helmet. I love the way the wind feels in my hair. Ask anyone who sails how it feels...cool wind through the hair, feeling the wind change directions; its a hoot.
.

Degrees of separation from the elements. Sailing small boats is a blast because of the relationship with the elements. Excellent analogy to bring up. Motorcycling without a helmet is sailing experience on steroids.

However, it is curious that you can increase gear your sailing gear and not experience the separation from the elements that you do when you don ATGATT to ride. At least that is my experience, ymmv and ysmv.