Discuss Detroit » Archives - July 2007 » Motorcycle-helmet bill passes Senate « Previous Next »
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1222
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 4:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Legislation that would allow some motorcyclists to ride without helmets has passed the Senate, after clearing the state House last week.

http://crainsdetroit.com/apps/ pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071018 /REG/71018007/1018/-/-/motorcy cle-helmet-bill-passes-senate- faces-granholm-veto

What in THE hell are they thinking in Lansing? Does it make sense for someone to ride without a helmet as long as they have 20k in insurance? Doesn't mean much when your brain is on the sidewalk.
Top of pageBottom of page

Gnome
Member
Username: Gnome

Post Number: 229
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 4:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Personally, I think they should be required to sign an organ donation card before they get their permits.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13

Post Number: 2752
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 5:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Why do you assume that in motorcycle accidents, the rider leads with his/her head? Usually, the first part of the body to touch ground is an arm or leg, NOT the head. This is true especially in low-speed crashes, which comprise the majority of cycle accidents.

Helmets are overrated, and as a motorcyclist with almost 30 years experience, I favor this legislation. Leave it up to individual riders to choose whether to wear a helmet, or not.

Education and increased motorcycle awareness on the part of auto drivers is the real issue. Car drivers often simply don't bother to look. In a significant number of cycle crashes, it's a negligent automobile driver who precipitates the event.

(Message edited by Fury13 on October 19, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1223
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 5:08 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Fury... that may be true but I am paranoid to drive around motorcycles. I'm not saying all riders are nuts, but many that I see zipping up and down the expressways are doing WELL over the speed limit and driving between cars.

When you are zipping thru traffic it's hard for a person in a car to see you. At 90mph or more by the time the person in the car sees you, you are right up on the car, so if they lane change it's a wrap.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13

Post Number: 2755
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 5:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I don't condone riders who ride their bikes like that. The crazy crotch-rocket riders give all of us a bad name; it's those riders who stick in many people's minds. Certainly, all riders need to have insurance.
Top of pageBottom of page

Philm
Member
Username: Philm

Post Number: 37
Registered: 03-2005
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 5:14 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Why is it that people assume that, because something is stupid, or just not what they would choose to do, that it should be illegal?
For what is supposed to be a free society, we are going down a slippery slope.
I'm a motorcyclist and would always wear a helmet, whether mandated by law or not, but if the government, and hence other taxpayers, isn't going to be responsible for my care after a head injury, it is NONE of their business.

If you want to talk about universal health care....well, that's a different story.
Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1224
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 5:14 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

as with anything... its the vocal/visible that speak for everyone (in general- not you)
Top of pageBottom of page

Bobj
Member
Username: Bobj

Post Number: 2601
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 5:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I guess the government cannot control everything. Personally, based on my experiences, we should have a helmet law.

I had a cousin, riding without a helmet, rear end a car that pulled out in front of him, go flying head first into the car, then the ground. he suffered massive brain injuries and his life has been a complete mess ever since.

Did the government pay medical bills from the accident, no, but his other issues that have occured snce have been largely paid for by taxpayers, not to mention wrecking his family.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lefty2
Member
Username: Lefty2

Post Number: 441
Registered: 07-2007
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 6:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

you have to PAY THEM OFF for this "privilege"

Who paid off the politicians on this bill.

To show their hypocrisy, the politicos will not let me drive in my car without a seatbelt if I PAY THEM OFF.
Top of pageBottom of page

Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo

Post Number: 504
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 6:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Better question, how can they write someone a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt and now they are going to legalize a motor vehicle operation with no helmet much less a seatbelt?

I've been around motorcycles all my life, known alot of people in accidents, wear a helmet. My Brother hit a deer at night on a motorcycle, went over the handlebars and landed on his head, he'd be gone if he wasn't wearing one. Indian Larry just fell backwards off of one, if he had a helmet on he'd still be alive. More idiotic legislation from the inept in Lansing.
Top of pageBottom of page

Diehard
Member
Username: Diehard

Post Number: 164
Registered: 03-2005
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 6:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I too can't believe anyone would even consider repealing the helmet law. You could never get mandatory seatbelt laws repealed, despite the fact that most cars on the roads today have airbags.
I'm not a biker and really don't have an opinion one way or the other, but it just seems crazy that it's gotten this far politically.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13

Post Number: 2760
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 6:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. I've been in a couple of minor accidents and have known many others who have been in them, and most all of them resulted in road rash and/or scuffed leathers, not head injuries. Then again, I don't drive 90 mph and weave in and out of traffic when I'm riding, either.

Of course, if I DID hit something at 70-80-90 mph, and I WAS wearing a helmet, I'd probably be a vegetable or messed up for the rest of my life. In that kind of situation, I think a quick ending might be a better alternative.

All that said, I do wear a helmet, albeit a simple half-helmet or 3/4 style, when I ride.

I don't think that seat belts in a car correlate to helmets on motorcycle riders at all. In a car, the object is to NOT be thrown clear of the vehicle. On a bike, the rider is going to be thrown clear, regardless (and you don't want seatbelts on motorcycles; bikes don't offer crumple zones or sheet-metal protection). In a 10-20 mph crash, you're most likely going to skid down the pavement on your arms, hands, or legs.

(Message edited by Fury13 on October 19, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Jimaz
Member
Username: Jimaz

Post Number: 3556
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 6:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Senate OKs motorcycle helmet fee bill
quote:

That's because Gov. Jennifer Granholm believes in the state's helmet mandate for cyclists and, therefore, will veto the proposal if it reaches her desk....

She already has done that once. Last year, the governor vetoed a bill, passed by both legislative chambers that would have ended the helmet requirement....

Top of pageBottom of page

Viziondetroit
Member
Username: Viziondetroit

Post Number: 1227
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 6:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"All that said, I do wear a helmet, albeit a simple half-helmet or 3/4 style, when I ride."

We call those the dick heads (not you, the helmet)
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray1936
Member
Username: Ray1936

Post Number: 2118
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 7:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Worked the bikes for six years in the DPD with one accident. The helmet saved me from severe injury or worse, no question about it. The top layer of the helmet was scraped right down to nothing on one side. The leathers kept me from road rash (it was late fall).

But I don't ride any more, so I don't worry about things that don't affect me directly. One of the pleasures of old age.
Top of pageBottom of page

Rrl
Member
Username: Rrl

Post Number: 917
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 8:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Fury-
Riders in accidents may or may not have first impact w/ their heads, but does it matter? If you go down, and your melon isn't protected, you will be F-ed up.

If you don't believe that, tell it to a co-worker that is currently laying comatose in the ICU after falling from his hog over Labor day weekend.

While I'm the biggest free choice advocate there is, not riding w/ a helmet to protect your most important body part is simply suicide and stupidity in it's highest form. Darwin was right.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ptero
Member
Username: Ptero

Post Number: 140
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 9:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I don't know about here, but in other states, it's the INSURANCE COMPANIES that have been behind the helmet repeal drives, along with the local ABATE chapters.

Texas, for one, repealed the law this way. You can ride w/o a helmet IF you buy the extra insurance. Anything to sell more product.
Top of pageBottom of page

Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo

Post Number: 505
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 10:07 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Quote: "Then again, I don't drive 90 mph and weave in and out of traffic when I'm riding, either."

It's not required. The impact of a 20 mph crash can cause lethal head injuries. Motorcycles are just a huge gamble anyway. It's like working up high, over 50 feet a fall is as bad as 500 feet. So, the speed is irrelevant. The insurance companies have weighed the premiums against the risks. A potential head injury/death will be covered by the fortunate. Nice folks to have involved in public safety.
Top of pageBottom of page

Douglasm
Member
Username: Douglasm

Post Number: 951
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 10:12 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Fury13....
.....my wife bounced off the pavement when a large dog hit her bike going about 15mph. She had forgotten to strap her helmet after a coffee stop. First hit on the pavement knocked her bucket off, second put her in the hospital for a week, 6 weeks off work. She had a severe closed head injury that caused some paralysis on her right side.

I guess the helmet/no helmet thing is a matter of choice. All I know is my wife had some oculer (ocular? How's bout eye) nerve damage and has difficulty focusing one eye 25 years later. She can't run because of the brain injury. She still rides. But we have one rule around the house. You start a bike, even to move it in the driveway, the bucket goes on.
Top of pageBottom of page

Futurecity
Member
Username: Futurecity

Post Number: 667
Registered: 05-2005
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 10:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The definition of stupidity: Riding a motorcycle without a helmet.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dbc
Member
Username: Dbc

Post Number: 79
Registered: 09-2006
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 10:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Here is the problem with this repeal:

According to the U.S. General Accounting Office, a surviving patient with a critical head injury incurs an average of $171,000 in medical and convalescence costs in just the first year following the injury. The financial burden placed on both the state and taxpayers for this so-called "freedom of choice" issue falls on most Michigan No-Fault insurance carriers. Unlike automobile drivers, motorcyclists do not pay for No-Fault insurance. [Taken from www.insurancejournal.com.]

It’s seems just a tad hypocritical that – based on the vote in the Republican-dominated Senate today – the same people who are constantly whining about money going to "entitlement programs" seem to have no problem making others pay for the "freedom” to engage in behavior that increases the risk of serious injury.
Top of pageBottom of page

Hagglerock
Member
Username: Hagglerock

Post Number: 458
Registered: 03-2005
Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 11:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

DBC, thanks for sharing the info. Where did you find the stats on head trauma?

I've been riding since I was 10. Started out on dirtbikes and now have a 76 Yamaha. A Victory is my next bike. I always wore a helmet, always will.


While I think it's STUPID to not wear a helmet, I realize that some folks will never wear one, no matter what the law says. Those are the kind of people that don't wear seat belts simply because their cousin's best friend's neighbor survived a car crash because his seatbelt wasn't on. Even though wearing one gives you a much higher chance of survival than not.


Hmmm, if I were a betting man.......
Top of pageBottom of page

Dbc
Member
Username: Dbc

Post Number: 80
Registered: 09-2006
Posted on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 1:03 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hagglerock,

I cut and pasted that paragraph from www.insurancejournal.com. I don't know how reputable that site is, but they do quote from the GAO, which is certainly reliable.
Top of pageBottom of page

Drm
Member
Username: Drm

Post Number: 1155
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 9:59 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Why require a helmet but still allow people to ride in shorts, flip flops and wife beater while wearing one?
Top of pageBottom of page

Lefty2
Member
Username: Lefty2

Post Number: 449
Registered: 07-2007
Posted on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 10:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

^ because the gov't needs a political reason to tax you, fine you etc. they want to save you from you.
Top of pageBottom of page

Andylinn
Member
Username: Andylinn

Post Number: 601
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 10:44 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

i don't think we should REQUIRE people to wear helmets... but it should be considered SUICIDE. and as such, the token fee to pay to get the "no helmet" sticker on yo' bike should be RAISED the hell up... i doubt that a couple hundred dollars will pay for the MASSIVE medical bills... compare this to the taxes on packs of cigarettes... law makers always grapple with this... they get SOME income from the sale of these packs, but it DOES NOT compare to the medical bills incurred by state hospitals due to lung cancer... these fees should COUNTER ALL costs incurred by the state... 'nuf said...
Top of pageBottom of page

Crystal
Member
Username: Crystal

Post Number: 43
Registered: 05-2007
Posted on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 10:55 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

It's true that motorcycles are exempt from Michigan's no fault laws. If you are driving a car, you do *not* want to have an accident involving a motorcycle, regardless of fault or perceived fault, or how reasonable a guy the motorcyclist seems to be. HIS insurance company can sue the driver or owner of the car.

Our 16-year-old son learned this the hard way.

We very much oppose any law that would allow cyclists to ride without helmets. It's fine for a cyclist to declare it's his life, and it's a free country, but that same cyclist is also free to sue another driver.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.