Are motorcyclists required to wear helmets in your state?

[undeterred]

If we are required to wear seatbelts in cars by law, why not helmets on motorcycles.

[armyowalgreens]

1. No. They should be required though.

[azmouse]

65. I think it's because of the heat here that they don't require helmets.

[armyowalgreens]

93. There is hot weather gear.

[TxRider]

138. It's cooler with a helmet..

I always wear a full face helmet.. It's cooler, and it keeps the bugs out of my eyes and teeth.. Wind sux over about 65mph..

But it is not required, as long as you maintain a certain amount of insurance.

Texas has wavered, there was no helmet law for those over age 18 when I started riding in the 70's, then we went to full helmet law, now we've backed off to helmets for those over 18, unless you have proper insurance to get a waiver... in which case your supposed to have a sticker displayed, which is rarely if ever enforced.

[JeanGrey]

2. YES. And it should be.

[gratuitous]

3. I think they are

But they're not required for bicyclists over the age of 16. But I always wear one anyway.

[flvegan]

4. No (Florida). And to be honest, the way folks drive here

I'm tempted to wear a helmet driving my car.

[Obamanaut]

52. It's actually both yes and no in Fla. Insurance and age enter into

the yes/no

[HughMoran]

5. No helmets, no seat belts in NH

Only kids are required to be belted here.

Live free or die.

[Ron Green]

16. Sounds like "Live free AND die."

[Chemisse]

19. And they do die.

We have fatalities fairly frequently among motorcycle riders in NH.

It's their choice, but damned if they don't make the wrong choice more often than not.

[HughMoran]

30. I always wore a helmet when I had a bike.

I think the people that don't wear helmets are idiots.

[Xicano]

36. When I ride I always wear a helmet and I agree

I too think people that don't wear one are idiots. However, there should be no laws making being an idiot a crime.

[TexasProgresive]

68. They are certainly idiots if the survive a crash w/o a helmet.

Brains don't regrow.

[lapfog_1]

6. No, thank god.

Why defeat Darwinism?

[armyowalgreens]

12. It's kind of common courtesy to the emergency responders.

You know, so they don't have to scoop your brains off the sidewalk.

[lapfog_1]

18. not my brains...

but OK, there should be a tax levied so that if you drive without, it will pay for a special crew to clean up the mess.

Seriously, why should we protect people from their own stupidity? So long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. It's pretty clear that we are getting dumber and dumber with each generation (witness the birthers). Time to "thin the herd".

[armyowalgreens]

24. We aren't trying to protect people from their stupidity...

We are protecting first responders from having to view or handle avoidably grizzly crash scenes. Not to mention, hospitalization/rehabilitation has to be statistically much more costly for non-helmet wearers.

Society has a vested interest in this law. The same goes for seat belt laws.

[lapfog_1]

32. Yes, that's the only sane argument for helmet laws.

The cost to society for any hospital treatment.

Granted.

But I would add that if you do NOT wear a helmet and you DO get into an accident with a head injury, perhaps society would have a vested interest in charging you with negligence and having you fined enough to pay for your treatment.

Fortunately, quite a large percentage (according to my B-in-L, the ER doc) of people that have a motorcycle accident here in Arizona and they aren't wearing their helmets (Arizona is a helmet free state - anyone surprised?) do not survive. Even low speed accidents.

[snooper2]

124. Texas state law- you have to have health insurance

FYI

[Morning Dew]

56. Link, please?

We are protecting first responders from having to view or handle avoidably grizzly crash scenes.

[armyowalgreens]

90. What do you mean?

I can deduce that answer from the facts.

Those who wear helmets have a lower chance of severe injury or dying. Therefore we could assume that a motorcycle accident scene is likely to be more violent if the rider wasn't wearing a helmet.

If a riders bare head hits the side of a car at 45 mph, it's likely to break apart. If the same rider wears a helmet, the risk of severe head injury or complete destruction of the head goes way down. That just makes sense.

[Morning Dew]

94. My question referred to your post stating:

"We are protecting first responders from having to view or handle avoidably grizzly crash scenes."

Indicating that the helmet laws are in place for the purpose of protecting first responders.

I was wondering if you have a link for that.

[armyowalgreens]

95. I'm sure that point came up when passing these laws. But I don't know...

have any links. Just go speak to first responders and they will tell you that they support helmet laws.

[Morning Dew]

97. I imagine many would support helmet laws

and some probably don't.

Passing a law to protect first responders from viewing grisly accidents just seemed odd, yet you sounded so confident. I thought it had to be factual in some state.

[snooper2]

123. First part of your argument is stupid

"We are protecting first responders from having to view or handle avoidably grizzly crash scenes"

Really :rofl: You ever see a trash truck flipped over on a minivan filled with people? That's grizzly...

And in Texas, you can only ride without a helmet if you can prove you have health insurance ( just a little FYI )


I ride Down Park from about Jupiter all the way to Murphy road, then cut across a little back road to my buddies house. Speed limit never goes over 40- Yep no helmet. If I'm going on a ride, I wear my helmet. My choice and that's how it should be...

[armyowalgreens]

130. It's not stupid. It's completely reasonable...

I never said that we should be protecting first responders from all grizzly crash scenes. I said that we should be protecting them from avoidably grizzly scenes.

If wearing a helmet does that, put a fucking helmet on.

Laugh all you want, but you are wrong.

[TxRider]

139. You have it backwards.

The folks without helmets die.

The ones with helmets are the ones who survive as quadrapegics etc. and consume all the costs...

[TheCowsCameHome]

15. Ouch!

:banghead:
:rofl:

[Hippo_Tron]

57. In fairness, I would probably rather die from than survive a motorcycle crash

I can't imagine one can recover well from those sorts of injuries.

[ThomWV]

118. What a silly thing to say. I've been in hard motorcycle crashes and I'm happy I survived

I got myself high-sided off a Kawasaki once and the result was three broken ribs, a broken colar bone, shoulder blade broken in two places, broken arm, and a good bit of skin loss. In fairness, I'm happy I survived and found that far preferable to the death that you would have opted for.

[Hippo_Tron]

122. I'm too scared to ride one in the first place and admittedly ignorant about this

But out of curiosity how fast were you riding. It just seems to me that at least at interstate speeds, the best case scenario is severe brain damage, paralysis, or severe burns.

[Spike89]

134. Depends

As I mentioned in another subthread here...it isn't the speed but the impact, and what you hit. Just like a car wreck, it can be fatal at surprisingly low speeds, and some people walk away with just some scratches at high speed. Good leather or armored gear can prevent road rash at surprisingly high speeds. Sadly, nothing can protect any rider from the deadly g-forces of a collision...put on a good helmet, run as fast as you can into the corner of a brick wall and even though you're probably moving at well under 20 mph (and lacking the inertia of a 500-1000 lb bike), you'll be very lucky if you walk away.

[TxRider]

141. Your way off...

Racers routinely crash at speeds up to 200mph.

I know many who have walked away from 60-70mph crashes.

Best case you don't even lose any skin if your wearing proper gear.

The only real danger in a motorcycle crash is hitting immovable objects like trees and cars and such..


I've ridden 35+ years without a serious crash though, it is possible if you ride sanely and don;t become complacent about all the idiots in their cars trying to kill you.

[aikoaiko]

121. I'm glad I survived my no helmet MC days.

[Winterblues]

7. Far more head injuries in cars than motorcycles so why not in cars as well?

Logic doesn't seem to apply in many cases.

[armyowalgreens]

13. Link?

[Chemisse]

23. Probably in total numbers of head injuries

Not in percents. A whole lot more people drive - and crash - in cars.

[armyowalgreens]

34. But that doesn't support the posters theory...

That somehow you are more likely to receive a head injury in an automobile accident.

[Chemisse]

41. I know - that's my point

I think he is wrong.

[Fumesucker]

59. That wasn't what the poster said..

He said more head injuries in cars than on motorcycles, a true statement.

Helmets in cars would save more lives than on motorcycles, simply due to the fact that far more people ride in cars than on motorcycles.

Fewer head injuries per mile in a car but a whole buttload more passenger miles driven.

[armyowalgreens]

88. That is exactly what I said the poster was saying...

And it's bullshit.

It doesn't matter that there are more head injuries in cars. What matters is the rate of head injury.

[TheCowsCameHome]

.........especially among those not wearing belts.

[lapfog_1]

25. you need to compare head injury accident rates

on a per passenger mile traveled, not all that many people ride motorcycles.

And, when you get those numbers, be sure that you compare injury rates of cyclists not wearing head protection with people driving (or riding) without their seatbelts... and compare head protection folks with the seatbelt wearers.

[sofa king]

115. Oh, that's like the old riddle.

One of the modern innovations put into full use during the First World War was the steel helmet. Yet during the same war, head injury cases in army hospitals shot up ninety percent (or something) from previous wars.

Why?

Because in previous wars, very few people survived head injuries, and therefore didn't show up in hospitals.

Not exactly the same line of reasoning, but similar enough. In this case, other factors like the small number of motorcyclists compared to all other drivers, the higher fatality rate of motorcyclists, and the fact that any force big enough to penetrate a good helmet is big enough to do all sorts of non-head related damage all probably play roles.

[rucky]

8. Not in Ohio - and nobody does.

I, for the life of me, cannot comprehend this.

[LeftyMom]

81. Ohioans are bad on safety stuff generally, in my experience.

People look at me like I'm crazy for wearing my seat belt in the back seat when we visit, since it's not legally required, or for making my kid use a booster in cars where the seat belt doesn't fit properly even though it's not mandatory.

Oh, and when the relatives visited us, they rented a car too small to fit everybody and thought I was nuts when I insisted we take both cars rather than have a kid ride in the cargo area. :eyes: It's like they think the laws of physics don't apply to them.

[undeterred]

9. Several motorcyclists have been killed in

auto-cycle collisions around here recently. No helmets required.

On the bright side, I suppose a lot of them become organ donors.

[TheCowsCameHome]

10. Yes.

And it's a good law.

[walldude]

11. Colorado.. Nope..

I'm on the fence on this one. I have ridden without a helmet before and I like it. However, with all the other drivers on the road it's a bit too dangerous. If I am taking a ride up in the mountains where traffic is light and the roads are open I'll go without one but in town where there are other people on the road it's too risky.

[Cowpunk]

40. Yeah we've got a law. I'm not quite sure where I stand on that.

I say that as someone who was in a motorcycle/car accident very recently. Anyone who rides motorcycles or bicycles in the city knows just how stupid/careless motorists can be. In my case, the driver of a car pulled away from a stop sign right in front of my motorcycle, in broad daylight, with nothing to block him from seeing us. He didn't see us or slow down until we were launching over his hood.

Am I glad that my stepdaughter and I were wearing helmets and leather? Absolutely. Will I ever ride without a helmet? Probably not. Does this mean I think everyone should be forced to protect themselves? I'm not sure. I am repelled by the nanny state, yet concerned that we all pay the price for the stupidity of a few.

[Cowpunk]

42. Sorry I wasn't contradicting Walldude with that post

That was a screw-up, sorry for any confusion. I posted it as a reply to Walldude's post by accident. I live in Nebraska, not Colorado.

[walldude]

54. No confusion here...

We seem to be mostly on the same page :toast:

[undeterred]

60. Auto Motorists don't understand motorcycles

if they've never ridden one. Just like they don't understand what its like to drive a large truck.

[XOKCowboy]

84. Amen to both those statements...

I always rode with the thought that every car was out to run over me. I had cars beside me move right over into my lane all the time (I'm not using all of it, right?). I also always kept my eye out for that infamous driver wanting to turn left. They're motorcycle killers.

Don't get me started on the way people endanger their own lives cutting off trucks. I've had a few scary moments there also.

[undeterred]

99. I don't ride a motorcycle

and until I worked with some people who do I had no clue that cars make those 'turn-in-front' accidents happen. After hearing a few stories I started looking out for bikers much more than before. But I still wish they'd wear helmets.

As for trucks, until I drove a UHaul from one state to another I had no clue what it was like to drive something so big with no center rearview mirror. You have so much less mobility in a truck than you do in a car.

[XOKCowboy]

82. I always wore a helmet for comfort and safety even in CO

You remember my helmet when I went down in NM. 40 mph. A shredded $400 leather jacket, my shattered $250 helmet and a pair of leather gloves are all that kept me out of the hospital.

I wore those by choice though. I'm still on the fence about mandatory helmet laws.

[undeterred]

100. No helmet law here in Wisconsin

but most of the time when there is a motorcycle fatality, its 'no helmet'.

[ashling]

14. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet can really be a mind opening experience

. . . all over the pavement

:shrug:

[create.peace]

17. Helmet required under 18, Eye protection for all....Kansas,nt

[Ron Green]

20. I just wish they were required to fit mufflers. What a bunch of noise pollution.

[TxRider]

142. They are...

It's Federal law, and state and local law in most places.

It just isn't being enforced any more. When I started riding in the 70's you wouldn't last a week with a loud bike. Now they don't even care.

[skorpo]

21. Illinois has NO helmet law. n/t

[Puzzler]

22. Helmets required in BC (Canada)...

... but as I often point out to the anti-helmet brigade, you're free to NOT wear a helmet, when your NOT on public roads.

[ixion]

26. No, thank goodness

the nanny state can kiss my a**.

[TorchTheWitch]

27. used to but not anymore

They got rid of the helmet law here in PA a few years ago. I think it was a big mistake. Seems like most people still wear them though. Or maybe it's more like 50/50.

[Xicano]

28. Here in California yes, but, it shouldn't be.

Nowhere should there be laws forcing someone to wear a helmet. I myself would never ride my motorcycle without my helmet, but, that's my choice. I don't like the idea of someone else telling me that I don't have any choice in the matter.

This country is suppose to be a country of laws protecting us from others, not from ourselves. It should not be illegal for someone to make dangerous choices for themselves.

The excuses for helmet laws reminds me too much of the excuses given to outlaw drugs, gambling and prostitution, etc. Why can't some people just leave their noses out of other people's business? Too many people seem to have the thought that they should be allowed to tell/force other people how to live.

*sigh*

[Johonny]

50. Driving isn't a right in this country

and your driving can seriously affect other people. If you hit my car without your helmet and die, I can be severely traumatized for life. You have to drive with insurance too. I know it sucks to be forced to act like a responsible adult, but if you want the privileges granted by our society then you have to suck it up and act like an adult. There's a difference between your personal freedoms in American society and things like driving that are not a guaranteed personal freedom.

[Xicano]

62. The sight of a fat republican can severely traumatize me for life too.

So are you saying their personal freedom to be fat and disgusting looking should be outlawed in 'public' too? C'mon, you're employing the same logic that tyrants use to justify restricting personal freedoms.

But not only that, your statement sounds like you should listen to your own advice. What I mean is: on one hand you say "you have to suck it up and act like an adult". On the other hand you say If I hit your car without a helmet and die, you can be severely traumatized for life because of it.

So.....shouldn't you be taking your own advice and "suck it up and act like an adult" if someone gets into an accident with you and they die from it? No offense intended.

Besides, in case you didn't notice in my two posts. I personally do wear a helmet when I ride (photos of me below). But that doesn't mean there should be laws forcing people to. And lame excuses like "Oh! I could be traumatized if I see someone get killed" is just that. An excuse to tell others how to live. Sorry don't mean to be offensive, but, I prefer freedom.






Me with my current Bike:





Me on my previous Bike: (Angeles Crest Hwy)

[Robb]

63. I think people should be allowed to ride without helmets

...on any private road they own.

I mean hell, we regulate the kinds of vehicles you can drive on public roadways, why is a fucking helmet an affront to personal liberty when no one cares about my right to zip around the interstate on a home-built dune buggy that runs on lighter fluid?

[Xicano]

67. Because "a home-built dune buggy"

If it isn't a safely built vehicle could "CAUSE" an accident with other people. Driving without a seatbelt or without a helmet isn't an issue in "CAUSING" an accident. In other words and as I pointed out in one of my above posts. Laws are for protecting us from "OTHERS" not from ourselves.

[Xicano]

69. While on the issue of "Cause"

I don't know if you've ever ridden, but, if we wanted to get into the issue of factors which may "cause" an accident. Wearing a helmet is far more likely to cause an accident than not wearing one. Two reasons: 1) they limit a large portion of your vision. 2) they significantly reduce your ability to hear anything other than your own bike.

[Robb]

72. Horseshit.

Prove it. That's nonsense.

I've been riding for years. Founded DU's Motorcycle and Scooter Group, as if that matters. And I can see (and hear, actually) quite well with a helmet.

So can every competitive rider in the past 25 years.

[Xicano]

78. Not horseshit

I've been riding bikes for twenty something years and they do reduce both your vision and cause the sound of your bike to drown out sounds that other wise would not be drowned out.

I think I know what it is you're trying to say and if I am correct I wouldn't disagree with you. But the fact is if you put a helmet on your peripheral vision is reduced and it takes the sounds of your bike and reverberates it inside of your helmet reducing or drowning out other sounds. I don't need to prove it. The last twenty years of it is proof enough for me.

Now if you're saying that a helmet doesn't restrict your ability to still see just as much of your surroundings as without one because its easy enough to move your head around to see. Than you're correct and of course I don't disagree. This is what I do all the time when I ride as a matter of fact and I always wear top of the line Arai helmets.

[snooper2]

127. I agree- they do restric your peripheral vision quite a bit

And that's your best defense when riding...I quit wearing full face helmets some time back...now have a half helmet and wear that if we are going on a ride or if I plan to get on the interstate.

Local riding on city streets sunglasses are just fine :)

[Xicano]

131. Thank you snooper2

Also, when I ride on freeways (what we call them here in California) I also use the time tested method of always riding a little faster than the flow of traffic. The reason is because relative to others on the highway it makes you a moving target and harder for them not to notice you. Going with the flow makes you much less noticeable and for damn sure I am not going to go slower than the flow of traffic relying on others not to run me down.

:fistbump:

[IDemo]

79. I've ridden over 30 years

Both of your statements are wrong.

http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/e-resources/ebooks/records/749-1.html

Helmets Don't Impair Vision or Hearing

Helmets don't obscure vision.
In fact, less than three percent of peripheral vision is limited by a motorcycle helmet, according to a study conducted to investigate helmets and vision. All helmets provide a field of vision of more than 210 degrees-well above the 140 degree standard that state driver licensing agencies use to identify vision problems. Most helmeted motorcycle riders simply turn their heads a little more, if necessary, in order to check traffic.

Helmets don't impair hearing.
A motorcyclist out on the road will hear just as well or even better with a helmet as without one, according to the US Department of Transportation. Why? Because for someone without a helmet, the wind and sound of the engine are very loud, and any other important sounds must be even louder to be heard over all that noise. With a helmet on, surrounding sounds are quieter, but in equal proportions. This means that what can be heard over wind and engine noise without a helmet, can also be heard in the same way with a helmet since wind and engine noise will also be reduced. Technically speaking, the signal to noise ratio stays the same.

A recent study to assess the impact of a motorcycle helmet on vision and hearing capabilities found that helmet use neither reduced the ability of riders to see traffic nor increased the time needed to visually check for nearby traffic. Helmet use also did not make a difference in a rider's ability to hear surrounding traffic sounds.

[Xicano]

83. You have your study and experience and I have mine

And we'll just have to agree to disagree because in all the years and different helmets I've ridden with only one (an open face helmet) can I say didn't affect my peripheral vision. All my full face helmets, which is only what I wear, reduce peripheral vision. And the couple times I have ridden without a helmet (once due to someone stealing it, the other due to giving it to a gal I picked up and so she'd have a helmet) I can tell you with no doubt that you can hear more sounds around you, and, your peripheral vision is better.

Besides the safety issue, I don't really care for the bugs and road grime on my face. But I still stand by my point and nothing will change that because of my personal experience for the last twenty something years.

Sorry.

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Enthusiast]

76. Never considered that part.

:spank:

[Xicano]

80. :)

:hi:

[A HERETIC I AM]

137. Nice Duke. n/t

[LuvNewcastle]

29. Yes, but you can

still text message while you're riding.

[virgogal]

31. Yes-MA.

[Edweird]

33. No. (FL) I don't like 'nanny state' nonsense. That being said, I always wear one.

I also always wear my Frank Thomas Aqua Pore jacket with hard pads as well. By choice. Asphalt sucks.

[Obamanaut]

35. Florida is both yes and no, depending on whether/not one has

medical insurance, and there is an age restriction.


In Florida, the law requires that all riders younger than 21 years wear helmets, without exception. Those 21 years and older may ride without helmets only if they can show proof that they are covered by a medical insurance policy.

http://www.iihs.org/laws/HelmetUseCurrent.aspx

[elocs]

37. WI-no. Those helmetless should get a tax credit if they sign a donor card.

I gave up riding a motorcycle years ago when I figured out that too many motorists seemed to be out to kill me. I also got tired of having my heart in my throat in fear that some car would simply turn in front of me.

[GP6971]

38. WA, yes n/t

[Spike89]

39. Yes, but fence-straddling biker here

Let's be honest, helmets save lives--in some instances. However, even the newest, best helmets limit hearing and or vision to some extent (well, not beany-style, but they also won't do much in most accidents). There is no way of knowing how many accidents are avoided because a helmetless rider heard or saw something a helmetted rider would not have.

Even if that isn't a factor, the reality is that riding at speed (55 mph +) pretty much puts you at extreme high risk in a motorcycle accident, helmet or no. Slide 100 feet on asphalt without professional-level leather body armor and you really won't care about brain damage. Hell, the helmet isn't going to help you in a much lower-speed accident if you're unlucky enough to hit something with your head. The only real protection it offers is if you're sliding or crash at less than 30 mph. You neck, trunk, and limbs are all at risk and serious injuries there can be every bit as fatal as a head injury.

All that said, I wear a beanie style all summer and a full-face all winter--I'd probably forego the beanie occasionally in the summer if it wasn't the law.

[armyowalgreens]

43. Most injuries happen because the rider hits something, not from sliding...

Sliding will give you road rash. I've hit the asphalt at 30 mph wearing an open faced helmet, pants and a sweat shirt. Sliding didn't do anything but give me horrible road rash. Hitting the ground head first was the problem. If I wasn't wearing a helmet, I might have died.

[undeterred]

61. I've heard that the worst accidents happen

when a car turns in front of a motorcycle they don't see coming.

[Robb]

73. Those are quite common

...But there's little "worse" than a bike that's tried to pass on the highway and hits an oncoming vehicle. Or the other way around.

Seen a few of those. Not good. At all.

[armyowalgreens]

91. I don't know about the rate of different types of accidents...

But from what I've seen, most motorcycle fatalities involve a vehicle.

Last year, at the intersection by my house, a rider died after a truck ran a red light. The truck slammed into the bike and threw the rider into the intersection light pole.

People don't understand that motorcycles, by themselves, are actually pretty safe (assuming you don't ride like a squid). I've seen videos of riders laying down their bikes at 100+ mph and they just slid to a stop with nothing more than road rash.

It isn't usually the slide that kills. High speed impact with other vehicles or with stationary objects is what does the most damage. Which makes sense.

Drivers really need to pay attention to riders. If people would just look out for motorcycles, the accident and fatality rate would decrease dramatically.

[TxRider]

143. I do

The majority of fatalities come from cars turning left in front of the motorcycle.

As for just crashes, most are single vehicle, as in the rider crashes all by himself with no other vehicles involved.

Left turners, rear enders, and red light runners are the real dangers of riding a motorcycle. All from car drivers not paying attention, these days due frequently if not mainly to cell phone usage.

[Spike89]

129. Well, at 30 mph the helmet did probably save you

However, if you'd actually hit something directly with a helmet at 30 mph, that's another story. My point was that at higher speeds (say legal hiway/freeway 55-70), that slide is not just horrible, it is likely deadly in denim and a sweatshirt. Also, at that speed-even in leathers-smacking into anything with your head is going to kill you. Granted, a helmet might save you if you just slide at 55 mph, but as you noted, most injuries happen when you hit something.

Like I said, I'd wear one almost always if it wasn't required. I do get tired of false statistics on the subject though. When a rider has a fatal accident without a helmet, it is assumed it was because of no helmet. I've gotten a concussion playing football in a helmet far superior to even my $300 motorcycle helmet--that impact was roughly 15 mph (I was basically standing still). No helmet will protect you from a direct impact to the head of 45+ mph.

[armyowalgreens]

132. That's a BS response. Helmets help at higher speeds...

You would have to be travelling pretty far over a reasonable speed limit in order to escape the effectiveness of helmets. I'm thinking well over 100 mph.

They have specifically designed helmets to protect riders at higher speeds. Full faced racing helmets are used on the track where riders are regularly travelling at 130+ mph.

[Spike89]

133. C'mon we're talking helmet laws on the road

Look, I acknowledge that helmets can save lives. But that is absolute baloney that even a good helmet is going to save your life if you strike something with your head at 100 mph. Those guys on the race tracks have straw bales to run into, not a friggin' semi truck. Even when they hit each other, they are travelling in pretty much the same direction, not getting t-boned or hit head on. Basically, we're back to sliding and yeah, a helmet will save you even sliding at 130+...until you hit the curb.

[XOKCowboy]

108. I disagree on a couple of points

Noise: I wore a full-face helmet mainly to keep out the wind noise at speed. Vision? I could barely see the sides of my Shoei helmets and besides that's what mirrors are for. One other thing and I know this from experience is that when you go down (even at 40 mph) a lot of times the effect of going down snaps your head right down onto the pavement. No helmet means at the least lots of plastic surgery. Worst case scrambled brains.

OK rant over. I also agree with your choice/right to wear a minimal helmet or no helmet at all. The thing about the beanie helmets is that they're not effective, just legal. Like so many of our bullshit laws there's always a way around them.

[Spike89]

135. Not really disagreeing

You're right, I prefer my full face helmet when riding the freeway for any time because it holds down the wind noise. However, in town at 30-40 mph, wind noise isn't much of a factor. Peripheral vision varies by person, but mirrors don't help for cross traffic.

Regardless, I never said helmets weren't safer. I just was pointing out that there are some other factors involved. I agree that the beanies are minimal protection. I also agree that helmet laws are bullshit. Riding motorcycles is dangerous. Riding with a helmet is still dangerous.

[XOKCowboy]

136. Well said..

Can't argue with that.

[Contrary1]

44. Indiana: No, and the neighbor kids are scared to death...

every time their Mom and Dad take the hog out for a ride.

[Sinistrous]

45. Pennsylvania: No.

[stevedeshazer]

46. Yes, in Oregon. And I agree that it is a good law.

When I was young, I wiped out on my bike and rolled all the way over on a gravel shoulder. I was wearing a helmet. It saved me from having a cracked dome. But my skid in the gravel left some serious road burn.

I don't know if I would have been more seriously hurt - or dead - had I not worn it. But I'm glad I did.

No one wants to take away the God-given right of bikers to catch bugs in their beards, but protect your damn head, man. I don't wanna see that and I don't wanna pay higher insurance rates and I don't want emergency crews to have to scrape you up off the pavement.

[sailor65]

47. Yes, and only a complete idiot

would ride without one.

[erinlough]

48. Funny story

My son was in school in Phoenix. I went to visit him and he wanted to take me for a ride on his motorcycle up into the mountains on the way to Prescott. I insisted on wearing a helmet until.......I experienced 109 degrees in a helmet. I thought I was going to die! I got about 10 miles and had to have him pull over to take it off. Once we were up in the mountains I put it back on.

[Robb]

75. There are helmets appropriate for the heat

...But having worn one that wasn't when it was hot, I feel your pain. :)

[erinlough]

89. It was full face and I felt

what it would be like to stick your face in an oven and keep it there. He went slow until we were at an elevation where I could stand having it on.

[Blackhatjack]

49. Helmet-less riders need to remember who they are leaving behind ... family, friends, etc.

Some fantastic people who are irreplaceable to their spouses, children, parents, siblings, friends and coworkers, are no longer with us because they chose the 'freedom' of riding their motorcycle without the inconvenience of wearing a helmet.

Having seen the results of helmet-less motorcycle accidents, it seems a small inconvenience to bear in order to be around for those love them and need them.

[undeterred]

85. I know a couple who used to ride together

until they started having children. After that they decided it wasn't fair for both of them to be taking a risk at the same time so they don't ride together any more.

[Blackhatjack]

106. Many fantastic people die too young. Any we save from needless death and dismemberment are precious

In our area the motorcyclists are very tight, and when one of their own dies they often ride together in a show of support at funerals and at fundraisers to help the children and families left behind.

It reminds us all that life has enough risks we cannot avoid. We should all work together to avoid the deaths which are preventable.

[Arkansas Granny]

126. The saying around here is: What do you call a person who rides without a helmet?

An organ donor.

[Davis_X_Machina]

51. I like 'If you sign a donor card you don't have to wear a helmet."

[horseshoecrab]

53. MA - yes n/t

[Raine]

55. Here in CA ... YES. nt

[Feron]

58. I remember seeing a motorcyclist on the road...

with no helmet on and on a cellphone. :crazy:

I'm against mandatory seatbelt and helmet laws. If someone is that damn dumb, then perhaps it's best if natural selection takes place.

[Iggo]

64. Yep.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

66. Yes.

[Pangolin2]

70. No.

So far there is no law against being an idiot..and I like it that way
Assuming the right to call them idiots remains intact.

[proud patriot]

77. California , Yes we require helmets

:hi:

[Jennicut]

86. In CT, for 17 and younger...adults, no

[old mark]

87. They were, but PA's helmet law was repealed several years ago.

Lots more people dying in crashes now, but lawmakers in PA are largely cowardly trash.

mark

[Redneck Socialist]

92. Nope, nor seat belts either.

No need to legislate common sense.

[Vidar]

96. Helmets are required in Michigan.

[Maru Kitteh]

98. Yes, as they should be.

[Libertas1776]

101. I can never

honestly recall ever seeing anyone on a motor bike not wearing a helmet. It is cavalier enough to be riding a motorcycle, but to ride one without a helmet. Well, that is called a death wish, and not the Charles Bronson kind.

[asdjrocky]

102. Yes.

But I really long for the times when I could ride without one. The way I ride all the helmet will do is keep my dental records together for ID.

[depakid]

103. Even Bycycle helmets are required for people under 16 in Oregon

And for everyone in New South Wales:

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/bicycles/

Why anyone would would go without one on a motorcycle is beyond any reasonable comprehension.

[undeterred]

104. When I was a child nobody wore a bicyle helmet.

And we never wore seatbelts, even on long driving vacations. At the time it didn't seem like a big deal.

[depakid]

107. Ddin't seem like a big deal to me, either- until a 7th grade classmate got gimped out

and my sister in law's father had a minor spill and died several hours later from a subdural hematoma.

Me, I've cracked two so far while mountain biking (that might have been my head).

Bottom line is twofold:

1. Wear the brain bucket.

2. Laws serve both an educational and motivational purpose that furthers #1.

[undeterred]

111. When I was a child a neighbor kid down the street

got hit by a car when riding his bike and he died. Then a teenaged girl from my school died the same way. Both of these might have survived if wearing a helmet. I think it was doctors treating children in the ER who really started the push for helmets, and it has saved a lot of lives.

[sofa king]

117. It was worse than that in my neighborhood.

Wearing a helmet was a sign of weakness, and the kids who were more scared of their parents had to deal with ridicule and the risk of being chased down and beaten up. I never did that, but I also never, ever wore a helmet.

What can I say? Kids are just as stupid as their parents, but with the pack mentality of a troop of baboons.

[TxRider]

144. That's the funny part where I live in Texas...

I can ride a motorcycle without a helmet.

But I'm required to wear a helmet on my bicycle.

[Skittles]

105. no, they like organ donors here

[Subdivisions]

109. Texas, nope. n/t

[krispos42]

110. Nope

Gotta keep those organ banks filled, yanno. Right now it's "donar season".



(Minnesota)

[brettdale]

112. In NewZealand

You have to wear a helmet if your riding a motorcycle or a bicycle.

[sofa king]

113. Yes, even 50cc mopeds, in Virginia.

The helmet law for scooters was passed with moderate fanfare a while back, and the police have enforced it assiduously.

It wasn't too long after I got my moped that I wrecked it, at full speed and doing everything else stupidly and wrong, and rode away from it. The half-helmet even protected my sunglasses, which stayed on. After that, I decided I really like helmets. I just wish I could afford a nice one.

[undeterred]

114. A friend of mine started using a scooter

a couple years ago. The police stopped her a couple of times about traffic issues but they didn't ticket her. She works in a building close to the police department, and one day a policeman came in and gave her a helmet. She's worn it ever since, and she has had an accident where it probably made a huge difference.

[sofa king]

116. The helmet seems to make a lot of difference.

Especially with the scooters. I think it's because they travel at such low speeds--usually around 30mph for me. If you can protect your head, the rest of you can do a pretty good job of protecting itself. So can the bike, amazingly enough. I rode away from my wreck and completed a 35-mile ride with nothing but a bent mirror and a lot of blood stains and scratches (on both me and the bike).

Though I have to admit the next couple of days afterward were far more painful than the half-dozen or so totally catastrophic car accidents I've been in. Maybe it's because I'm getting older, or maybe it's all those other accidents adding up.

[guitar man]

119. Oklahoma- No

no helmet law here if you are 18 or older. I choose to wear one when I ride. The only time I might take it off is when it is 100 degrees or hotter outside and there is sweat running down into my eyes but other than that, I wear my helmet.

[ThomWV]

120. Our state (WV) requires a helmet - but I'd wear mine even if they didn't

And not because I don't want to see my brains splatter all over a tree or the underside of a Hummer. Its because it (mine has a full face shield) stops me from getting hit in the face by bugs at 80mph. It also allows me to keep on seeing in the rain, something that will immediately blind anyone without a shield.

As for saving lives, I doubt that they do. They may save a good bit of face skin, but that's about it. If your head smacks a tree at 20 or 40 mph it won't make much difference if its wrapped in a helmet or not, your neck is still going to break.

[Arkansas Granny]

125. No helmet required in Arkansas if you are over the age of 21. Seatbelts are mandatory.

It doesn't make any sense to me.

[Fleshdancer]

128. My favorite are the cities that require bicycle helmets but not motorcycle helmets

It's insane trying to follow THAT logic. :rofl:

[AngryAmish]

140. No. It makes the transplant surgeons very happy (and busy)

[gauguin57]

145. No. And they should be. We all pay for their severe head injury treatment.

So we the people should be able to tell them to wear a damned helmet. Same with seatbelts. Seriously ... this "it's a free country so I can do what I want" doesn't wash when you realize that their injuries make all of our insurance rates go up ... and if the injured don't have insurance, we all wind up paying for their injuries.

We used to have a helmet law in PA, but somehow it disappeared.

[polly7]

146. I had a very close cousin die from a motorcycle crash head injury.

He was riding a very short distance home from work and hit by an elderly woman who swears she never saw him. He was on life-support for three days. No helmet. 20 years old.