Well,...I guess the phone company has it all figured out...  

That's incredible,.... literally....

I find the arrogance of your premise insulting....
That, has driven my persistence in this argument...
Now,.. what has driven yours?....

I'll give you this...
It is true,.. that all motorcycle accidents are avoidable...  just don't ride....

Now, believe whatever lets you sleep at night... but, don't be insulting about it...
You don't know me, and you weren't there...
so, unless you think you're god... don't pretend to be all knowing...

  I just use my helmet to keep my wig from blowing off.

Paladin. wrote on 01/16/10 at 12:19:01:

 It is hubris to think that we can perceived and predict what other motorists are going to do.  This is not to say we should just toss up our hands, but we should do everything in our power to increase our chance of survival. I fully believe we have the right to choose what we do with our own lives, but lets be clear on statics.

   * Head injury is the leading cause of death in motorcycle crashes. (U.S. Department of Transportation/National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, State Legislative Fact Sheet)
   * Helmets are estimated to be 37 percent effective in preventing fatal injuries to motorcyclists. (NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, Motorcycles, 2006)
   * Wearing a properly fitted helmet can actually improve the rider's ability to hear by streamlining the head and ear which can deduce wind noise allowing the rider to hear other sounds. (Safe Cycling-Motorcycle Safety Foundation Publication.)
   * Helmets prevent eye injuries and distraction from dust, dirt and debris thrown up by other vehicles on the road. (Safe Cycling-Motorcycle Safety Foundation Publication.)
   * Per vehicle mile, motorcyclists are about 37 times as likely as passenger car occupants to die in a traffic crash and about 8 times as likely to be injured. (NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, 2006)
   * Hospital stays are longer for unhelmeted riders and the cost to taxpayers is significantly higher since many motorcyclists are uninsured. (Michigan Traffic Safety Information Council.)

jabman wrote on 01/16/10 at 13:04:14:


The citation is that "Helmets are estimated to be 37 percent effective in preventing fatal injuries to motorcyclists. (NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, Motorcycles, 2006)"

The weasle word here is "estimated."  It nulifies any claim of FACT.  The authorities are in the pockets of the automobile insurance companies.  Five years after California passed it's mandatory helmet law motorcycle deaths had dropped 40%.  What they avoid mentioning is that motorcycle ownership/riding dropped 39%.  Motorcycle Helmet Laws *do* decrease motorcycle fatalities -- by reducing the number of riders.  Thus saving the automobile insurance companies big money as they are the ones who pay out on most motorcycle-car accidents.

The Statistics are on-line, just spread out and hard to find.  But you can pull up motorcycle registrations for each State.  You can see which States have mandatory Helmet Laws.  You can get morotcycle accidents and fatalities for each State.  Roll them together and you find that the States that mandate helmets have an insignificantly higher rate of accidents per registered motorcycle, and an insignificantly higher rate of death per motorcycle accident.

IF helmets were indeed "37 percent effective in preventing fatal injuries to motorcyclists" why is it not reflected in the Statistics?  The Nanny States should show a 5-20% reduction in the per-accident motorcycle death rate.  They do not.

While you are at it you can look at historic motorcycle accident and fatality rates.  fifty years ago hardly anyone wore a motorcycle helmet.  Now, the vast majority do.  Compared with fifty years ago the per accident death rate has tripled.

wolfmrp wrote on 01/16/10 at 17:36:08:

I do not claim to know what other motorists are going to do.  I am watching to see what they are doing.  From that I know what they probably will do and possibly could do.  I drive for the probably but hold contingencies for the possible.  People do not do things without reason.  The classic "turned left in front of me" has warnings -- vehicle slow or slowing, a path to turn onto.  People running lights and stops fail to slow (those that do their stop somewhat past the limit line have me starting my escape.)

This is not easy.  It is not relaxing in that you can kick back.  It is "relaxing" in that it requires total concentration and all other concerns are shelved.  It is not something that can be maintained constantly, but there are straight sections with no incoming and me away from other vehicles that are short breaks.  And I'm talking City Driving, not town, villiage, country.  Get away from Los Angeles and different rules apply.

It is not something I expect others to do, just as I don't expect others to play tournament level chess.  That others do not do this does not mean I cannot.  THAT is the Hubris -- that you are as good as it gets and no one can be better.

Going back to helmets.  Here in L.A., the way I ride, a helmet is a deadly handicap.  It interfers with the way I ride and anyone claiming otherwise is ignoring the laws of physics.  Elsewhere, other people, yeah, a helmet has advantages.  People often cite rocks and bugs.  Some 20,000 hours of riding and there is not a single bug splat on my 7" headlight -- L.A. is relatively flying bug free.   When it comes to helmets, a full face provides far more protection than a beanie.  If you are going to wear a helmet for protection, the FF is the way to go.  If you must wear a helmet to comply with the law, a Beanie is the way to go.  If not for the law, I see no reason to wear a half helmet.

wolfmrp wrote on 01/16/10 at 17:36:08:
With 80% of those wearing DOT helmets.
wolfmrp wrote on 01/16/10 at 17:36:08:
Not reflected in the Statistics, don't ask where or who did the "estimate."
wolfmrp wrote on 01/16/10 at 17:36:08:
Weasle Word - "can".  Maybe at 100 mph.  I know from experience that when I wear my helmet at freeway speeds I need earplugs or I will not be able to hear at the end of the ride.  Without the helmet, I do not need the earplugs.  Not to mention that most of my riding is at low speeds where wind noise is not a factor, a helmet covering the ears will muffle sounds, and in L.A. this is not a good thing.
wolfmrp wrote on 01/16/10 at 17:36:08:
Helmets do not protect the eyes.  Face shields and visors do.  As do glasses or goggles.  This is what is known as a Red Herring.
wolfmrp wrote on 01/16/10 at 17:36:08:
 Wow, this one is so slanted it's nearly horizonal.  Per Vehicle Mile?  Cars average over 10,000 miles a year, bikes under 2,000.  Bikes are 95%+ recreational.  Bikes attract speeders and risk takers -- accident rates should be compared to high performance cars, not cars in general.  Bikes have no steel cage.  AND it's another Red Herring -- says nothing about helmets saving lives.  Really, the authorities and the automobile insurance companies would like to see all motorcycles off the road -- and are quite willing to lie about the facts.
wolfmrp wrote on 01/16/10 at 17:36:08:
Why?  Are the helmeted riders killed off?  Maybe it's that the unhelmeted rider also wasn't wearing leather and scraped more skin off?   Cost to taxpayers?  So stop paying for uninsured drivers of cars and you'll save a huge bundle.

======

If helmets are so great, why do they have to publish the above crap?  Why can't they just publish the statistics of helmeted riders surviving more crashes than unhelmeted riders?