Federal Government Will Conduct First Major Motorcycle Crash Causation Study In

[Triple J]

Or, they can just wait until they turn 18 and get a regular license and not really be any more mature than at 16...

Exactly.

There should be stricter training requirements for new drivers, regardless of age.

[NAKID]

So, i am FULLY prepared to get flamed to bits on this, but this is an honest question.

Why would any of you actually want a helmet law?

I am from NH and split my time between there and MA.  I WOULD NEVER ride without a helmet.  I woudl never ride with someone else who wasn't wearing a helmet.  I beleve 110% in helmets.

That said, if someone else wants to choose to ride without a helmet I am not sure how it impacts me that much.  Drunk driving - impacts me.  Speeding (often guilty) could impact me.  Choosing to not wear a helmet - stupid person making a stupid choice, doesn't impact me..

I feel like anytime the gov't gets involved and starts to regulate what i do they get it wrong.  Starts with a helmet law, ends with the banning of all two wheeled vehicles on public roads?

Again - i am not being an asshole here - honestly curious why others feel strongly about this, and i will reiterate i use a helmet 100% of the time and hope all of you do to.

Educate me.

<ducking>

Problem is, what happens when the guy who chooses not to wear a helmet crashes and doesn't have health insurance? Who pays then? You will.

Here's a question for you: Why is it no one pregnant doges about seatbelt laws and the government mandating airbags?

[il d00d]

I am still trying to understand why this study would be a bad thing.

MC laws and licenses are issued by state.  As far as I know there are only federal standards for vehicle safety, and not any laws about operation, training, etc. Also, this is not a bill or anything, just a study - the first one was released in 1981, and a lot has changed since, mostly demographics.  The +40 riders have seen the greatest increase in fatalities over the last 10 years.

If states do choose to use the new data to update laws, they would be bucking the trend.  A lot of this stuff we already know, and I doubt it has changed very much. 

On a more positive note, I would like it if this study challenges or supplants the Snell standards, and calls for some federal standard for other protectors.  The US version of CE.  I don't think it is within the scope of this particular study, but the first one did comment on the existing helmet standards.

[Triple J]

Problem is, what happens when the guy who chooses not to wear a helmet crashes and doesn't have health insurance? Who pays then? You will.

Here's a question for you: Why is it no one pregnant doges about seatbelt laws and the government mandating airbags?

I understand your first point..but I don't think it is valid. It can be applied to any activity...skydiving, snowboarding/skiing, diving, walking across the street (and getting hit by a car), etc. We all pay for anyone without insurance who is injured doing any activity . Regulating just motorcycling based on this argument is discriminatory.

On the second point...a lot of people complained very strongly when seatbelt laws were introduced. No one does now because they're older laws and we're used to them.

People don't complain about air bag laws because we don't make cars, so it doesn't directly affect us. I'm sure automakers have their opinion on the issue.

[corey]

Both are a form of motorized transport.
Both have the consequence of death or serious injury if one crashes.
Both are operated in public areas.
Both are required to operate within said public areas according to their respective governing laws.

The regulations for car and motorcycle licensure are a joke and need to be strengthened, but I don't believe in a graduated license structure so much. Just that the written test needs to be 3x harder and trooper evaluated road tests need to be mandatory.

100% agree.
I am STRONGLY against a graduated license system. If people are uncomfortable on a certain size bike, and are responsible enough to choose a smaller bike that suits their tastes, then kudos to them. The test they take to acquire that license should be much harder in order to prepare them for riding ANY bike. Having been to the DMV recently, I can't comprehend in any way, shape, or form some of the people they let walk out of that place with a license. It's unreal.

[corey]

Problem is, what happens when the guy who chooses not to wear a helmet crashes and doesn't have health insurance? Who pays then? You will.

Here's a question for you: Why is it no one pregnant doges about seatbelt laws and the government mandating airbags?

this is SORT of a joke... but... sort of NOT a joke:
if a guy without health insurance wrecks, and IS wearing a helmet... don't we STILL pay for it?
FURTHER, if a guy NOT  wearing a helmet wrecks without health insurance, he would probably die and the cost would actually be CHEAPER.

okay it's totally a joke...


also, my dad pregnant dog heartily about seat belt laws for many years...
and i think the airbag thing is rather passive when it comes to the consumer, and really doesn't affect the average person, so much as it does the auto mfgs

[il d00d]

Some interesting numbers from more recent studies:
• The largest number of motorcycle fatalities (41%) is still in the 501-1,000 cc engine size
group, followed by 38 percent in the 1,001-1,500 cc engine size group.
• Two-thirds of motorcyclists killed on 1,001-1,500 cc engine size motorcycles were riders
over 40.

This is just fatalities, not crashes, and there is no mention of the relationship between age and experience, but an interesting data point.

this is SORT of a joke... but... sort of NOT a joke:
if a guy without health insurance wrecks, and IS wearing a helmet... don't we STILL pay for it?

The rationale behind helmet laws as they pertain to cost is that head injuries = longer recovery.  If someone comes in with a concussion and other broken parts, they may have to wait until the head is stable before working on the rest of them.  Longer stay = more $$.
Look at #7 here
http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/helmet_use.html

[triangleforge]

We all pay for anyone without insurance who is injured doing any activity . Regulating just motorcycling based on this argument is discriminatory.

Actually, you pay for the ones WITH insurance, too, and conceivably more than for the uninsured ones -- at least if they're with the same Ins. Co. as you're paying into. OK, new rule: Helmets and ATGATT required by law for all Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Arizona members! 

Back on topic, the Hurt Report (how about Skidmore Gitoff as author this time?) did a whole lot to inform new rider & experienced rider training programs. As a new rider, it was really interesting to read the report's summary findings and some of the detailed findings, in order to realize that some of the things I thought were big dangers really weren't, while others I hadn't comprehended were real killers. It changed my riding for the better. I found this link to the summary findings, and read through them as a good refresher:

http://www.clarity.net/~adam/hurt-report.html

Bikes, cars, average rider ages, drivers, roadway design, gear & more have all changed dramatically since the Hurt Report was completed; refreshing that info is a VERY good thing in my opinion. Getting it into the hands of traffic engineers, moto instructors & driving instructors would be an even better thing.
 

[triangleforge]

Some interesting numbers from more recent studies:
• The largest number of motorcycle fatalities (41%) is still in the 501-1,000 cc engine size
group, followed by 38 percent in the 1,001-1,500 cc engine size group.
• Two-thirds of motorcyclists killed on 1,001-1,500 cc engine size motorcycles were riders
over 40.

This is just fatalities, not crashes, and there is no mention of the relationship between age and experience, but an interesting data point.

Thanks for posting that -- I just read the intro summary & scanned the rest, but I plan to read in more detail. Based on that quick reading, it sounds like the CC stats above come from a basic numerical calculation of deaths, not controlling for the ratio of +/- 1,000 cc bikes in the mix -- if 75% of the bikes on the road were <1,000 cc but they notched 41% of the fatalities, then the liter+ bikes would be the ones of most concern. I'd also wonder if they were going by the actual displacement or by the marketing description of, say, a 980 cc bike as a "Literbike"

The stats cited there on alcohol consumption & fatal motorcycle accidents are as striking as ever, as are the two bullet points after the ones you cited:

Two-thirds of motorcyclists killed on 1,001-1,500 cc engine size motorcycles were riders
over 40.
• There were increases in motorcycle fatalities between 1997 and 2006 for each engine size
group, but the largest increase was for motorcycle operators with engine sizes ranging from
1,001-1,500 cc.

[herm]

Problem is, what happens when the guy who chooses not to wear a helmet crashes and doesn't have health insurance? Who pays then? You will.

Here's a question for you: Why is it no one pregnant doges about seatbelt laws and the government mandating airbags?

thank you for articulation what i was trying to say (and gave up...)

[herm]

Some interesting numbers from more recent studies:
• The largest number of motorcycle fatalities (41%) is still in the 501-1,000 cc engine size
group, followed by 38 percent in the 1,001-1,500 cc engine size group.
• Two-thirds of motorcyclists killed on 1,001-1,500 cc engine size motorcycles were riders
over 40.

personally, this clearly equates to the younger/less skilled/less careful riders not being able to afford the larger CC bikes rather than the larger cc bikes being safer (and the fact that there are so few race replicas over 1000cc)

i bet there is a similar correlation here concerning the buying power of the older crowd

[angler]

So, i am FULLY prepared to get flamed to bits on this, but this is an honest question.

Why would any of you actually want a helmet law?

I am from NH and split my time between there and MA.  I WOULD NEVER ride without a helmet.  I woudl never ride with someone else who wasn't wearing a helmet.  I beleve 110% in helmets.

That said, if someone else wants to choose to ride without a helmet I am not sure how it impacts me that much.  Drunk driving - impacts me.  Speeding (often guilty) could impact me.  Choosing to not wear a helmet - stupid person making a stupid choice, doesn't impact me..

I feel like anytime the gov't gets involved and starts to regulate what i do they get it wrong.  Starts with a helmet law, ends with the banning of all two wheeled vehicles on public roads?

Again - i am not being an asshole here - honestly curious why others feel strongly about this, and i will reiterate i use a helmet 100% of the time and hope all of you do to.

Educate me.

<ducking>

+11ty billion

Keep your laws off my body (to steal a protest from another debate).

I can't believe avid participants in a risky hobby are advocating for strengthening the nanny state.  Give me a freakin' break - mandatory safety laws?  Really?  Our societies fascination with legislated safety is the most insidious route to fascism yet.   

[ducpainter]

+11ty billion

Keep your laws off my body (to steal a protest from another debate).

I can't believe avid participants in a risky hobby are advocating for strengthening the nanny state.  Give me a freakin' break - mandatory safety laws?  Really?  Our societies fascination with legislated safety is the most insidious route to fascism yet.   

This whole topic is very close to the politics line.

I'm thinking posts like this cross it.

Care to back it off a notch please?

[sbrguy]

if you are riding anything under 1000 cc or under 150hp you are quite simply a panzy and totally riding a motorscooter and  not a "real" motorcycle.   

but seriously the study will show that most accidents are caused by cars.  duh.

and honestly i have to agree with soemone else, someone else riding without a helmet doesn't really affect me the same way as if a drunk driver is on the same road and crashes into me.  the helmetless guy if he crashes basically hurts himself more.  and if you think that insurance companies would ever decrease rates you are insane, even if we are riding around in plastic cushioned bubbles they would still be charging more than right now.

[NAKID]

Insurance companies decrease rates for taking safety or rider improvement courses...