Think I'll write to my State Rep & the Editor...

[OmniGLH]

Right, but this is what it comes down to:

A politician attempts to instate a law that bans sportibkes.
He references all these deaths and such, and then calls it a "proposal" like "proposal A."  Then, they launch a crap load of commericals showing guys flying down the e-way pulling wheelies at 100 mph and doing stoppies.  Non-cyclists see this and remember: "hey, remember when we were driving down X, and the guy passed us a 200 mph?"   So, then the vote YES on proposal A comes out a month before vote time, and nobody remembers what the hell proposal A was, so they vote yes anyways or something.  
During all the commericals, they don't show a guy on an HD, they show a GSXR and such.  The motorcycle "jackass' that people see on the news isn't riding a HD type of cruiser.  He's riding a sportbike.  How many times have you seen an HD on the news when it's related to death or accident compared to sportbikes?  How many times have you seen an article about dangerous bikers and they're referring to a crusier?  You don't.  You see those things with sportbikes involved.  
It could really hit the fan really quick if the wrong politican gets into office that isn't "sport bike frendly."  The general public view of sportbikes is seen as what compared to how they see the HD's and such?  That's all that counts.  
This is why we should all be paying supporting memebers of the AMA.  They are the only chance we have.  

Good point.

I often forget that it's not about the truth in politics... it's about the PERCEPTION of the truth.

[Zac]

Does that statistic exist somewhere?  I'm really curious to see the result on that.

Sure, sportbikes definitely have an advantage when it comes to killing somebody based simply on the power.

But there are LOTS of idiots out there on cruisers, too.  Overconfidence and overall bad riders aren't just confined to the sportbike crowd.  In fact, the worst riders I've ridden with on the street were on cruisers - NOT sportbikes (and I've met a lot of bad sportbike riders!)

In the majority of fatal motorcycle accedents reported on my local news, the bike is some early '80s UJM, it was late at night, and involved alcohol with one party or the other.  Maybe we should make riding drunk illegal..oh wait......

-z.

[Lowe119]

Actually, last year's tremendous increase in motorcycles deaths were claimed to be from Harleys. I read a few newspaper reports that said it is from the middle-agers who go buy a big Harley to ride with his friends and has no motorcycle experience.......  

If the government pays for indigent deaths, is that going to change if the guy lives longer? He is going to die sometime. Maybe it will be after he racks up $1,000,000 in hospital bills to cure his cancer. Or maybe it will only be $4,000 to clean up the mess on the highway.

As far as the government telling me how to take care of myself? That's BS. This is the only reason I liked the movie Demolition Man. It showed how extreme the gov't can get in their motherly role.

"A persons rights end when they infringe on another persons rights."  Me not wearing my seatbelt, not wearing a helmet, eating salty or fatty foods, or not exercising is no business of the govenments.

[Burt Munro]

This may be blunt - but it's a fact of life.

We all suffer the costs from motorcycle accidents.  Helmet or not.  Couple weeks or months in ICU can total hundreds of thousands of dollars and  drives up insurance costs for everybody.  Don't have insurance?  Hospitals are obligated to try and save your life even if you don't have a penny to your name.  Higher hospital costs and insurance costs all of us more.

Survive an accident and can't take care of yourself anymore?  SSI pays to help care for you and your family for the rest of your life.  Insurance coverage continues to foot the bill too for the life long medical treatments you will need.  Again, it costs all of us.

And it isn't much cheaper if you are 'lucky' enough to be killed.  SSI benefits go to your kids until they're 18 or longer if they go to college.

Really be interesting to see what costs more in the long run - the number of people who are killed and the Government helps support your family for years on end or the number who survive and the Government helps cover your care and feeding till you die.

[LMsports]

I think one of the main concerns over this elected officials statements goes deeper than the helmet issue itself. He basically refers to motorcyclists as out of control speed freaks and lumps all motorcyclists into that category. Those kind of pictures painted for the general population do nothing to help promote our sport or our further enjoyment of any aspect of it in any way. Send a letter Heather, and then send a copy to me to sign!

[StumpysWife]

Great discussion...

I have calmed down a bit.  I'll wait a day or two to write anything.  I think the author could have got his facts on this issue more in line.  

Helmets are not the enemy...we are.  However, because you don't believe in a law for them doesn't mean you should try to paint them as ineffective, as that clearly is not the case.  Adamini took a complete wrong turn on explaining this issue.  I watch you guys fall all day long at the track and get up mad...because your bike looks funnier than it did when you got there.  His argument is that if you weren't wearing a helmet, the results would be the same.  I just don't think so.  

Anyway, I think you guys get my drift...

I was really ticked off by the presentation of the argument, I guess.

Heather

[Baltobuell]

 The only reason a helmet law is good, is because kids wouldn't ware one if their peer didn't. Kids are stupid. Anybody that has lived into their 20's should understand anyway. Older cruiser dudes are as bad as teenagers though with the peer pressure. I agree with corner, it's about the $ and control of the masses but in reality it's mostly good, just not right.
 If they can't afford a funeral they were probably on welfare so we might save tax money if they ride without one.

[sbs126]

I read this thanks to stumpy's wife and forward it to a friend in the industry who in turn sent this email to Rep. Stephen Adimini

Mr. Adamini,
 
The following link was sent to me from a friend. http://miningjournal.net/news/story/128202004_new02-n1208.asp
 
Your quote: Added Adamini, "Show me the data that proves wearing a helmet will make a difference in high-speed motorcycle crashes and I'll support the current law." is stunning.
 
It seems to me that you are not at all qualified to make a decision on this law. Your level of ignorance is staggering. The thought of someone like you being part of the law making process scares the crap out of me. You don't need to know anything at all about motorcycling to know that if your head hits a solid object at speed you are going to be seriously injured. It's common sense. The list of people I know that have been saved by wearing helmets is way too long to list.
 
I really don't have a problem with the helmet law itself, just the rationale most people use to argue against it (see attached article for just a taste). In this over-litigious society we live in, I am a firm believer in personal responsibility. If you do something stupid that results in injury, you accept the responsibility and deal with it. But since many people cannot accept responsibility and like to sue and blame others for their actions, we end up with personal freedom robbing laws like this. Oh well, that's what we get for being idiots.
 
Quotes like "Face it, most people driving a motorcycle do so at high speeds. If you're going 80 miles per hour, you're going to be hurt whether or not you're wearing a helmet." just don't cut it when arguing the helmet law. When you get right down to it, it's just a matter of personal freedom. Do we offer that freedom to the people? Can we afford it? If you are truly serious about learning more about helmet safety, reply to this email and I will explain why I am in a position to enlighten you.


Thanks stumpy's wife!! I like to vent on politicians!!

[spyderchick]

Weird, I wear a helmet AWAYS, and I wear a seatbelt NEVER. We have a seatbelt law in WI, but not a helmet law. My rationale for the seatbelt thing is reading studies done with and without restraint. In high speed accidents you have about a 50/50 rate of survival, because sometimes being thrown from the vehicle can actually be beneficial.

My rational for wearing a helmet comes from knowing that it won't matter if I hit my head riding at 5 MPH, 55 MPH or 150 MPH, because blunt force trauma will do the same thing to your brain. I've heard more stories about an "around the block" accident causing head injury than racing accidents. This is my choice, I accept accountability for my actions.

I agree we all make our own decisions, and thus must take responsibility for them. Do law makers make laws for revenue? Certainly. Do they make them out of ignorance? Absolutely. That, my friends, is why it is so important you educate yourself before you vote, and then go out there and vote. Holding elected officials accountable for their comments and voting record is part of the process. And Heather, I agree, the PATRIOT act does more to restrict our civil liberties than any law on the books. However, it doesn't matter if the issue is big or small, the way toward change and the end to ignorance is getting involved. You guys write to your reps, and tell them the truth of the issue.

[spyderchick]

Related...Ike's thoughts about rider education are so important.

One thought Roger has always held is that helmets should be perceived as ultra cool. They have cool logos and graphix, look tight and mean, so why won't kids wear them? If they were sold as the hot accessory, not only would dealers make the money from the sale, but they would assure a return customer by perhaps saving that precious brain matter should the kid get stupid. Just a thought...

[SliderPhoto]

It should be the riders' choice.

I hate using raising insurance costs as a reason for ANYTHING. Lots of people slip on steps, we could make a law that all steps must have sticky tape. Whew, saved millions there. Wait, how many people died of the flu last year? That cost us how much? OK, everyone by law must receive a flu vaccination. It's just silly. Believe me, no one hates paying $1K/month for health insurance more than me, but to use it as a justification to take people's rights away is silly.

The Stat Rep is ignorant. He may be anti-helmet law which is fine, but to be giving the absolute wrong message is unbelievable. People SHOULD wear helmets. We shouldn't say that they are more dangerous. I'd suggest taking a picture of each of your scuffed helmets and sending it to him.

In fact, I'd be willing to create a Web page or even a Web site that showed photos of all the helmets that have saved lives or at least made a difference.

[Burt Munro]

On a shelf in my garage is the scuffed up helmet that I was wearing in a '77 street accident.  I've hung onto all these years as a reminder of stupidity.

I was wearing shorts and a t-shirt when I went down at about 60 mph.  A 4 x 8 piece of plywood flew off of a truck in front of me and knocked me down.  I didn't break anything but I had severe abrasoins over about 40% of my body. Some skin grafts - mostly just betadine showers 6 times a day for 2 months.  I keep the helmet as a reminder of what a helmet is designed to do and shorts and t-shirt are not.

I also keep the helmet as a reminder of my father. He raced a little dirt track in the 40's and still owned /rode 9 bikes when he died at age 79.

In the 70's my father was not a big proponent of full face helmets.  Helmets yes, full face - no.  His rationale was that the more weight you carried on your head, the greater the likelyhood that you would suffer a spinal injury.  Helmets of the 70's were no where near as light as today.  After seeing my helmet he changed his mind.  I had a huge gouge across the chin bar - right wear my naked chin would have been in a 1/2 helmet.  

Look where we are today.  Even kids riding BMX bicycles are wearing full face helmets.  Helmets can be cool with the right approach.

But it is your choice.  Just like choosing what you wear on your back and legs when you're on the street.