Motorcycle Forum banner

The CDC is supporting efforts for a national helmet law

40K views 188 replies 33 participants last post by  ABQ-Jammer 
#1 ·
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recently been supporting efforts for a mandatory national helmet law in the US. Following questions by US Representative Tim Walberg, the American Motorcyclist Association AMA) has also officially requested an explanation from the CDC.

AMA Vice President for Government Relations Wayne Allard has sent a letter to CDC Director Tom Frieden asking for clarification concerning a task force meeting of a CDC advisory group last month.

"Is it the goal or strategy of the CDC to reduce the use of motorcycles - a legal mode of transportation - by recommending and pursuing a federal helmet law? With the safety of motorcyclists the utmost priority of the AMA, we are willing to work with all stakeholders, including the CDC, to promote rider education and training, as well as motorist awareness programs. These are effective strategies to reduce motorcycle crashes from ever occurring. Whereas, universal motorcycle helmet laws do nothing to prevent crashes," Allard wrote to the CDC.

The AMA strongly supports helmet use, but believes that riders, and not the government, should make the choice to wear them. The AMA is questioning the authority of the CDC over traffic safety issues.

[AMA]
 
See less See more
#146 ·
I still find it rather amusing that you fob off my suggestion (loaded with sarcasm, sorry, perhaps I shouldn't have added that) that proper training of all road users would have an impact on what you deem to be an inconvenience that no one should suffer. Wearing a helmet isn't going to do a single thing to reduce those inconveniences. At all. If you wreck with a helmet or wreck without a helmet, everyone on the road is going to be inconvenienced. The fraction of those inconveniences attributable to motorcycle wrecks where a helmeted rider dies is small. Ergo my suggestion about proper training of all motorists. I am not so naïve as to believe that accidents would suddenly end if everyone received better training and was required to demonstrate better ability. But it stands to reason the roads would be safer.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to observe that a sizeable fraction of motorists aren't well trained at all. Take note of the lack of lane discipline or the proper use of accel/decal ramps at interchanges. Unqualified motorists abound. Getting rid of them, or at least trying to, by requiring more stringent training is a much better means of reducing the number of inconveniences motorists in general run across.


We, as motorcyclists, have a vested interest in staying alive. I'll continue to wear my helmet and go out and drill myself on stopping and swerving at the beginning of each riding season. I know there are riders who don't take safety seriously. If they want to ride helmet free, let 'em. I really don't think your inconvenience for the rest of us argument holds much, if any water.

Less that 5000 fatalities on MC in 2012. 112,000 motorcycles were involved in crashes that year. Compare that to the more than 33,000 total crash fatalities in the same year. 5,615,000 total crashes for 2012.

ALL crashes inconvenience other road users. Sure, fatals tend to take longer to investigate. I can only think of a few times a MC crash has inconvenienced me personally, but I've been held up countless times due to car crashes. Considering the total number of crashes it would seem driver improvement would bear greater positive effect than mandatory helmet use.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motorcycle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811856.pdf

http://www.iii.org/issue-update/motorcycle-crashes
 
#147 · (Edited)
Where the hell are you getting this idea that I'm against training? I suggested training! This is a thread about helmets, though, so I am talking about helmets. Make a thread about driver training and I'll throw in my support there too.

I will repeat, I am not against training, and your perversion of my position is at the point where I can only think you're doing it on purpose to distract the conversation.

The conversation, by the way, is about helmets.
 
#150 ·
Where the hell are you getting this idea that I'm against training? I suggested training? This is a thread about helmets, though, so I am talking about helmets. Make a thread about driver training and I'll throw in my support there too.

I will repeat, I am not against training, and your perversion of my position is at the point where I can only think you're doing it on purpose to distract the conversation.

The conversation, by the way, is about helmets.
I saw you're suggestion about training and was quite surprised you suggested my notion was some sort of fantasy. So I'm not quite certain where you're coming from. Unless it was getting distracted by my sarcasm about riding nekkid.

Training is relevant as it pertains to reducing accidents. Which might lead to a reduction in fatalities. The real question is how many fatalities could be prevented by helmet use, vs how many accidents (and fatalities) could be prevented by better training. By this I mean motorists in general, not just riders.
 
#149 ·
With the progressing erosion of personal freedoms taking place in the name of eliminating any and all risks possible, eventually some bleeding heart liberals will decide it is better for everyone's own good to be locked up so no harm can come to them.

If you want to give up your freedoms, fine, but don't decide for others that they should do the same, just because YOU think it's the thing to do.
 
#151 ·
If you want your freedoms then use them responsibly.

I would also like to point out, once again, that operation of a motor vehicle is not a right. It is a privilege and a convenience.

I saw you're suggestion about training and was quite surprised you suggested my notion was some sort of fantasy. So I'm not quite certain where you're coming from. Unless it was getting distracted by my sarcasm about riding nekkid.

Training is relevant as it pertains to reducing accidents. Which might lead to a reduction in fatalities. The real question is how many fatalities could be prevented by helmet use, vs how many accidents (and fatalities) could be prevented by better training. By this I mean motorists in general, not just riders.
Why is this a vs. situation? Why can't we have both?
 
#153 ·
And if you want a more serious answer, the amount of opposition to mandatory helmet laws is a bit of an issue.

We only recently have had LEOs giving out tickets for riders wearing novelty helmets. Putting a DOT sticker on one is met with higher fines. But the enforcement went down after Bikes to the Beach (Ocean City, Maryland). It might come back during Bike Week but will probably fade out again.

Additionally, there is potentially less mess with a full face helmet than there is with a half shell or a 3/4. Soooo, are we going to mandate FF?
 
#160 · (Edited)
Oh I see, you have a crotch rocket, so banning crotch rockets because the only thing they are good for is going fast is definitely out of the question.

So let me get this right, whatever you do for your personal safety is what everyone else should do also..........but if it comes to the way you have fun.......hands off

ok got it.


and BTW your helmet saving your life is costing me more money than if your brains were scattered across three lanes.
 
#159 ·
Just wanted to add... I saw someone posted earlier about insurance paying for medical costs. Not in Canada they don't... taxpayers pay the medical bills. I know this is about the CDC in the US mind you, but thought I would point out that not all medical emergencies are paid the same way country to country.
 
#162 ·
Serious question for those who believe in helmet laws:
Should helmet laws be decided by individual states, or should it be a national law?

Another question for those who believe in helmet laws:
Should helmet laws require full-face helmets to be worn?
 
#163 ·
well lets see you address it

it all comes down to you want everybody to be like you, but not no way will concede to be even safer than you are by wearing a helmet.

and it still stands that the helmet saving your life cost me more than if your brains are spread across 3 lanes.
 
#165 ·
I believe it should be a national law because it's a national issue of public safety directly equivalent to seatbelt usage.

Full-face vs non is a tricky issue though. The best protection is obviously a good thing, but there's plenty of good reasons why someone would forgo a little protection for some other benefit, like better peripheral vision.

Edit:

Give me a real rebuttal and I will address it.
 
#174 ·
Don't discount neck braces just yet. I hear mixed opinions on them for road use. If they prevent hyperextension of the neck they can potentially prevent neck injuries. I don't know about you, but I'd rather die than end up a quadriplegic.

They do help in motocross, apparently.

There is also the matter of other body armor reducing injuries. Face it, head injuries aren't the only concern we've got while we're out and about enjoying our bikes. I've got several jackets with elbow, shoulder, and back protection. Fortunately I haven't tested any of them, if you get my drift. They're not at all cumbersome. Where I'm a bit on the lax side with protective gear is from the waist down (apart from boots). I do have one pair of riding pants that mostly come out for foul weather. They've got some knee and hip padding, but where I see most of their value is in their ability to disintegrate at a rate superior to the denim I tend to wear.
 
#179 ·
Here's a good source for stats. It has the raw numbers, analysis by factors such as helmets, deaths-per-mile compared to cars, age, gender, alcohol, bike type and size, and much more. It's only two years old and cites reputable sources.

Helmets are about 37 percent effective in preventing motorcycle deaths and about 67 percent effective in preventing brain injuries.
A total of 4,381 motorcyclists died in crashes in 2013. Motorcyclist deaths had been declining since the early 1980s but began to increase in 1998 and continued to increase through 2008. Motorcyclist deaths decreased by 16 percent in 2009 compared with 2008 and increased slightly in 2010, 2011, and 2012 before decreasing by 7 percent in 2013. Motorcycle deaths accounted for 13 percent of all motor vehicle crash deaths in 2013 and were more than double the number of motorcyclist deaths in 1997.
 
#187 ·
The trouble with the 'stats' is that they are usually, initially, gathered 'wrong'. When they include someone who got off their bike on the side of the road, and then was 'killed' by a passing car, having already 'removed' their helmet, they are 'included' in the 'no helmet' numbers, even though they weren't even actually RIDING their bike, at the time of the accident. This is how the 'numbers' can get 'skewed' from the start, to try to 'twist' the numbers toward one view or the other. THIS is the main problem with the 'stats'. Depending on how they are 'gathered' and from what 'information' makes all the difference. If you ask 10 different people 10 slightly different questions, but claim they are the 'same', then you can somehow get them all to 'agree', if you want them to, even though 'statistically' that's impossible.

So far, I don't think ANY of the 'agencies' which supposedly 'gather' these 'stats' do so by the same standards or using the same 'data'. This is why they can be made to say whatever you want. They mean NOTHING!
 
#180 ·
A few thoughts...

It would be interesting to see cause of death broken down into 3 or 4 categories. Head injury, chest injury, abdominal injury, hemorrhage/circulatory shock. Cross referencing to helmet use as well.

I'm not entirely certain about the relevance of engine size. Displacement has been on the rise during my riding career. HD had the larger engines but they didn't seem to be as quick as the smaller displacement engines. Kawi 2 strokes were among the fastest with the H2 750 triples. I think the entry of the Japanese big four into the cruiser markets saw the beginnings of the huge displacements pushing up to the 2 liter mark. If there are more big bikes on the road it stands to reason that they'll be involved in more crashes.
 
#181 ·
I forgot to mention something.

I think it was in MCN that it was posited that higher profile vehicles have contributed to the rise in fatalities among multi vehicle accidents as it is more violent to slam into a tall vehicle as opposed to sailing over a lower one.
 
#185 ·
I know this is an old thread but it never ceases to amaze me how motivated some people are to take the rights away from others. Riding gear ranges from flip-flops, t-shirt and shorts on one end to full riding leathers w/armor, full face helmet and boots. Somewhere between those two ends of the spectrum is what most of us consider the balance between safety and enjoyment. Everybody closer to the flip-flop side is either crazy or stupid. Those who wear more gear than you are unacceptably less comfortable than you. We all choose where we fall on that line.

Why choose for me where I should be on that line? I read it is because if/when I crash and become brain dead, it costs you money on your insurance. In truth the amount it cost you over the pool of insured drivers is probably pennies a year if that. Seriously, how much of your insurance do you think goes to head injured motorcyclist?

My wife, whom I love dearly, is 60 and just started riding 5 months ago. She has an 2016 Indian Scout with 100hp. She loves the power and the test drive is what made her want to ride her own bike. She has 4 helmets, 1 half helmet, 2 3/4 helmets and 1 modular. She chooses to wear the 3/4 helmets 90% of the time. Weather determines when she wears the other two. I ride safe and laid my bike down twice the first year I rode, self taught, on a 74 Honda 750. Both times my fault, bald tires and trying to go through a yellow light when the car in front of me didn't.

I have been riding for 40 years. I am teaching her how to drive safely as well. If she were forced to wear a full face helmet she wouldn't ride. When there wasn't a helmet law I wore one about 95% of the time and it was usually a full face, not even modular. It should be my choice, not the government's choice or yours. Oh, my wife also wears an armored jacket and boots and gloves. It is what she feels is safe enough.
 
#188 ·
Freedom is dangerous! But it sure beats the alternative!!

However, in the socialist nanny-state entitlement world we live in, the people who choose liberty and individual responsibility over nanny state entitlements and oppression are fewer and fewer...

"They're doing it for our own good..." until we're powerless to resist. Then the real agenda will be known. Once it's too late.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top