Motorcycle Deaths Up...

[crazy steve]

Interesting article.... I'm not trying to stir the 'helmet/no helmet' debate, but still...

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_new...le-deaths?lite

Probably the most interesting statement in this article is the study about safety courses; Indiana found that riders who took the course were 44% more likely to get in an accident than those who didn't...

[dpotter58]

I think the likelyhood of the increased deaths is more riders and not related to helmets (I wear mine all of the time). Likewise, more of the new riders taking the safety course still can't ride well so they crash more frequently than us old farts.

[crazy steve]

Here's a link to the full article....

http://www.fairwarning.org/2012/06/d...-s-regulators/

[Bonz]

I pay particular attention to the local news here in Colorado Springs, and most any accident involving a motorcycle with a death involved (either single vehicle or with a car) the unfortunate souls are specifically stated as "He/she/they were not wearing helmets".

So, I'm gonna throw out the first shot across the bow here as I speak to this in general...

The proof is in the pudding, so don't argue about being safer overall on a motorcycle without a helmet. I won't tell you to wear a helmet, but don't insult my intelligence by telling me you think you are better off and in a better possition to escape injury without a helmet. That isn't a winnable argument.

Hey, with all the idiots riding around relying on loud exhaust to make them noticed instead of paying more attention themselves, we will see sweeping restrictive laws on aftermarket exhaust at some point, guaranteed.

Let enough people get killed that were exercising their right to raise my insurance premiums because they choose to not wear protective head gear or otherwise, and that choice will be gone as well.

Sorry, I try to be level and even minded about the whole helmet thing, but I think of more people than just myself everytime I get on the bike and choose or don't choose my gear.

Oh boy, I done a bad thing George...

[slow mo]

some guy in the article wrote this!!we ought to save some of the costs when police or emergency responders go to the scene of a crash and the person is not wearing a helmet. Perhaps they ought to be left there like roadkill.”

– Michael Dabbs, president of the Brain Injury Association of Michigan, attacking the logic of helmet law

[DGXSER]

Having taken way more staticstical analysis classes than I ever wanted to, the one thing I learned for certain is that the numbers can always be manipulated to show whatever it is your trying to prove.

As to the laws, I am not concerned with them myself, I wear a helmet, of my own free choice. I live in a state where they have not been mandatory except for 1st year endorsement since I started riding many years ago.

having completed the basic course with a guy who passed, but himself felt he needed a repeat before he would ride on the road, I am sure there are any number of folks who can pass the course. And a side note, that goes along with my first statement about manipulating the numbers, what statistic does not address is what number of new riders are taking the course? Here in Ohio, if your under 18, you MUST complete the course to get your endorsement. Those under 18 are given the spots in the course before they take others to fill the classes. With that in mind, along with a push for folks to take the course, it would obviously skew the fact that more riders who crash took the course, perhaps simply becase the largest percentage of riders out there take the course.

Personally, I agree it is a matter of choice what you wear or do not, feel the same about seat belts. The earth is getting a little thick with humans anyway, let Darwin's theory thin the herd a little.

And Howard, all I wll say about the folks who say they hear better and are safer without their helmet is that for me personally, I know I can hear my engine and exhaust and alot of other noises much better with my helmet on because of the lack of wind noise than with it off. I have taken a few test rides sans helmet, and can't hear the engine or exhaust nearly as well.

Reallity is though, the human mind has an inordinate ability to rationalize. John Wayne Gacy was quoted to say " I never hurt a single person" and it was obvious he felt he was truthful about it. So those who want to ride without it for whatever reason it may be, will always have some logical reason not to, and truly believe their logical reason is correct.

[Erik the Red]

...the numbers can always be manipulated to show whatever it is your trying to prove.

AMEN!!!

...And a side note, that goes along with my first statement about manipulating the numbers, what [that] statistic does not address is what number of new riders are taking the course?

...it would obviously skew the fact that [if] more riders who crash took the course, perhaps simply becase the largest percentage of riders out there take the course.

Absolutely! I think you hit the nail on the head. I am wary of just about every single statistic I see, because the numbers can so easily be skewed by being selective about your input parameters. ...Whether it supports my personal belief or not. =)

[neJeff]

I didn't realize so many states don't have mandatory helmet laws yet. Since I have ridden that has been the law in Nebraska and it seems normal and logical to wear a helmet. I'm even looking to start wearing a reflective vest on hiway rides but of course that begs the question as to why not wear one all the time ( and I have no good answer for it). My son completed his MSF course last weekend and I guess it's time to set a better safety example. Just my two cents...

[crazy steve]

Having taken way more staticstical analysis classes than I ever wanted to, the one thing I learned for certain is that the numbers can always be manipulated to show whatever it is your trying to prove...

I'll agree with Don that statistics can be manipulated, but a nearly 300% increase (from 5% to almost 15% as a percentage of all highway deaths) in motorcycle fatalities is pretty hard to ignore. Even if you only look at motorcyle deaths, a 200%+ increase is a bit hard to account for. Particularly when you look at the fact that the numbers climbed as the helmet repeals came in. I don't think that overall rider numbers or miles have doubled or tripled which is what would be needed if rates in the 'group' have stayed the same; I don't see any more bikes now than I have in the past.

I'm in favor of the local mandatory law, and for purely selfish reasons. Washington state is a 'helmet' state, and also requires vehicle insurance with a few exceptions; one exception is motorcycles. When Washington passed their insurance requirement a number of years ago, they exempted bikes in a trade-off over the helmet requirement. If the helmet law is repealed here, the costs of insuring each of my bikes will become prohibitive. I currently don't insure any of them, but do have full medical insurance that will cover me in the event of an accident, so I'm not one that's going to suck money out of the health system....

[neJeff]

I'm in favor of the local mandatory law, and for purely selfish reasons. Washington state is a 'helmet' state, and also requires vehicle insurance with a few exceptions; one exception is motorcycles. When Washington passed their insurance requirement a number of years ago, they exempted bikes in a trade-off over the helmet requirement. If the helmet law is repealed here, the costs of insuring each of my bikes will become prohibitive. I currently don't insure any of them, but do have full medical insurance that will cover me in the event of an accident, so I'm not one that's going to suck money out of the health system....

Wow! I'm learning something today. I had no idea that you could operate a motor vehicle anywhere without a minimum liability insurance. Everything on the road here has to be insured, no exceptions, and it's a large ticket if your pulled over without proof in your hand. What if life happens and you run one of your cycles into the back of a 2010 SL500 in a grocery store parking lot? How are you held accountable in an accident situation? Just cash out of your pocket then?

[crazy steve]

...What if life happens and you run one of your cycles into the back of a 2010 SL500 in a grocery store parking lot? How are you held accountable in an accident situation? Just cash out of your pocket then?

Yep, I'm on the hook for damages. But realistically, to do any serious damage with a bike you'll need to be moving at a pretty good clip. If I survive, I have money in savings for these unforeseen things. If I don't, I have plenty of life insurance; SWMBO can pay them off out of that...

[jwhughes3]

minimum liability assets

I know its this way in Texas and I'd bet in other states as well that require minimum liability insurance - that you can set aside a "self insured" asset account that meets the state requirements for liability and essentially pay your accidents out of that pot of money if you have one -

I'm sure there is legal paperwork required to do that which I have no idea how much it would cost to set up - I always imagined that only the super wealthy would self-insure and even then maybe not so as to insulate themselves somewhat in lawsuits - but if there are limits on what the insurance company has to pay to meet the minimum it only makes sense that an individual can do the same given the means.

John

Just found out no "paperwork" required other than depositing $55,000 in cash or assets with the county comptroller office unless you want to file a "Surety Bond" from two property owners in the State. JW

[foreda]

Helmet

If it were not for a good motorcycle helmet, I would not be here today. In 1971, I got hit from behind at 70 mph on I10 about 3 miles from my house. This was a hit and run and I was very lucky, I even got up and rode the bike to the hospital. I would not think of getting on the road without one.
Dale

[mstic2000]

I agree. More motorcycles on the road and motorcycle accidents rise. Michigan just passed the no helmet law. I choose to wear a helmet. The jump in my premium to have an additional $20,000.00 medical is not worth riding without a helmet, which is what the law requires. If riding without a helmet is safer, why is it required to have an additional $20,000 in medical? I would think if it were safer to ride without a helmet my premium would go down??? I was in an accident in the 1980s in a state with a no helmet law and sustained a head injury, only because I wasn't wearing a helmet. The only one's I really see riding around here without helmets are the harley riders. Must be the 'cool' factor. Anyone I've really seen on a jap bike has had their helmet. Or maybe it's just Harley riders can afford the more expensive insurance?

[Bonz]

Statistics can be manipulated, however it is clear these statistics are a direct and irrefutable reference to, and referendum on, not wearing a helmet and/or other gear and the correlation to motorcycle fatalities.