Man dies after motorcycle crashes during helmet protest ride

[pcosmar]

Motorcycles are dangerous. Fact of life that won't be changed by piling on laws.
I was told by a biker cousin when I was very young,

"Ride like the bike, the road and everything out there is trying to kill you. Personally. And you will be alright.
Ride with that attitude.
The first time you get on it and think you know what you are doing, you will go down."

I usually wear a helmet and leather. I have hit the ground hard, doing something stupid. And helmets do help especially in low speed crashes, for the initial thump.
At speed the leather is your best protection. Why do you think most bikers wear it? It ain't just style.

The article mentions this one guy that died,,,How many rode that day with no helmets and did not?

Let those that ride, decide.

 

[squarepusher]

here's the issue, the government build the roads, so them regulating rules on it seems fair to me. You can't ride a a lot of vehicles at all on roads, is that restricting ones freedom?

Lets say you were a private company, and you build roads on your property, shouldn't you be allowed to make rules on travellers on it?

 

[YumYum]

Helmets save lives. They have saved mine. Gasoline on asphalt is like ice on ice, and when a motorcycle hits a spot of gasoline on the road it will spin out of control. I would rather the government make laws requiring helmets to be worn than making laws requiring that I go to war and kill my fellow man. At least the helmet law is not killing people.

 

[Carehn]

You can't ride a a lot of vehicles at all on roads, is that restricting ones freedom?

No so much in Montana. I have heard you can drive just about anything on the roads in the big sky.

 

[Travlyr]

Helmets save lives. They have saved mine. Gasoline on asphalt is like ice on ice, and when a motorcycle hits a spot of gasoline on the road it will spin out of control. I would rather the government make laws requiring helmets to be worn than making laws requiring that I go to war and kill my fellow man. At least the helmet law is not killing people.

Helmets do kill people, too. That's the whole point being made. As long as a rider has the motorcycle under control... no problem. At the point the rider loses control, all bets are off... it all depends on what happens next. Get tossed down a canyon, into oncoming traffic, hit a bridge abutment or post, or just garner some road rash. It's all a matter of chance once the motorcycle is no longer upright.

Helmets have killed a lot of people. If my math is correct a 3 pound helmet at 60 mph = 180 foot/lbs. That is a lot of instant strain on the neck given an accident which often results in broken necks. That's why states without helmet laws are demonstrating higher safety records than states with helmet laws. And all this was predicted back in the 60's.

Motorcycle helmet manufactures knew this. They lobbied for the laws. Since most people just assume that helmets make sense, then most people will argue for them without doing the research. For the state? The state wins by collecting sales tax on the sale of the helmet, and by ticketing & collecting revenue from riders who go without a helmet.

The state should not be allowed to force people to wear dangerous equipment.

 

[pcosmar]

here's the issue, the government build the roads, so them regulating rules on it seems fair to me.

Not really, though I have heard this fallacy before.
people made roads. First on the personal and local level. Then trade routes that were commonly used were improved by local folks.
Eventually municipalities started paving them. Then states did.Then somewhere along the line the Federal Government usurped authority over the highways.
Maintaining post roads was and is a responsibility of government. Maintaining, but they were initially built by people at the local level.

 

[acptulsa]

There are a couple of old timers and bikers in this thread that not only approach this from a "freedom of choice" issue, but also have real world experience that causes doubts about the efficacy of helmets and in fact view them as a dangerous hindrance rather than a help.

I happen to be one of them.

+ rep and + one.

I avoided an accident because I wasn't wearing a helmet. A car didn't see me and pulled out right in front of me while I was riding in the right lane of a four lane street. I went to change lanes and heard the engine and rolling tires of a pretty quiet car which was passing me, but not yet in my peripheral vision. So, I rode the dotted white line between lanes, and passed between the two cars. With a helmet on, I'd never have heard that car and would unquestionably have swerved right into its right front fender.

True story.

 

[YumYum]

Helmets do kill people, too. That's the whole point being made. As long as a rider has the motorcycle under control... no problem. At the point the rider loses control, all bets are off... it all depends on what happens next. Get tossed down a canyon, into oncoming traffic, hit a bridge abutment or post, or just garner some road rash. It's all a matter of chance once the motorcycle is no longer upright.

Helmets have killed a lot of people. If my math is correct a 3 pound helmet at 60 mph = 180 foot/lbs. That is a lot of instant strain on the neck given an accident which often results in broken necks. That's why states without helmet laws are demonstrating higher safety records than states with helmet laws. And all this was predicted back in the 60's.

Motorcycle helmet manufactures knew this. They lobbied for the laws. Since most people just assume that helmets make sense, then most people will argue for them without doing the research. For the state? The state wins by collecting sales tax on the sale of the helmet, and by ticketing & collecting revenue from riders who go without a helmet.

The state should not be allowed to force people to wear dangerous equipment.

I ride motorcycles. I started off on a 125 Enduro as a little kid. I have owned four wheelers and a YZ 490 (motocross bike). helmets have saved my life on many occasions. I agree that a helmet can sometimes actually be the cause of more harm than good, but I don't think that is the norm.

 

[Travlyr]

I ride motorcycles. I started off on a 125 Enduro as a little kid. I have owned four wheelers and a YZ 490 (motocross bike). helmets have saved my life on many occasions. I agree that a helmet can sometimes actually be the cause of more harm than good, but I don't think that is the norm.

The helmet can cause accidents, and it breaks people's necks in certain circumstances. The state should no more force a rider to wear a helmet than they should force you not to wear one.

Let those who ride decide.

 

[acptulsa]

I ride motorcycles. I started off on a 125 Enduro as a little kid. I have owned four wheelers and a YZ 490 (motocross bike). helmets have saved my life on many occasions. I agree that a helmet can sometimes actually be the cause of more harm than good, but I don't think that is the norm.

Sounds like you ride off road quite a lot. I'd wear a helmet off road as well. Off road, the big threat isn't other traffic but invisible prairie dog holes. I'd also be far, far more likely to ride in shorts off road, as the occasional rock is far less deadly than asphalt (a far greater threat than head injury imo, but don't let me say that too loudly or full body armor will be next on the legislators' agendas).

Racing, meanwhile, involves rididng only in professional and capable traffic which is all on two wheels and all going the same direction--and generally lound enough to hear through the most well padded helmet. It also involves pushing to the limtis of adhesion. I'd never race without a helmet.

I only ride fairly sedately in traffic, and almost always city traffic. Don't even own a bike (unless you count the bicycle, and I never, ever wear a helmet while riding it either). I have quick reactions, situational awareness and a good instinct for tucking my head in and protecting it. Not everone does, but I do, And, on the flip side, many people have notably wider peripheral vision than I do. So I'm better off with my limited peripheral vision and good hearing undiluted. Period.

But that's just me. Not everyone can claim the same. Someone with poor hearing and excellent peripheral vision will feel differently, and more power to them. So, this:

Let those who ride decide.

Sometimes I think all laws of this type are there to help the mediocre feel better about themselves, or at leasst to protect the mediocre from doing stuff because they feel inadequate. But if America is so idiot proof that those with talent are never allowed to use their talents, then we've lost something. And we have definitely lost something.

 

[Anti Federalist]

+ rep and + one.

I avoided an accident because I wasn't wearing a helmet. A car didn't see me and pulled out right in front of me while I was riding in the right lane of a four lane street. I went to change lanes and heard the engine and rolling tires of a pretty quiet car which was passing me, but not yet in my peripheral vision. So, I rode the dotted white line between lanes, and passed between the two cars. With a helmet on, I'd never have heard that car and would unquestionably have swerved right into its right front fender.

True story.

Thanks for the rep and the great personal story.

Anybody who has ridden for any length of time has got one.

Let those who ride, decide.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Motorcycles are dangerous. Fact of life that won't be changed by piling on laws.

I was told by a biker cousin when I was very young,

"Ride like the bike, the road and everything out there is trying to kill you.

Personally.

(That part there is critical. I got the same advice when just starting out myself, and that point was stressed more than any other. Put it in your mind that every cage, every other driver, every road, every bike, is out to get your ass on a personal level, you! - AF)

And you will be alright.

Ride with that attitude.

The first time you get on it and think you know what you are doing, you will go down."

Good post and good advice.

 

[mczerone]

"When I wear a helmet, I can drive faster and take more risks, because I'm protected."

+rep

Aside from the psychopaths taking our liberties, this is the scariest part of forced "safety" laws: they may protect the dangerous behavior, but they encourage the dangerous to behave more dangerously.

One of the best results of basic law & economics studies was showing that seat-belt laws increased the number of accidents with pedestrians being injured far greater than they saved the lives of drivers.

 

[mczerone]

here's the issue, the government build the roads, so them regulating rules on it seems fair to me. You can't ride a a lot of vehicles at all on roads, is that restricting ones freedom?

Lets say you were a private company, and you build roads on your property, shouldn't you be allowed to make rules on travellers on it?

The government provides the FAA, so they should be able to demand certain security procedures, right?

The government provides the police force, so they should be able to demand your obedience to the police force, right?

The government provides the courts, so they should be able to determine the laws that apply, right?

The government provides health care, so they should be able to decide your diet, right?

 

[Anti Federalist]

The government provides the FAA, so they should be able to demand certain security procedures, right?

The government provides the police force, so they should be able to demand your obedience to the police force, right?

The government provides the courts, so they should be able to determine the laws that apply, right?

The government provides health care, so they should be able to decide your diet, right?

Bing - go

 

[Anti Federalist]

Sometimes I think all laws of this type are there to help the mediocre feel better about themselves, or at leasst to protect the mediocre from doing stuff because they feel inadequate. But if America is so idiot proof that those with talent are never allowed to use their talents, then we've lost something. And we have definitely lost something.

That ^^^ Great point.

 

[Travlyr]

Come on folks ,,post your bike.

Okay... okay... this isn't mine... but it looks like fun.

 

[UWDude]

how interesting, the ABATERs I knew called themselves "American Bikers Against Tyrannical Empires"

 

[Anti Federalist]

how interesting, the ABATERs I knew called themselves "American Bikers Against Tyrannical Empires"

Already posted in this thread but worth repeating, when I belonged it was called:

A Brotherhood Against Totalitarian Enactments

 

[Tarzan]

Helmets and personal safety should not be the business of government... neither local or national. I have only had one wreck and I was not wearing my helmet at the time... go figure. But, I wonder what would have happened had I been wearing my helmet. Instead of landing on my back after flipping over the truck, would my center of gravity my rotation to vary enough to make me land on my head had I been wearing my helmet (and snapped my neck). No answer there... just one of those 'my bike crash' stories.

If someone wants to risk leaving a grease smear on the road using their brain it's their own business... so long as I do not have to contribute to their medical expenses whether they survive or not (or burial expenses).

I DO have an issue with eye protection. If you are coming at me in the oncoming lane on a bike... and you take a wasp in your eye... and you wind up in my windshield... then its MY business. So, helmets... no. Eye protection... yes.

And people who text message (etc) and case someone else injury should be dragged from the vehicle and shot on the spot.