They passed the "no helmet law"

[YZMAN400]

Don,, then whats the point in addressing trail loss issues by writing to our representitives when asked to?? One persons voice does make a difference.. More then you can imagine!!!

Dude your making my brain hurt....As if reading the flood of GLDS/CCC emails and the beating the Boon trail gave me hasn't inflicted enough damage on me ol bod/mind already :yikes:

I need some coffie I think :nener:

 

[2TrakR]

As if reading the flood of GLDS/CCC emails

Gee, what could THAT be about?

 

[James]

Well, to play the emotional game vs personal freedom...

How 'bout when your daughter, driving her car and not being at fault, collides with a helmetless biker. Said biker is killed on the scene purely due to head injuries that would have clearly been preventable if he had a helmet on.

Does the $100 waiver also waive the involuntary manslaughter charge for her?
Is his family prevented from suing her for [whatever is the current trend]?

Perhaps the above scenario is too far fetched, I don't know the statistics. It would seem other States who already have no-helmet laws would have data on this.

If someone can be charged for manslaughter for a collision where they were not at fault...we have bigger problems than helmet laws.

 

[SNDMN2]

Gee, what could THAT be about?

I was just thinking about this the other day. I don't know enough about it to form any opinions. I guess I"m going to have to sit in at a meeting.

 

[BadgerMan]

I am bothered by my own thinking on this subject in that when some Peter Fonda wannabe whacks his unprotected head on a curb, I am gonna be relieved because he doesn’t live on to become a ward of the state.

Woodsy………I don’t liken helmets to alcohol because I think it is possible to consume adult beverages in a safe manner whereas I don’t think you can ride a motorsicle on the street without a helmet, in a safe manner…….just my personal opinion. Instead, I liken helmets and seat belts to stop signs and speed limits. All are just good common sense measures to protect yourself and others.

As an aside, I do think we need tougher penalties for abuse of alcohol involving vehicles.

A similar ethical dilemma (in my mind) is the current trend for the Lance Armstrong wannabes to ride their bicycles to work, during rush hour traffic, just to save a few dollars in gasoline. I cringe everyday as I pass these guys going to and fro. I think “what is the cost to society when they become disabled or when they are killed and they leave behind a wife and children”? Should the freedom to ride your pedally bike to work be restricted? No. Do I think these guys are fools for taking such risks? Hell yes.

So, the question is “do we need legislation to protect people from themselves (natural selection)”? My mind is still chewing on this one.

 

[2TrakR]

I guess I"m going to have to sit in at a meeting.

Nah, no need. Won't be any more meetings.

 

[TCTrailrider]

I would never consider riding without a helmet, but don't have a problem if others chose to do so. Its a personal choice that will not cause injury to the innocent.
I support the law requiring protective eyewear. A bug in your eye at 55mph may cause damage to others. I support required use of seatbelts. Taking evasive action to avoid a collision requires control of the vehicle. You can't control it if your not behing the wheel and a seat belt will heep you there. Requiring others to obey these laws keeps me and others safer.
I don't see how lack of a helmet could cause or contribute to an accident. Sure it may increase medical costs but so do alot of things. Smoking, drinking, over weight, lack of excersise and on and on. Govenmment can't require free people to live perfectly healthy lives.
I blew out my knee last year on the dirtbike. Cost my insurance company about $10,000. Can't take that privelage away because it may increase costs. I now won't ride without knee braces but I would not support a law requiring them. Its a personal choice.

 

[Wolverine423]

....

 

[Wolverine423]

I would never consider riding without a helmet, but don't have a problem if others chose to do so. Its a personal choice that will not cause injury to the innocent.
I support the law requiring protective eyewear. A bug in your eye at 55mph may cause damage to others. I support required use of seatbelts. Taking evasive action to avoid a collision requires control of the vehicle. You can't control it if your not behing the wheel and a seat belt will heep you there. Requiring others to obey these laws keeps me and others safer.
I don't see how lack of a helmet could cause or contribute to an accident. Sure it may increase medical costs but so do alot of things. Smoking, drinking, over weight, lack of excersise and on and on. Govenmment can't require free people to live perfectly healthy lives.
I blew out my knee last year on the dirtbike. Cost my insurance company about $10,000. Can't take that privelage away because it may increase costs. I now won't ride without knee braces but I would not support a law requiring them. Its a personal choice.

IMO this is the best statement on this post.

 

[woodsy]

del

 

[Wolverine423]

^^WERD^^
Yzmans statement about needing to go for coffee runs a close second though :)




Badgerman I couldnt disagree more.. I think there are situations where helmets are acutally a detremint.. Have you ever ridden in temps over 110 degrees?? Your brain cannot release heat and the result is loss of congnitive ability..

110 temp in Michigan????Boy that's a sturdy leg to stand on! And you call me ^^^WERD^^^ :)

 

[BadgerMan]

GOOD NIGHT I MISS MY COLLEGE DEBATE CLASSES.... ;)

I'll bet they miss you too....... ;)

I said it was "possible" and I believe that most consumption is done in a safe manner. Trouble is, the abuses make headlines when people are hurt. There is a difference between consumption and abuse although many folks, sad to say, never figure that out.

Regarding helmets, you will never convince me that one is safer sans skid lid. Any sport where there is even a threat of trauma to the head involves a helmet as a piece of essential gear.

The only unanswered question, in my mind, is whether we should try to "legislate common sense". When we say that a biker with a naked head is only risking hurting himself, I disagree with that. We all have families and maybe those that we are supporting. I think that we have responsibilities (to our oved ones) to avoid taking unnecessary risks. If you are no longer around due to your risk taking, who is gonna be hurt and what is the cost to our families, friends, and society?

 

[salgeek]

Not certain about this ... but I think protective eyewear is required at all times off-road. But, eyewear is only required on-road if you are traveling over 35mph and you do not have a windshield that shields your eyes.

As for the seat belt usage in a car... I agree that a seat belt will keep you planted in the seat so you can take corrective action; but, I've driven few cars where the handling was good enough that I needed a seat belt to stay put.

 

[tdunn976]

I'll bet they miss you too....... ;)


The only unanswered question, in my mind, is whether we should try to "legislate common sense". QUOTE]

Now there's a thought, our legislatures, legislating something they know nothing about. :whoa:

 

[Wolf Child]

I'll bet they miss you too....... ;)


The only unanswered question, in my mind, is whether we should try to "legislate common sense". QUOTE]

Now there's a thought, our legislatures, legislating something they know nothing about. :whoa:

Sounds like S.O.P. to me.

 

[BadgerMan]

Now there's a thought, our legislatures, legislating something they know nothing about. :whoa:

Good point :nod:

 

[Smit-Dog]

It puzzles my brain that alcohol and tobacco are legal, yet marijuana is illegal... :think:

And bicyclists that ride on the white line or edge of roads at 15-20mph with cars and trucks going 40-50mph right along side them... They belong in the same category as helmet-less riders... :coocoo:

 

[BadgerMan]

It puzzles my brain that alcohol and tobacco are legal, yet marijuana is illegal... :think:

Yer not one of them there hippy types, are ya' Bill? :ohmy:

And bicyclists that ride on the white line or edge of roads at 15-20mph with cars and trucks going 40-50mph right along side them... They belong in the same category as helmet-less riders... :coocoo:

Good analogy IMO. Both are terribly risky situations that I personally would avoid. Would I prefer to see people stop taking such risks? Yep. Do I think that there should be laws prohibiting either behavior? Probably not.

 

[foxmichigan]

Well certainly an interesting debate, and lots of good points on both sides. I was riding before the helmet law, and bought a helmet because it was required for ice racing. I wore one from that point forward. Quite frankly YZMAN400 opening post sums it up. Taken from WZZM. "Motorcycle Helmet Law changes could mean dollars for Michigan" http://www.wzzm13.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=82212
What strikes me is one can buy a really good full face, well ventilated, Snell/DOT helmet for less than $140, or pay $100 to not wear one. ;)

 

[KTM Mike]

Actually Woodsy I have ridden in temps 100 to 105 degrees on multiple occasions (South Dakota, Kansas, Nebraska, Southern Wyoming) dont think I hit 110, but whats 5 degrees? - from that I learned the effects of dehydration. Unprotected skin, (including the head) exposed to 60 plus MPH winds dehydrates a body quicker than one totally covered up. Dehydration is a larger cause of loss of cognitive ability. Loss of cognitive ability impacts decision making, and ability to ride. I learned to keep my hide and head, covered...and to take steps to cool down. Soaking a helmet liner and jacket, packing pockets with ice etc..and you can actually be to cool (for a while) on a 110 degree day.

I have also logged some 900 mile days (never quite made it to a 1000 miler..but got close), and many many 800 plus mile days. I learned from this, the impact of "aural fatigue" - the constant wind noise etc. even in a top shelf (Arai) helmet, causes this. Another clear cause of fatigue on the road, and decreased cognitive ability. I learned to ride with ear plugs in anytime I rode more than 30 minutes. I quickly found a dramatic reduction in fatigue, and my ability to remain alert and attentive on the road. With no helmet...somewhere I have a copy of a test done in I think in Cycle Magazine on sound levels...dont recall the specifics...but no helmet, dramatically more noise (DUH)...(oh...add in the loud pipes on top of the wind noise!)

I have also had 3 on pavement accidents. 1 of which, a helmet saved my life, no ifs, no ands, no butts (try getting hit broadside and riding the remainder of the crash out on the hood of the car someday..fun stuff). Another of which a helmet certainly elminated injury..without it, veggie time would of been the result. The third incident, helmet would not of been a factor, but a full road suit (Aerostich) saved my hide from a LOT of road rash. (that same Aerostich is what i wore in 100 degree temps BTW). The fact that helmet saved my life and or minimized injury is not vague theory I read about somewhere...it is a reality that I experienced. (BTW, my insurance company bought me a new helmet each time)

Oh..this crap about riding and crashing without a helmet..affects no one else, therefore it should be OK? How about this...how many of you have called your wife and had a conversation like this "Honey, I am at the hospital...no I am OK, just a precaution...well, the bike is totalled...I am OK really - just a few bruises" Then go show your wife (with your young childern standing behind her watching) your smashed up helmet. Then observe the impact on others around you...and that is WITH a helmet in use. Once you do that...then tell me your choice to ride without a helmet affects no one but yourself. SO...maybe if you are a TOTAL loner, no friends, no family, no job counting on you, NO connections to anyone or anything...maybe maybe you can say no one else is impacted.

Along the way in these various posts the word "safe" came up. Look up the word "safe" in the dictionary. It will say something to the effect of "with an absence of risk". Do you think you can EVER ride a motorcycle with an absence of risk? NO (for those of you who have taken an MSF class...yep...that is straight out of the course materials) So all you can do is MINIMIZE risk. At a minimum, a helmet is a HUGE step towards minimizing risk.

Bottom line is...I feel SOOOOO strongly about helmet use, I have a hard time separating USE from LAW. Yes, I like freedom...I exercise mine everyday... but a civil society often takes steps to protect members of society from making bad choices - countless examples can be made of that. Do I LIKE the idea of the goverment telling me what to do? NO, BUT when I acknowledge they are legislating something that is (to me) simply what everyone should do anyhow...

I said it before, and I will say it again... I respect your right to choose to wear (or not wear) a helmet, however if you choose to not wear one, I do not respect the choice you have made.

 

[woodsy]

del

 

[joey450]

I'll bet they miss you too....... ;)

I think that we have responsibilities (to our oved ones) to avoid taking unnecessary risks. If you are no longer around due to your risk taking, who is gonna be hurt and what is the cost to our families, friends, and society?

You do not think riding a dirt bike is an unnecessary risk :coocoo:

 

[woodsy]

You do not think riding a dirt bike is an unnecessary risk :coocoo:

RIGHT ON TARGET - BINGO!!!
but remember to be respectful,,, hopefully you know him well enough to call him coocoo so no one gets offended.... ;)

 

[bbarel]

And bicyclists that ride on the white line or edge of roads at 15-20mph with cars and trucks going 40-50mph right along side them... They belong in the same category as helmet-less riders... :coocoo:

I agree, but they probably think the same about you! A car can come over a few feet to the right and take out a bicycle, but it can also come over a few feet to the left and smack you head on.

 

[BadgerMan]

You do not think riding a dirt bike is an unnecessary risk

Of course it is at some level, as is every form of transportation. You always have the option to sit at home on your couch and do nothing. You don’t HAVE to ride a two wheeled vehicle of any type. However, that is not the question here………you missed the point. The question is one of risk mitigation when it is easy and sensible to do so.

That said, the only reason I would opt for elimination of the helmet law is because I fear that someone (a politician) could someday determine that my dirt riding entails an unacceptable level (to them) of unnecessary risk. I really struggle with this as I know more people are going to die as a result of riding without a helmet. Life is precious but I guess that freedom is precious too.

hopefully you know him well enough to call him coocoo so no one gets offended

No, he doesn’t

Oh..this crap about riding and crashing without a helmet..affects no one else, therefore it should be OK? How about this...how many of you have called your wife and had a conversation like this "Honey, I am at the hospital...no I am OK, just a precaution...well, the bike is totalled...I am OK really - just a few bruises" Then go show your wife (with your young childern standing behind her watching) your smashed up helmet. Then observe the impact on others around you...and that is WITH a helmet in use. Once you do that...then tell me your choice to ride without a helmet affects no one but yourself. SO...maybe if you are a TOTAL loner, no friends, no family, no job counting on you, NO connections to anyone or anything...maybe maybe you can say no one else is impacted.

Mike…….dog-gone-it……..I’ve changed my mind. EVERYONE PUT YOUR HELMETS BACK ON! ;)