Oregon State lawmakers may get the opportunity to make changes to the state helmet laws. As it stands the law requires all those who ride motorcycles to wear an approved helmet. The law has been in effect for many years and every year motorcyclists bring some version of this bill forward to eliminate the requirement. This latest attempt would require those under 21 years old to wear a helmet and eliminate the requirement for those who should be older and wiser.
Those who seek the wind in their hair and the freedom of going helmet less argue that helmets cause accidents because they limit vision. I don't suppose any of those accidents had something more to do with speed and handling skill. Nonetheless, I believe that people who are of age should be encouraged to take responsibility for themselves and the State should work to withdraw or alter laws like these that limit personal freedom of choice. Seatbelts next.
We can always use more organ donors.
ReplyDeleteThere is tons of data showing that people who ride motorcycles are much safer wearing helmets. However, I have no problem with motorcycle people riding without helmets or any other protective gear. However, they must agree when they get a motorcycle certification that if they crash, they will pay cash for their medical costs. No welfare, no insurance charges and no costs to those of us who have medical insurance and pay for increased casuality costs. In other words, if the motorcycle rider that has a crash and is not wearing a helmet has to go to the emergency room, he/she either has the cash in their pocket for treatment or they die. Tough? Not really. The reasonable alternative is that motorcycle riders conform to the restrictions the data suggests.
ReplyDeleteThe “Data” would also show that few pilots survive plane crashes but yet we don’t require parachutes. We cannot legislate smart thinking, it has never worked. Prohibition failed, we still allow smoking and every year kids drown in back yard pools. Is it stupid to ride with out a helmet, absolutely, but should the law tell riders they can’t ride without a helmet, absolutely not.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if "Random Chain Slippage" is engineered in to kids bicycles?
ReplyDeleteIndividual freedom to not wear helmets?
Absolutely!
A person should be free to be as stupid as he or she wants to be without any pressure from other individuals.
For me it's absolutely a helmet, full-face as well, at all times.
Why is that?
After having my right femur(Shin Bone is it?) twisted vitually in half and being slammed face-first into the pavement after running into a 125 pound English Mastiff puppy, running off-leash up on Irving, in 2003 and two-plus years of recovery, I am thankful I didn't opt for one of those more popular and fashionable, "Badass Cruiser Brain Buckets"(Half-Helmets I think they are called).
Most of us, growing up, learn a mighty lesson when that bicycle chain slips, some of us don't.
Come on Anon, parachutes are no use at low altitudes or on certain types of planes or in some weather conditions. There is no correlation between the safety of pilot parachuting from an airplane and the safety of a motorcycle pilot hitting a pole, drunk sober or stupid. Obviously, you have never been in a parachute and, hopefully on a motorcycle.
ReplyDeleteAnd, Patrick, people who do stupid things like riding motorcycles without helmets cost the rest of us lots of money. They have no right to cost me money. If you believe that a motorcyclist who is not wearing a helmet and is involved in a crash either pays cash in his pocket at the emergency room or dies, that is another thing. But, I bet you want we reasonable people to pay the medical expenses of the idiot who refuses to wear a helmet using the rationale the he has a right to be stupid. Grow up, Patrick, you are now media.