Do you live in a State that does NOT require a helmet? (speeding, driving record)

[Peperosso]

I lived in a State that didn't required helmets, and at the hospital I worked we called them "Organ Donors". True story...

[Nepenthe]

Originally Posted by inventor1

Thus a person who does understand data can conclude helmets restrict visibility to the point of causing more accidents.

So you're adamant that correlation is implying causality?

I don't really have to look at data to make a conclusion about my vision. I ride my motorcycle every day and enjoy a vastly more panoramic view than I do in my car. In my amazingly comfortable Shoei, if I hold my head perfectly straight and merely roll my eyes as far as I can from side to side then at the very fuzzy edge of each side I can perceive the edge of the opaque material. But human peripheral vision is error-prone at this extreme anyway. This is why I depend on my neck as well. Learning to scan the environment is a SKILL that must be learned AND continually practiced. My car is way more restrictive.

That said, I do have to rotate *down* just a bit to view my dashboard/instruments. Two nifty helmet technology upgrades that would be great are the HUD displaying speed or other info superimposed on the visor (works well in my father's car) and the center mounted rearview mirror. I think we'll see these become more prevalent in the next 5-10 years.

Bottom line is I love wearing a helmet, it feels great and is very comfy, grants sun and UV protection, provides an easy way to breathe, gives great airflow, keeps me clean, protects the eyes, and protects the head, face, chin, skin, etc. Some of my earliest memories involve riding around with my father on his bikes (Kawi Z1, Yam FJ1100, Moto Guzzi, etc.) and although armored motorcycle jackets and pants weren't what they are now (especially for kids) we always geared up as much as possible. If I can't wear all the gear, I don't touch the bike.

Originally Posted by inventor1

In many if not most states it is illegal to wear a helmet because well it is determined it restricts your vision.

Please post your source.

Originally Posted by inventor1

would you be for people wearing helmets in cars since it would save so many lives?

I've worn a helmet in a car many times. Only once on the street that I recall, but I'll tell you the thought that I'd feel safer and less *naked* has crossed my mind many times. I do like my deeply bolstered seats and would like to install a five point harness in the current car. As with motorcycles, there's an equilibrium level of death and disfigurement that society is willing to accept in personal automobile travel -- this equilibrium level dictates how much safety gear is required, how vehicles and roads are designed, driver training (which is abysmal), etc. We're willing, as a society, to accept n head injuries in order to not inconvenience 100% of drivers and passengers.

The problem I see with the whole motorcycle industry/activity/sport/community is that it has been more or less left to SELF-regulate. And it's done a wickedly dreadful job of self-regulating. Whether you're talking about unhelmeted/unarmored drivers who turn a potential minor incident of small bumps and bruises into a critical condition ER trauma case, or insanely stupid highway stunters scaring the 99% of motorists on that road who don't ride a motorcycle, or brand new riders buying a 950 pound Harley or a 175 horsepower literbike, or the manufacturer horsepower wars that are bound to heat up again as Japan strikes back against BMW for 2011, things haven't gone well in this generally unregulated industry.

And focusing on not just helmets but on motorcycle riding in general, could there come a time when single payer becomes the law of the land, where taxpayer-funded government healthcare is the only healthcare, and could that cause a new round of scrutiny on purely voluntary dangerous activites including motorcycling? When all taxpayers must bear the cost of head injuries for people who refuse a basic safety item, I hope it leads to mandatory safety items instead of banning the activity altogether. I think it's my responsibility to wear a full face helmet and full armor, to practice my skills every day, and to ride intelligently and courteously.

[texdav]

I no longer ride a bike. But when I did it was the head injuries I saw in others and heard about that convinced me to wear a helemt;not the accident rate. I came to the conclisuion very quickly that they can often ********* togethr after a accident but the brain doesn't screw together very well. Now I see more and more that have head injuries often meaning they lose their livelyhood and worse .

[Nepenthe]

Originally Posted by texdav

I no longer ride a bike. But when I did it was the head injuries I saw in others and heard about that convinced me to wear a helemt;not the accident rate. I came to the conclisuion very quickly that they can often ********* togethr after a accident but the brain doesn't screw together very well. Now I see more and more that have head injuries often meaning they lose their livelyhood and worse .

********* too buddy!

Censured by the forum software...

[inventor1]

Originally Posted by Nepenthe

So you're adamant that correlation is implying causality?

I don't really have to look at data to make a conclusion about my vision. I ride my motorcycle every day and enjoy a vastly more panoramic view than I do in my car. In my amazingly comfortable Shoei, if I hold my head perfectly straight and merely roll my eyes as far as I can from side to side then at the very fuzzy edge of each side I can perceive the edge of the opaque material. But human peripheral vision is error-prone at this extreme anyway. This is why I depend on my neck as well. Learning to scan the environment is a SKILL that must be learned AND continually practiced. My car is way more restrictive.

That said, I do have to rotate *down* just a bit to view my dashboard/instruments. Two nifty helmet technology upgrades that would be great are the HUD displaying speed or other info superimposed on the visor (works well in my father's car) and the center mounted rearview mirror. I think we'll see these become more prevalent in the next 5-10 years.

Bottom line is I love wearing a helmet, it feels great and is very comfy, grants sun and UV protection, provides an easy way to breathe, gives great airflow, keeps me clean, protects the eyes, and protects the head, face, chin, skin, etc. Some of my earliest memories involve riding around with my father on his bikes (Kawi Z1, Yam FJ1100, Moto Guzzi, etc.) and although armored motorcycle jackets and pants weren't what they are now (especially for kids) we always geared up as much as possible. If I can't wear all the gear, I don't touch the bike.

Please post your source.I've worn a helmet in a car many times. Only once on the street that I recall, but I'll tell you the thought that I'd feel safer and less *naked* has crossed my mind many times. I do like my deeply bolstered seats and would like to install a five point harness in the current car. As with motorcycles, there's an equilibrium level of death and disfigurement that society is willing to accept in personal automobile travel -- this equilibrium level dictates how much safety gear is required, how vehicles and roads are designed, driver training (which is abysmal), etc. We're willing, as a society, to accept n head injuries in order to not inconvenience 100% of drivers and passengers.
....(i removed to save space)
T

Ok the laws in general state that any restriction is illegal. You contend a helmet does not, you are wrong. cite me any competent study that shows a helmet does not. You claim you just know. While I was in college I wore a carved out punkin on my head for holloween and was pulled over by the officer in a non-helmet mandatory state. I am sure you know my argument, it did not fly. Though because it was a large college (sure he had seen everything) town he let me off with a warning.

anyway there are people who have received tickets for wearing helmets, google it, I did and easily found one.

Now you believe helmets do not restrict your vision. you are dead wrong. in my search I hit a great paper that I had never seen.
Helmets

They did a decent job. they put on devices to see if you did lose viaability, and YES you do. and better they put on devices to find out if people compensated by turning their head. (note, they did not do the test to see if it was fast enough, that would have been a real tough test.) Well as I said they found with no question you do lose visability wearing a helmet, and they put on sensors and found out that about 20% of the riders with helmets did not even turn their heads (though I bet they all claim they do) in all cases to see if their was a obstruction.

Next here are their exact words on sound. If you read some of my other posts you will find I was able to convince a friend who is a rider, and a emergency room doctor and on the board of emergency room doctors for his state that there is a major danger of the sound physics in play with wearing a helmet. Due to the speed of sound and the method of which a person triangulates the direction of sound (i am hearing impaired and a engineer) there is a physics problem with telling (localizing) the sound direction. If you have a helmet on and a car is to your 4 or 8 o'clock and there is an emergency and you do not have time to look and use your feedback as all humans do you can move right into the the car.

Here is the words from their tests.

in each of the six subjects performed the activity three
times, once wearing no helmet, once wearing a helmet with a full face
shield, and once wearing a helmet without a face shield. This study took
place both in the laboratory and outdoors. In both cases they found that
wearing a helmet had a detrimental impact on signal detection.

So please in the future keep your biases out of the ream of facts when debating such important things that could make people un-informed and cause them to be harmed or killed. Your personal opinion is fine but is not factual. and we as motorcyclists need to know the facts, as out lives depend on it. The more we know the safer we can be.

If the DOT was not so obstinate that would make sure people are educated that helmets do have problems and should be told and explained to people.

on the other subject, the trade offs have to do with and do I have a right to go scuba diving? (not hurt others) flying a small plane (could hurt others), kiteboarding (not hurt others), jumping out of a perfectly good plane(not hurt others), walking across the street with a helmet on(not hurt others)?


here is the restriction as measured. is any restriction a detriment to safety, I say yes... from my source...

The subjects rested their
chins on a fixed pad to restrict head movements. This study found that
subjects wearing a typical three-quarter coverage helmet lost about 3%
(6.5o) of the horizontal plane. Subjects wearing the two most restrictive
full coverage helmets lost 7.3% (16.9o) and 21.9% (51.7o) of the lateral
plane.

There is no question as to the restriction in peripheral vision imposed by
the structure of motorcycle helmets so long as the head remains stationary.
However, the head is capable of rotating. The effect of helmets upon visual
search at intersections is minimal since riders generally turn their heads
far enough to place any vehicles or pedestrians approaching from either
direction in the center of their visual field. When changing lanes,
however, the effort involved in rotating the head to its limit, coupled
with the need to divert attention from the path ahead as little as
possible, results in turning the head only as much as is needed to check
for traffic to the rear. Here, the visual restriction of a motorcycle
helmet could spell the difference between seeing and not seeing an adjacent
or overtaking vehicle.

With both helmets, the degree of head rotation fell short of fully compensating
for the vision restriction.

[silverwing]

Originally Posted by inventor1

I prefer the windshields without a question when not wearing a helmet, specially in buggy areas, or in temperature extremes. I do not get hit by bugs and stay much cleaner when behind a windshield, no comparison on driver comfort. so enough about the whining about bugs, and dirt when not wearing a helmet. if you are not smart enough to figure that out you should not be riding in the first place in some respects.

In regards to the discussions of pro- and anti- helmet views, my answer is a big "whatever" . That subject is the "sex and politics" of motorcycle boards that I stay out of. I obey the laws of the state in which I ride, and make my own decision in the states giving me an option. As far as trying to make a change, I support the groups favoring my views and make sure to examine to the directions of my legislators and vote accordingly. Arguing it out on message boards really doesn't create resolutions.

As to the disparagement of my experience and being able to "figure out" - FACT: my bike for the past 10 years has been equipped with a full windshield. The short one that came standard directed a buffet of air straight to my face that caused headaches. Since I replaced it with a high one (that I have to look through since I can't look over it), the buffeting has ceased, but that is still no protection from debris only kept at bay by wrapping one's head in a helmet. In much the same way, my legs aren't fully protected by the fact that my bike has a wide fairing, which is why I have the sense to never wear shorts while riding. [MOD CUT]

[catman]

Well, I don't like riding behind a windshield (the tiny ones on quarter-fairings don't count). So even if a windshield stops bugs, etc., it doesn't apply in my case, and I think silverwing is right anyway. I have a perfect right to "whine" about stuff which hits my face if I don't wear a faceshield, but to prevent that, I always do.

Speaking of statistics: Did you hear about the guy who drowned in the lake with an average depth of nine inches?

[inventor1]

Originally Posted by Gunluvver2

************************************************** ***
A well reasoned post Inventor1. However when you are dealing with folks who believe in a "nanny" type of lifestyle reason does not count for much.
GL2

yep there certainly some who fit that around.

[ladyofnorth]

We live in South Carolina When we ride our bikes we have in the past and still do wera our helmets. it is not mandatory here But for 21 and under it is. Also, for 1st year riders in ohio you have to wear a helmet. We choose to wear helmet because you can fix anything else. But if your brain gets hurt you can not fix that. At least we have a chance with a helmet on. We do not put other riders down for not wearing a helmet its their choice. But, those who do not wear one seem to make fun of riders who do. One lady told me just doesn`t look cool. I just looked at her said so. I dont need to impress anyone.MY HELMET MY CHOICE. We dont push wearing a helmet on our friends when we ride together.Its their choice. The insurance we have progressive with all three bikes mine, husbands and our cruiser we pay 423.00 year full coverage on all . all yamahas 99 91 96

[ladyofnorth]

I dont know about the driving classes and manuals and test now days. BUT, all the states should make sure motorcycles are included in these test. Driving schools should teach the students to watch out for motorcycles. Manual should bring this up. And when you have a road test . Computers should have a program with motorcycles. All student drivers should be taught to watch out for motorcycles too.
When I was a student driver it was people. Cars. Not one about motorcycles. Or mopeds. Times have changed more people are riding. And it depends on your state mopeds too.