There’s no doubt that motorcycle helmets save lives, says the National Transportation Safety Board, which is recommending that all states adopt mandatory helmet laws.
Kansas repealed its helmet law in 1976 (riders under 18 are still required to wear a helmet), with many cyclists arguing that a helmet requirement violates their right to personal freedom.
But similar arguments were made against seat belts, which have saved thousands of lives and untold injuries over the years. The steadily rising numbers of motorcycle fatalities (more than double since 1997) and catastrophic head injuries should prompt the Legislature to take a look at tightening the state’s helmet law.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
74 Comments
One of the most effective demonstrations I ever saw for motorcycle safety was by a German when I lived in Germany. He had a window type frame that was filled with asphalt and gravel to simulate a road.
He asked each of the participants to stand on their tip toes and lean forward into asphalt, then drag their head into the gravel.
No one would do it. :)
He then had a plastic head dummy with some kind of skin on it and raked the dummy head across the two surfaces rather fast. The skin and part of the nose of the dummy was completely torn off.
The class got the message.
for once you are 100%correct kansas.
i’m sure many people will follow with their comments about loss of hearing, side vision, awareness of other traffic, when you wear a helmets when you drive your car i will wear a helmet on my bike, i crashed my bike and the cop praised me for not wearing a helmet, etc.
you just show the world how ignorant you actually are with your silly little reasons for not wearing a helmet while you ride your big bad motor bike.
Wearing a helmet ruins the experience of riding a motorcycle.
Some people enjoy being a pain in the ass, and you sound like one of them.
Only an idiot puts on a tank top, shorts and flip flops, no helmet riding a sportbike. I see them often.
At least the Harley riders got jeans on, most likely a pair of boots or heavier shoes.
Nothing wrong wearing a helmet.
The experience is riding the motorcycle not the headgear overly matters.
Smarter ones wear a helmet just in case. Many different styles of helmets too.
Car and truck tires throw rocks. Get knocked in the face or head by a rock without a helmet on would ruin the riding experience even more. Some people can’t take being slammed in the head or face by a bug!
I’m purchasing a Harley based Motor Trike this month. Conversation takes 10 days apparently.
Called a Road King/Trog
Click that, its the purple bike I want. The front fender and back rest makes a design difference that I like.
I also like that Red Heritage Softail. The Heritage metal rear seat bracket on the side, makes the look on that bike, to me. Its a Heritage with two rear wheels.
http://www.motortrike.com/mtShowRoom.aspx
With three wheels and wearing a helmet, I should be fine. Wider bike, it will have Harley sounds, should be more noticeable to cars.
Never have to put feet down is the key benefit at stop lights!
I was one who believed that wearing a helmet should be optional. In June, my wife and I had an accident on our motorcycle and totaled it. Neither one of us were wearing helmets. The good Lord was watching over us; neither one of us sustained a head injury. But that split second when I saw the pavement rushing at me changed my outlook.
I’ll never get on a bike without a helmet again.
Back when I was in high school I had a bike and I wore one. I am glad I did because I ran into a fire engine and did enough damage to my ankle and leg but none to my head.
I will say this- if folks don’t want to wear helmets- or seatbelts for that matter- I would not force them. What I would do however is stipulate the following rule:If you CHOOSE to be STUPID, you will NOT make the rest of us pay for your stupidity. From this day forward ALL medical insurance policies will EXCLUDE any driver, rider or passenger that refuses to wear a helmet or a seatbelt in a motor vehicle. And no public funds shall be paid for the medical care for such injuries. If the injured party does not have sufficient funds to pay for his medical care, it should be handled just like student loans and back taxes. No bankruptcy and all future wages and assets will be siezed to pay for it including your home- even if it is co titled (that is what happens when you marry stupid people) if you own one as well as Social Security and disability benefits if you survive and any life insurance if you die minus your burial expenses.
Oh, and if you do not wear a helmet or a seatbelt, even if the wreck is the other person’s fault, that person and their insurance would be excluded from having to pay 1/2 for your injuries or anything for pain and suffering.
Blah, Blah, Blah… how many of you on this blog even ride a motorcycle? If you don’t then keep your comments to your self! Let those who ride decide… this wouldn’t even be an issue except for the idiots who go out and buy a crotch rocket, get no training on how to ride it and think they know what they are doing… add to that wearing sandals, shorts and tank tops going down 135 at 100 mph… no wonder our insurance is skyrocketing!!!!Common sense goes a long way people! Wake up!!!
Maybe we should take the insurance issue one step further. Anybody too lazy to get a job doesn’t need government assistance, matter of fact we could just stop the welfare program all together. That would save us money. How about we exclude all fatal diseases from being covered by insurance, if it’s fatal there is no reason to spend the money is there? Wake up people it isn’t about helmets. If you want to wear one do it, if not don’t. This about the government trying to micromanage yet another portion of your life.
Maybe we should take the insurance issue one step further. Anybody too lazy to get a job doesn’t need government assistance, matter of fact we could just stop the welfare program all together. That would save us money. How about we exclude all fatal diseases from being covered by insurance, if it’s fatal there is no reason to spend the money is there? Wake up people it isn’t about helmets. If you want to wear one do it, if not don’t. This about the government trying to micromanage yet another portion of your life.
If you lay a bike down, it makes no difference if you’re wearing shorts or jeans– you are in trouble with either. I can show you the scars from my episode earlier this year. I can also show the scrapes on my helmet that are not on my head. People that ride cycles without a helmet are showing the world the worth they place on their head, and presumedly, its contents!
Just read a story about how bikers think loud pipes are a safety accessory on Harleys. Motorcyclists, by-an-large, are idiots. They dress up in stupid hero costumes, which seldom hide their huge guts. About the only place they ever go to is a bar and the only thing they are born to do is barbecue.After they smash their heads and spill their brains all over the road, they have a biker funeral procession, which winds up at a bar.
If you want a real adventure, spend you Harley payments on education for your children.
— Hates noise.
One of my first patients in nursing school was a young man who wasn’t wearing a helmet when his bike got hit by a motorist who “didn’t see him”. He was in a vegative state with a tube in his throat, stomach, and rectum. He would grimmace in pain when I cleaned his trach. His broken body was contorted and contracted because they never bothered to set his broken bones and he was forever curled up in a fetal position. The cost of his care to the taxpayers was astronomical, I’m sure. It runined his mother’s life to watch him like that..he wasn’t brain dead and on a vent so taking him off wasn’t an option, he was condemned to live that way until he died from natural causes. When someone makes a decision not to wear a helmet ot a seat belt and then gets into trouble because of it, it impacts more people than just them.Another way to look at it is from nature’s point of view, the stupid and careless often don’t survive, which helps keep the population down and the gene pool stronger.
“His broken body was contorted and contracted because they never bothered to set his broken bones and he was forever curled up in a fetal position.”
I’m sure a helmet would have made all the difference then.
Rog, they would have set his bones had he not suffered such massive brain damage…he could have had a normal life..probably with some arthritis later in life. There was no use to work on his body, he was never going to move on his own again.
But…but what will we do for organ donors???
People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged
People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged
People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged
People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged
Two issues here:
1) Are you safer with a helmet? Or for that matter, seat belts? Yes, no doubt. The smart call is to wear one.
2) Is it the State’s job to save me from myself? NO, NO, NO.
If insurance companies want to exclude medical coverage for those who do not wear a belt/helmet, or increast the rates, fine. That’s a contract issue between me and my insurance company.
But the State, and all you self-appointed nannies, can butt out.
What happened to “my body, my choice?” Selective principles, I suppose.
BTW – same goes for banning smoking. In my business, it’s my business. If you don’t like that I may permit smoking in my restaurant, you are free to go elsewhere. If enough go elsewhere, the market will send the message loud and clear.
“People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged”
And how about those who can’t stop hitting the “post” button?
Sorry . . . couldn’t resist.
Why do I have this feeling that the “request” will soon turn into a mandate, such as if the state wants federal highway money, such a law will be a condition therefor? The states will be forced into passing the law, or suffer the economic consequences for failing to so do.
From a prior existence, working in a funeral home, I feel all should wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle. Based upon this experience, I believe all should wear seat belts.
I’m getting to the age where the years of hard livin’ are starting to show their wear and tear. If bikers want to ride without helmets, excellent! I will soon be in need of several replacement parts. Helmetless riders, please be sure to be _especially_ stupid between the ages of 18 and 25. I don’t want some old, worn-out liver.
Thanks!
Rob, Ha! Doctors don’t call them “donor cycles” for nothing!
VT – You’re exactly right.
And yes, people “should” wear helmets or seat belts. But that isn’t the issue, is it? It’s whether the State should MANDATE same.
How many mommies do you want?
If you think this is a good thing, let’s take this to it’s logical conclusion.That cheesburger you’re eating, it’s bad for you, too. Ban it. In fact, there’s whole new career opportunities for food police. We can lock you up until you see the virtues of tofu. It’s for your own good, after all.And reading in low light – bad. Ban that.
Pocketknife? You might cut yourself. Ban it.
Glass in your house? You might break it, and cut yourself. It’s gotta go. Mandated plexiglass for all.And let’s not get started with sports – most of them are just injuries waiting to happen. No more bike riding, skateboarding, sky diving, scuba, football, basketball, etc. Forget it. Just take up knitting . . . uh, wait, those needles are potentially dangerous. You’ll have to knit with your fingers.
Enjoy your new life.
That sounds more like an “reducto ad absurdem ” argument.
I got a chuckle out of a Highway Patrol poster in New Mexico a few years back… It said, in big bold letters: 31% of Traffic Fatalities last year were not wearing seat belts!!
I looked at that and thought: Hmmm that means 69% WERE wearing seat belts… I think I wont wear mine… odds are better!!
I mentioned that to a HP friend of mine… The next year they had a different poster campaign!!
LOL
“What happened to “my body, my choice?” Selective principles, I suppose.”
Does that apply to abortion too?
Motorcycle helmets do increase the odds of surviving a motorcycle wreck. Should the law require they be worn? I don’t know.
People urging new laws often argue that “if just one life is saved it is worth it.” Requiring the use of helmets, not only on motorcycles, but also in all cars would save many lives each year. Helmets do greatly increase the chances of surviving an auto accident; that is why NASCAR and all other professional racing organizations require drivers wear them. However, there is no public outcry that the Government requires all car drivers to wear helmets.
Rather than debating whether helmets should be required, we need to discuss where the line is in governing safety. How far is too far? Why stop at helmets on motorcycles? Leathers, boots, and gloves also save lives and taxpayer medical spending. In cars why stop at requiring seatbelts? Requiring helmets in cars would also save a lot of lives and taxpayer money.
I ride a motorcycle and always wear a helmet. I get nervous though, when the government gets in the business of telling people how to live, since there really are no boundaries, yet.
gster:
“reducto ad absurdem”
Yes, but it’s not as “absurd” as you might think.
We’ve already started with the food, i.e. trans-fat bans. Don’t tell me how bad trans-fat is, again, that isn’t the point. The point is that it is not the State’s business to be my nanny and dictate what I do in my own life.
How many mommies do you want? What will be the next target of the do-gooders? What else of your life will be sacrificed “for your own good,” or worse, “for the children.”
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
– C.S. Lewis
GMC_ If given the chance, and the power, would you want to reverse the examples you cite? IE, are they all bad or wrong?
Go ahead and don’t wear a helmet.
But if you’re in an accident, don’t expect taxpayer-dollars to subsidize the ambulance to come pick up your sorry ass. If you’re disabled for life due to your disregard for your own safety, forget about public benefits subsidizing your disability.
Go out and enjoy the helmet-less motorcycle experience but if you do understand that you’re literally taking your life into your own hands. Enjoy the experience of helmet-less recovery from your injuries! Why should I (through my tax dollars) be more interested in your well-being than you are?
Apologies in advance to all the responsible motorcycle riders out there, but we’ve all seen them: kids on “road rockets” tearing past us at twice the legal speed limit wearing of course no helmet.
I think this is a good thing. We need fresh young organs for dying people and since these people aren’t using their organs for anything worthwhile, their reckless behavior yields a steady supply.
Darwin in action. Hooray for “donor-cycles.”
People who refuse to wear helmets are doing us all a favor in the long run by helping to eliminate the “stupid” gene from the pool. Please, feel free to leave the helmet at home!
Another way to look at it is from nature’s point of view, the stupid and careless often don’t survive, which helps keep the population down and the gene pool stronger.
Posted by: Mary Caruso | September 13, 2007 at 08:26 AM
Mary, that’s a pretty cold attitude. Using your logic, I suppose we could say the same for, oh, a kid who accidently shoots and kills himself. Just mother nature’s way of cleaning the gene pool.I mean, If you’re dumb enough to shoot your silly self…
before comparing seatbelts to helmets and getting on the ‘we just want you safe’ soapbox, consider who backs the majority of helmet laws. companies that make helmets. seatbelts were not rallied for by the car companies. amazingly, the strongest backers of helmet laws are companies which stand to profit from them.i ride. i choose to wear a helmet. i also choose to wear leathers, boots and gloves. it is my responsibility to keep myself as safe as possible, not someone elses to regulate how i dress when i am riding.and yes, i laugh at the riders who wear flipflops shorts and tanktops and i hope they enjoy their road rash.
XXX
There is a certain truth, however, don’t you think?
I mean, if you’re too stupid to understand that Preparation H is not to be taken internally, do we really want you procreating?
Accidents: Nature’s way of weeding out the gene pool.
GMC,I’m a FIRM believer in what you’re saying. Some people are just too f*cking stupid to allow to reproduce. Nature has a way of correcting mistakes.
Witness the Darwin Awards.
The reality is do you want the government micromanaging your life regarding your own personal safety, sadly judging from the response on the blog the answer is yes. Anybody who has ever rode a motorcycle will tell that in many situations a helmet wont save you(collisions at highway speed) so its more of an illusion of safely than a real safety. And their are many problems with helmets on a long ride they can be both hot and cause fatigue with can cause accidents and on the highway really dont help. Helmets cut down on your peripheral vision which also can cause accidents unless you wear a brain bucket type helmet which most are a novelty type worn just to get around helmet laws no real safety.
“People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged”
And how about those who can’t stop hitting the “post” button?
Sorry . . . couldn’t resist.
“People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged”
And how about those who can’t stop hitting the “post” button?
Sorry . . . couldn’t resist.
“People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged”
And how about those who can’t stop hitting the “post” button?
Sorry . . . couldn’t resist.
“People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged”
And how about those who can’t stop hitting the “post” button?
Sorry . . . couldn’t resist.
“People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged”
And how about those who can’t stop hitting the “post” button?
Sorry . . . couldn’t resist.
“People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged”
And how about those who can’t stop hitting the “post” button?
Sorry . . . couldn’t resist.
“People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged”
And how about those who can’t stop hitting the “post” button?
Sorry . . . couldn’t resist.
“People who refuse to wear helmets are already brain damaged”
And how about those who can’t stop hitting the “post” button?
Sorry . . . couldn’t resist.
Gmc you need to go in the penalty box for 6 posts. This means that until Chas says ‘good nite’ 6 times you will not be allowed to post again.
ksgm:
WooHoo! I’ve been trolled. I consider this a prize!!
OK, not really, but. . . this is a first for me. I was at lunch, not at the computer, so whoever was doing the cute posting will have to do the apologizing as well. I presume that was “Ronnie,” so I’ll leave it to him/her to do the apologizing.
And there is evidence of same in the posting and nic itself; look, you’ll figure it out.
And no, “Ronnie” I will not respond in kind.
And BTW – Chas saying good night/goodbye 6 times should only take 10 minutes or so, it’ll be a short wait!
Sorry, Chas, couldn’t resist.
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
GIVE ME A BREAK. IF I WANT TO WEAR A HELMET, I DONT NEED ANY OF YOU PEOPLE TO TELL ME TO WEAR ONE.ONCE AGAINBLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
The next year they had a different poster campaign!!
LOL
Posted by: Chas.
It’s good we have you to make sure everything is done right.
Anybody who has ever rode a motorcycle will tell that in many situations a helmet wont save you(collisions at highway speed) so its more of an illusion of safely than a real safety.
YOU’RE AN IDIOT.
And their are many problems with helmets on a long ride they can be both hot and cause fatigue with can cause accidents and on the highway really dont help.
MOMMY MY HELMET MAKES MY HEAD FEEL HOT.
Helmets cut down on your peripheral vision
NEWS FLASH–YOUR HEAD ROTATES ON YOUR CHICKEN NECK.
which also can cause accidents unless you wear a brain bucket type helmet which most are a novelty type worn just to get around helmet laws no real safety.
Posted by: Tom Paine
GO RIDE YOUR BIKE AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS WITHOUT A HELMET, NOBODY CARES IF YOUR BRAINS ARE A BLOODY STREAK ON THE PAVEMENT.
Realistically, you should be responsible for your own actions, the consequences is your choice.I have ridden motorcycles for about 34 years and I have always worn helmet and eye protection.That is my choice, I have never had an accident while riding alto I have come close to it.It is not the vehicle, the equipment or technique that you use, regardless the type of transportation.
The truth of when an accident occurs is when you do not have enough awareness and the lack of or the opposite of having too much confidence is the real killer, no matter what.I have drawn my conclusions of this on this fact.
I have had a friend and co-worker killed at the airport driving an aircraft tug while servicing commercial airlines restrooms.It was his last night working there before going to college, a wonderful, bright young man of 19 years old.As he was pulling up behind the wing of a DC-10 to come up along side the fuselage he had somehow lost his steering, the tug straighten itself out and he went under the belly of the aircraft, sadly there was only a 3 inch space, it crush his head.I have wonder for a very long time how it would have been like, what scenarios goes thru a person consciousness when the results ends in death.I have realized that it is the same as if you were using a knife to cut meat and you slip and cut yourself quickly, deep enough to warrant going to the ER to get stitches.It is the decisions that you make at planning ahead and sometimes the instance of that moment that decides whether or not you are going to have an accident.
Realistically, you can’t think faster then the laws of physics, by the time that you realize your mistake it has become past events.Better Safe then Sorry.
Enough of the “nanny state”! Wearing a helmet protects you at speeds UP TO 13 MPH. These are Federal standards. Those uninformed think a helmet will protect the rider in all conditions. It certainly will not. Lets deal in facts, not emotions and personal bias.
I know if I laid my bike down and was sliding towards a curb at 35 MPH, I damm sure would rather have a helmet on than not!
I believe that wearing a helmet saves lives. So much so that I will not put up with members of my family not wearing a helmet. I have seen the effects of both wearing, and not wearing a helmet. I will take the effects of wearing a helmet. In my view, not wearing a helmet is just plain dumb. But, I disagree with the government telling anybody that they must wear a helmet. We don;t need any more nanny state than we already have
I’m torn on the issue. Like driving a car, driving a motorcycle isn’t a right….you have to earn it by following the rules of the road. And if you want to ride, you have to wear a helmet or seatbelt. Pretty simple.
But I also agree with the nanny state statements…I am sick of the government telling me what I can and cannot do with my own body.
I don’t advocate throwing a quadriplegic out on the streets either. even if it was his own fault.
Years ago, I worked with a guy who’s brother had a bike wreck. A car pulled out in front of him, he went over the hood, and hit his head on the pavement. He wasn’t wearing a helmet. He was in a coma for months but finally regained consciousness. The brain damage was mostly control issues. He was like a stroke victim, but his mind was still pretty good, just lots of physical issues. His medical bills were astronomical and he’ll spend the rest of his life drawing disability and a small annuity from the insurance settlement.
Yes, he wasn’t wearing a helmet, but the accident wasn’t his fault. I don’t see where he should be thrown out in the street.
Sometimes bad things happen to good people.
“XXX” –
The accident wasn’t the guy’s fault, but by not wearing a helmet the head injury was.
Helmet and seat belt and child seat laws are not “the nanny state” interferring with people’s freedoms, they’re an effort to reduce the cost to taxpayers who fund disability benefits, ambulances, and trauma centers. It’s part of the social contract.
A pain in the ass can justify his judgement that you need to follow his rules and your life somehow belongs to him, at least the part about making decisions.
Freedom isn’t free, it comes with taking risks and some are built to take on risks while others are to scared to come out from under the bed.
Don’t try to blame us for the fact that you are a coward, you are and that is your problem whether or not you’re willing to admit it or not.
You want to make everybody as chicken livered as you are and you can probably find plenty of cowards to keep you company, but Bikers is the wrong place to look, so FO…
Ed -
Are you off your meds again?
Lay down, and take the pretty pills . . . . it’ll be all better soon.
The Zionist punk speaks…..oh my
GMC — I got trolled earlier on the Open Thread… guess they dont realize that it is obvious, when the blue underlined name doesnt show up… LOL…. Now if we could figure out some way to stop that crap…
I’ve posted this in the article comments, but I’ll say it again here: This is a long argument, both sides are adament, and each have valid concerns. How about a compromise? Just like we restrict the driving of new (car) drivers, impose a mandatory helmet law for those under 18, and those with less than 3 yrs motorcycle experience? Those who have had the endorsement for over 3 yrs get a notation on their license, and a special sticker for their tag, so cops can tell if that person is “authorized” to ride without a helmet? Unlicensed riders (a considerable portion of the accidents) would also be ticketed for no helmet.
“if you’re too stupid to understand that Preparation H is not to be taken internally, do we really want you procreating?”
That reminds of a true story..a nurse I knew had a patient who’s doctor had ordered a suppository for him. She asked him if he knew what to do with it and did he need help? He replied yes, he knew what to do and he didn’t need help…after a while she asked him how it went, and he replied “OK, but it was a little hard to swallow with that foil wrapped around it!”
Mary -
So – did everything come out all right? (pun intended!)
I hope so! I’m sure he had to do it over again, and this time the right way!
There is only one person here that has the right to decide about whether or not I wear a helmet, and it is not you!
Don’t believe the feds. Every year, they come out with the most startling statistics to have the public go into a panic. They want to pit citizens against motorcycle riders, and safety against rights. The fact is we are all citizens, highest office in the land, and they are public servants who intend to govern.
Have you ever noticed, bureaucrats avoid relevant statistics? They “cherry pick” data, then try to lead you to believe their solution is urgently needed. They use public opinion to divide us. They do this every year, and sometimes the folks in other states believe them.
This year, they say there are more motorcycle fatalities, they leave out all relevant data, then they come up with their solution, which is always to force helmets onto motorcycle riders rather than let them choose.
The only relevant stat I have ever heard is one that quantifies how many motorcycle fatalities are attributed to head injuries. One would think the US DOT would know the answer to this. If they know, they are not saying.
They won’t even hint whether it is 1% or 100%. They certainly make it seem high.
According to a study quoted by an emergency room physician in 1993, the answer was 4%. So, if 10% of a states motor vehicle accident fatalities are motorcycles, a motorcycle helmet discussion is only 0.4% relevance.
Regretfully, I do not have any stats about how many head injuries are from other motor vehicle accidents, because the government will not provide that data either. I suspect that even with seat belt laws, it is a higher number than motorcycle accidents, because with 10 times as many deaths, you motorists have to be dying of some kind of injuries. Right?
I do know the number one reason for Traumatic Brain Injury, according to CDC data, is falls, and the second highest is motor vehicle accidents.
I’m figuring there are probably 10 times as many head injuries for other motorists than there are for motorcyclists, but I am not going to jump on any band wagon to wish them on you, so why do you wish them on me? It makes no sense!
I realize that the figure of 4% was from a long time ago. I am being as honest as I can, and recognize you are all intelligent. The fact is that the NHTSA, DOT, NTSB…nobody is going to tell us the correct data unless we demand “truth in statistics”. These bureaucrats from Washington DC think you’re ignorant and will form the opinions they want you to, based on the data they spoon-feed you. We citizens need to demand relevant rather than cherry picked data.
The biggest reason for a spike in motor vehicle fatalities is cell phones. This has spiked motorcycle fatalities, because we are being run into, run over, and being cut off by people not paying attention while they are on the phone.
Tell the bureaucrats you are not ignorant, you are onto them, and their fear tactics, and their cherry picking of stats, and failure to disclose relevant stats.
Please write NTSB Chairman Mark Rosenker at mark.rosenker@ntsb.gov and tell him he has underestimated you and demand relevant stats including exactly how many motorcycle fatalities are primarily caused by head injury, and of those how many were wearing helmets and how many were not.
Everyone who loves freedom, please join with us in saying yes to citizens and no to government bureaucrats. Say yes to states rights and no to federalization. The rights you save may very well be your own!
The decision to wear a helmet is up to the individual.
As for me, I will do the minimum requirement and yearn to ride free of helmets from coast to coast.
—–Original Message—–From: Bruce Arnold [mailto:Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 2:04 PMTo: Mark Rosenker (mark.rosenker@ntsb.gov)Cc: ‘debbie.hersman@ntsb.gov’; ‘williat@ntsb.gov’; ‘bridget.serchak@ntsb.gov’; ‘lopatt@ntsb.gov’; ‘hollowk@ntsb.gov’Subject: NTSB Motorcycle Safety Recommendations Miss The Mark By 84 Percent
Mark Rosenker (mark.rosenker@ntsb.gov)Chairman
National Transportation Safety Board
429 L’Enfant Plaza
Washington, D.C. 20024
202-314-6000
Mr. Rosenker:
The universal helmet law mandate you proposed this week fails to address the causes of approximately 84 percent of all motorcycle fatalities. Not only do we have the NTSB’s admitted issues with understated motorcycle registrations and vehicle miles travelled (VMT) in the demoninators of key NHTSA statistics, you made even greater and more reprehensible misrepresentations by overstating the numerator:
In your Tuesday morning meeting, you and your fellow NTSB members and staff implied that as many as 4,810 motorcycle accident fatalities in 2006 could have been avoided by the enactment of universal motorcycle helmet laws. This was a gross and I suspect intentional overstatement. In 2005, 4,553 motorcyclists died on our highways … 2,521 (55%) of them were wearing helmets AND DIED ANYWAY … and of the 2,032 remaining, quoting NHTSA, only “… 728 more [lives] could have been saved if all motorcyclists had worn helmets.” Applying those same percentages to the 2006 death toll of 4,810, the maximum number of lives that MIGHT have been saved by helmet laws is only 769, not even 16 percent of the 4,810 you implied. In other words, Mr. Rosenker:
IF THE NTSB MOTORCYCLE SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS RELEASED ON TUESDAY HAD BEEN IN EFFECT NATIONWIDE FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR OF 2006, ONLY 769 LIVES MIGHT HAVE BEEN SAVED, WHILE EIGHTY-FOUR PERCENT (84%) OF THE 4,810 MOTORCYCLISTS WHO DIED ON OUR ROADWAYS WOULD PROBABLY HAVE DIED ANYWAY.
At the same time, as NTSB Chairman you either knew or should have known that (a) we have 236 million cellphone subscribers on our roadways, (b) 73% of them are talking while they are driving, (c) cellphone conversations impair their driving skills as much if they were intoxicated with alcohol, consequently (d) they are four times more likely to cause or be involved in an accident than motorists who responsibly shut up and steer, and resultantly (e) assuming reports of the Oklahoma Highway Safety Office are a reliable measure, roughly ONE IN FOUR ACCIDENTS in 2006 occurred when a driver was talking on the phone. So barring evidence to the contrary, as NTSB Chairman you either knew or should have known that it would be reasonable to assume that cellphone conversation-impaired motorists could have been responsible for 25 percent (or more) of the 2,575,000 traffic injuries and 42,642 traffic fatalities reported by NHTSA for 2006.
And rather than using the taxpayer-provided resources of your bureacratic office to pursue restrictions on the use of cell phones while driving, which might have saved 10,660 lives (25% of 42,642 fatalities) last year, you chose instead to go on what the press calls a mandatory helmet law “crusade”, which in comparison might have saved at best only 769 lives. Had you made the responsible choice, Mr. Rosenker, our nation could be saving almost 15 TIMES AS MANY LIVES by restricting the use of cellphones by drivers rather than requiring helmets for riders.
I am no lawyer, but given these facts and pursuant to the provisions of United States Code Title 49, Chapter 11, Subchapter II, Paragraph (c) as I understand them…
***
(c) TERMS OF OFFICE AND REMOVAL.–The term of office of each member is 5 years. An individual appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the expiration of the term for which the predecessor of that individual was appointed, is appointed for the remainder of that term. When the term of office of a member ends, the member may continue to serve until a successor is appointed and qualified. The President may remove a member for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.
http://ntsb.gov/alj/NTSB_statute.htm
***
…I believe that immediate steps should be taken to see that you are removed from office on the grounds of clearly demonstrated inefficiency, neglect of duty, and malfeasance.
In distributing this communication, I am calling on all American motorcyclists, all motorcycle clubs and riding groups, and all state and national motorcyclists’ rights organizations to call, write and email the White House and their United States Senators and Representatives to petition for and demand your resignation or termination as Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board.
Speaking strictly for myself and no other entities or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray’s Biker Forum
Premier Member, Iron Butt Association
Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation
Member and Elite Legislative Supporter, American Motorcyclist Association
I would like to see BOTH… the 769 motorcycle riders are worth saving too!!
If you can’t see and understaand that you are far safer riding WITH a helmet, you really should stay with the Schwinns!
THIS ISSUE HERE IS THAT HELMETS ARE NOT THE ISSUE HERE:
—–Original Message—–From: Bruce Arnold [mailto:Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 12:45 PMTo: J. Richard Capka (rick.capka@fhwa.dot.gov)Cc: George W. Bush (president@whitehouse.gov); Nancy Pelosi (americanvoices@mail.house.gov); Mary Peters (mary.peters@dot.gov); Nicole Nason (NHTSA.custservice@dot.gov); Mark Rosenker (mark.rosenker@ntsb.gov); David Winter (david.winter@fhwa.dot.gov)Subject: Open Letter to FHWA Administrator J. Richard Capka
5 October 2007
J. Richard Capka (rick.capka@fhwa.dot.gov)AdministratorFederal Highway Administration
Bldg. SFC Room E87-314
1200 New Jersey Ave. SEWashington, DC 20590202-366-0650 (tel)202-366-3244 (fax)
Re: Motorcycle Travel Symposium, NTSB Conference Facility – L’Enfant Plaza, 10-12 October 2007
Mr. Capka:
The tentative agenda for next week’s Motorcycle Travel Symposium clearly states that “better estimates of motorcycle travel are needed”…
http://tinyurl.com/ywlqa7
…and for that concession by its sponsors, I applaud the Federal Highway Administration (”FHWA”) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (”NHTSA”). And unless and until we have more reliable reporting of statistics such as motorcycle registrations, motorcycle vehicle miles traveled (”VMT”), injuries and fatalities from motorcycle crashes and the actual causes thereof, I ask you and your symposium participants to join me in demanding that NHTSA and its lobbying ally, the National Transportation Safety Board (”NTSB”), cease and desist from spinning statistics that they know are flawed in support of misguided, Haddonistic safety agendas:
http://tinyurl.com/2ttq9v
For evidence of same, Mr. Capka, we need look no further than your 30 January 2007 joint memorandum with NHTSA Administrator Nicole Nason…
http://tinyurl.com/2ysogq
…wherein you state “Since fatality rates based on VMT are the best measure of exposure risk for motor vehicle crashes, it is critical that FHWA receive accurate, complete, and timely VMT data to determine accurate crash rates and to monitor trends…” only to follow up a few lines later with the blatant admission that “…the reporting of motorcycle VMT data in HPMS is optional and consequently, many States choose not to report it.” Despite that knowledge, in their meeting of 11 September 2007–nine months later–the NTSB used VMT-based measures to support their “band-aid on a bullet wound” motorcycle safety recommendations…
http://tinyurl.com/ytxee7
…specifically quoting NHTSA statistics suggesting that in 2006 motorcycles accounted for over 10% of all traffic fatalities but less than [0.4%|0.34%|0.034% ... they couldn't seem to decide] of total vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Obviously, any computation based on a meaningless statistic is itself a meaningless statistic. The NTSB knew this … their Dr. Sweeney even warned them about it … but Chairman Mark Rosenker ignored her comments.
In that same session, the NTSB quoted NHTSA statistics claiming that in 2006 motorcycles represented only 2% of all registered vehicles but over 10% of all fatalities. And again, they knew or should have known that statement may be false. As Dr. Sweeney acknowledged, the registered motorcycle statistics upon which that comparison is based may be seriously understated. In other words, for all we know at this point, the number of motorcyclist fatalities as a percentage of the number of motorcycles on the road may have actually DECREASED over the past ten years!
DESPITE THAT KNOWLEDGE, and as part of what I suspect may be collusion between the NTSB and NHTSA to circumvent the state lobbying restrictions imposed on the latter by TEA-21 (the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century)…
http://tinyurl.com/2l4evp
…on 3 October 2007 the NTSB included the following paragraph in a series of lobbying letters released to our state governments:
“The Safety Board is concerned about motorcycle safety and the growing number of riders who have been killed or injured in motorcycle crashes. Since 1997, the number of motorcycle fatalities has increased 127 percent, an increase that far exceeds that of any other form of transportation. In addition, the number of motorcycle fatalities in any recent year has been more than double the number of deaths that same year from accidents in aviation, rail, marine, and pipeline combined. In 2006, for example, 4,810 motorcyclists died in crashes, and motorcycle fatalities accounted for more than 10 percent of all motor vehicle crash fatalities.[1] The following figure clearly shows the rising numbers. Although rising motorcycle use may partly explain this trend, increases in fatalities have outpaced increases in activity measures such as motorcycle registrations and vehicle miles traveled.”
http://tinyurl.com/25h3cq
THIS PARAGRAPH IS A MASTERPIECE OF POLITICAL SPIN. They say the best lies are half truth, Mr. Capka, and that certainly applies here:
1. Yes, motorcycle fatalities may have increased 127 percent since their historic low of 2,116 in 1997…
http://tinyurl.com/2fdhjv
…but why not compare them to their historic high of 5,144 in 1980? That is an equally rational comparison which reflects a DECREASE in motorcycle fatalities.
2. So what if “…the number of motorcycle fatalities in any recent year has been more than double the number of deaths that same year from accidents in aviation, rail, marine, and pipeline combined”? According to HospitalInfection.org, “Every year in this country, two million patients contract infections in hospitals, and an estimated 103,000 die as a result, as many deaths as from AIDS, breast cancer, and auto accidents combined.”
http://tinyurl.com/36bzok
In other words, last year 21.4 times as many people died from going to the hospital as died from riding a motorcycle. And how relevant is that? At least as relevant as the NTSB planes, trains and pipelines comparison. Even more relevant is this comparison:
“…as NTSB Chairman, you either knew or should have known that (a) we have 236 million cellphone subscribers on our roadways, (b) 73% of them are talking while they are driving, (c) cellphone conversations impair their driving skills as much if they were intoxicated with alcohol, consequently (d) they are four times more likely to cause or be involved in an accident than motorists who responsibly shut up and steer, and resultantly (e) assuming reports of the Oklahoma Highway Safety Office are a reliable measure, roughly ONE IN FOUR ACCIDENTS in 2006 occurred when a driver was talking on the phone. So barring evidence to the contrary, as NTSB Chairman you either knew or should have known that it would be reasonable to assume that cellphone conversation-impaired motorists could have been responsible for 25 percent (or more) of the 2,575,000 traffic injuries and 42,642 traffic fatalities reported by NHTSA for 2006…. And rather than using the taxpayer-provided resources of your bureaucratic office to pursue restrictions on the use of cell phones while driving, which might have saved 10,660 lives (25% of 42,642 fatalities) last year, you chose instead to go on what the press calls a mandatory helmet law “crusade”, which in comparison might have saved at best only [747] lives. Had you made the responsible choice, Mr. Rosenker, our nation could be saving almost 15 TIMES AS MANY LIVES by restricting the use of cellphones by drivers rather than requiring helmets for riders.”
http://tinyurl.com/ytxee7
3. Yes, last year there may have been 4,810 motorcycle fatalities that accounted for more than ten percent of all traffic deaths, but that in no way supports the NHTSA/NTSB lobbying assertion that helmet laws will solve the problem. By NHTSA’s own numbers…
http://tinyurl.com/ynsrms
…of the 4,810 motorcycle fatalities in 2006, 2,792 (58%) were helmeted, and 2,018 (42%) were not helmeted. 58% (2,792) were wearing helmets and DIED ANYWAY. For the remaining 2,018, apply the 37% factor supplied by the NTSB here…
http://tinyurl.com/2xjqc6
…and the actual number of lives that might have been saved if ALL riders had been helmeted in ALL 50 states ALL year is only 747. This is not to say that 747 deaths–16% of the total–are not important. Rather it is to emphasize that the NHTSA/NTSB helmet law lobby does nothing at all to address 84% of motorcycle fatalities!
4. Their paragraph concludes with “…increases in fatalities have outpaced increases in activity measures such as motorcycle registrations and vehicle miles traveled.” And as I explained above, that is a specious claim.
AND THE SPIN DOESN’T STOP THERE, MR. CAPKA. Let’s take a look at this recent NHTSA report:
DOT HS 810 834 September 2007 (Fatal Two-Vehicle Motorcycle Crashes)http://tinyurl.com/273y2f
One of the more obvious findings of this report was that “the role of the motorcycle was recorded as the striking vehicle” in most cases. Of course! That is what happens when a negligent, care-less, distracted or cellphone conversation-impaired motorist turns left or pulls out in front of a motorcyclist. And of course, “more than 90 percent of the two-vehicle motorcycle crashes involving passenger vehicles occurred on non-interstate roadways”. Roads without median barriers make it easier for irresponsible drivers to violate a motorcyclist’s right-of-way!
What wasn’t so obvious was the implication of this conclusion: “For the passenger vehicle drivers involved in [fatal] two-vehicle motorcycle crashes, 35 percent of the driver-related factor was failure to yield right-of-way compared to only 4 percent for motorcycle operators.”
One might easily interpret that to mean that the automobile driver was at fault in these accidents only 35 percent of the time, which would conversely mean that “it was the biker’s fault” 65 percent of the time. But that is not the truth.
The truth can be found, well obfuscated, in Table 22. The obfuscation begins with the selection of a data presentation format in which the “…sums of the numbers and percents are greater than the total drivers as each driver may be coded with more than one factor.” The obfuscation is perfected by using a doubletalk category breakdown in which driver offenses like making improper turns, failure to keep in proper lane, failure to obey traffic signs or signals, and even driving on the wrong side of road are reported separately and thereby partially or entirely EXCLUDED FROM THE 35 PERCENT RIGHT-OF-WAY VIOLATION STATISTIC. The truth can be found by applying this formula: “1 – ((711 + 26) / 1792) = 0.588727679″. Logic precludes any double counting in the “None reported” or “Unknown” categories, and for all other categories, the automobile driver either caused or contributed to the death of the motorcyclist. So, the sad but undeniable truth is this:
AUTOMOBILE DRIVERS WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR EITHER CAUSING OR CONTRIBUTING TO THE DEATHS OF AT LEAST 58.87% OF ALL MOTORCYCLISTS KILLED IN TW0-VEHICLE CRASHES IN 2005.
Sadder still is what can be gleaned by combining this discovery with the not-so-obvious revelation from Table 21 that although motorists were at fault almost 60% of the time, over 70% of the time they walked away with no punishment, no penalty, no fine, and not even so much as a traffic ticket. And saddest of all is the extent to which NHTSA went to effectively bury these smoking guns in the framework of this presentation.
MY POINT HERE, MR. CAPKA, is essentially the same point I tried to convey to NTSB Member Deborah Hersman over a year ago, in my position paper of 2 September 2006:
http://tinyurl.com/2×88so
My point here is to try to get you, the FHWA, NHTSA, the NTSB, your symposium participants, the media, all motorcyclists and the public to realize that the issue here is that helmets are not the issue here. As does the American Motorcyclist Association (”AMA”), I support the voluntary use of helmets:
http://tinyurl.com/4heqs
Legally requiring their use by motorcyclists only, however, is both absolutely discriminatory and relatively ineffective. Focusing on crash survival instead of crash prevention punishes victims for the crime, and makes no more sense than trying to reduce the murder rate by mandating Kevlar vests for the innocent rather than prison or worse for the guilty. As I wrote last year, “Helmets and other defensive measures CANNOT prevent or lower the probability of motorcycle accidents. Proactive abatement of negligent, distracted, impaired and inattentive motorists CAN.”
THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT HELMETS ARE NOT THE ISSUE HERE, MR. CAPKA. And if NHTSA and the NTSB do not stop using bad numbers to promote bad public policy through illegal lobbying efforts, be on notice that there are many concerned and dedicated American motorcyclists who will not rest until the heads of those agencies are dethroned, and the taxpayer funding for those agencies is diminished.
Speaking strictly for myself and no other individuals or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray’s Biker Forum
Premier Member, Iron Butt Association
Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation
2007 Chairman’s Circle, American Motorcyclist Association