Bikers... Please read and be carefull out there

[bofh]

bofh, punishments for breaking the law is dependant on the severity of the crime. If I speed just 5 miles over the speed limit I get a fine but if I speed 30 miles over I get arrested for a misdemeanor. By your logic someone going 1 mile over the speed limit is equivalent to someone who is going 40 miles over and that is simply irresponsible thinking.

You missed were I said "no list of approved helmets." Without a list of legal helmets, or a qualifing factor, how can I comply with the law? That fits right in the Nuisance law catagory.

[Hasty8]

Thats not what I see. What I see is you chose to take an unpopular veiwpoint and then become irritated when people do not agree with you. While I like seeing someone argue the apposing viewpoint I hate to see it turn personal. Its the internet for gosh sakes. Keep it in perspective. Keep it friendly as possible. Its not worth it.

No, what I see is my clearly expressing my views and opinions and saying quite clearly that they are merely my views and opinions and instead I get called a "tool" or end up getting vilified by some 16 year old punk who's testicles haven't even dropped yet and has no clue how the world functions from their safe and cozy haven at mon and dad's.

Several of these people I have tried to "bury the hatchet" with so to speak via PM's and all I get is more wrath and abuse.

I know full well that certain topics can be inflamatory but I also remeber who, less than a year ago, you could openly talk about these topics with out it getting personal.

If I was the only person to feel this way I would say it was me but based on the number of PM's I have received since I posted my comment about the quality of posters here on AO lately I can tell that I am not alone.

I loved the fact that I could come here and discuss topics other than painball and if you look at the post counts quite a few of the more "volatile" topics are the one's that gain a large count fairly quickly because open and honest debate is what makes us [humans] grow and learn.

Honestly, I think the rapid introduction of the internet was one of the worst things that could possibly have happened to intellectualism in the past 100 years.

Now that everyone has an avenue with which to talk no one is willing to listen.

[Hasty8]

You missed were I said "no list of approved helmets." Without a list of legal helmets, or a qualifing factor, how can I comply with the law? That fits right in the Nuisance law catagory.

You're absolutely right there. I totally missed that bit and I apologize. Since I myself am not a rider I had no idea that there was not list of approved helmets and to me that is just stupid. When I go kayaking I have to use a specific type of lifevest [Type 3 PFD] and when I play paintball I have to use a specific type of goggle system.

Wait a minute. Scratch all that. Here is what I found with just a few seconds worth of a google search:

New York State Motorcycle Helmet law:

STATUTE: Chapter 71 of the Consolidated Laws. Title III--Safety Responsibility; Financial Security; Inspection; Size and Weight, and Other Provisions. Article 9--Equipment of Motor Vehicles and Motorcycles. Section 381. Motorcycle Equipment. It shall be unlawful for any person to operate or ride upon a motorcycle unless he wears a protective helmet of a type which meets the requirements set forth in section 571.218 of the federal motor vehicle safety standards as may from time to time be amended. . . ."

Iron Horse Helemts

Michigan:

April 3, 1996

There are many motorcycle helmets currently available that meet federal standards; however, they do not appear on the list of State Police approved motorcycle helmets. Due to the large number of manufacturers and wide variety of models, it is not practical to maintain a current list of approved helmets.

It is the position of the Michigan Department of State Police that only motorcycle helmets meeting all of the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 218 are legal for use in Michigan. Helmets meeting federal standards shall be labeled permanently and legibly with the following:

Manufacturer's name or identification.
Precise model designation.
Size.
Month and year of manufacture (i.e., June 1988 or 6/88).
The symbol DOT, constituting the manufacturer's certification that the helmet conforms to the applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards. The symbol shall appear on the posterior outer surface, in a color that contrasts with the background, in letters at least 3/8 inch high, and between 1 1/8 inches and 1 3/8 inches from the bottom edge of the helmet.
Instructions to the purchaser regarding construction and other safety-related information.
Other guidelines:

As a general rule, the thickness of the polyfoam inner liner should be at least 1 inch thick. This is the easiest way to detect helmets not meeting federal standards, as most novelty helmets are nothing more than a shell with a very thin liner or pad for comfort.
Chin straps must be sturdy, thick, and well-riveted.
Protrusions outside of the helmet shall be limited to those required for operation of essential accessories and shall not protrude more than 2/10 inch.

Michingan State Helmet Laws

While I will concur that there is technically no approved list of helmets for NJ I argue that the law is not a nuisance if it gets some dope to put on a helemt before he rides.

Of course, I may be wrong.

[bofh]

Honestly, I think the rapid introduction of the internet was one of the worst things that could possibly have happened to intellectualism in the past 100 years.

Spoken like a true elitist. Somehow, the ability for people to communicate, and disperse information in an interactive way, is the worst thing to happen to critical thinking?

This from a guy, one page earlier, offers no proof of the "public burden" that recideing of a ful helmet law would cause? Nice way to advance the cause of intellectualism.

[bofh]

Of course, I may be wrong.

I, of course, will also admit, that I picked NJ because that's where I live.

In your reseach, did you find that in NY, you CAN be jailed for NOT wearing a helmet? They take it seriously like a safety issue there.


Beyond all that, now's not a good time to get started on how bad the DOT regulations on helmets are. I won't wear anything but a snell approved system

[bofh]

While I will concur that there is technically no approved list of helmets for NJ I argue that the law is not a nuisance if it gets some dope to put on a helemt before he rides.

The nuisance part is, there is no way to be sure you are in compliance with the law. I also oppose the law on a personal freedom basis, but as written, it's an absurdly bad law.

[cphilip]

I, of course, will also admit, that I picked NJ because that's where I live.


Beyond all that, now's not a good time to get started on how bad the DOT regulations on helmets are. I won't wear anything but a snell approved system

Ok that brings up another topic. SNELL approval. There are just too many helmets that might could save a life but are not tested by SNELL. But are DOT approved. Some of them mostly because SNELL does not have a test method for them. And some because the manufacturer just does not pay and submit them. As long as SNELL is a voluntary private process this will continue. And SNELL has no real incentive to develope testing methods for some of them until there is enough flow to justify it. My primary aim here in this is to point out that if you want a total filp up full face you cannot find one SNELL approved. And for people that wear glasses these full face flip ups are preferable and more comfortable and easier to use. Thus promoting more use. But yet still no method to test them. Seems SNELL intends to some day but just hasn't. So if I am a manufacturer of there popular helmets I got nothing to do on but DOT. Some are good and some aren't.

By full flip up I mean the entire chin area unlocks and flips up as well as the visor can also. The sticking point is how to test the locking mechanism for reliability.

[SlartyBartFast]

So if I am a manufacturer of there popular helmets I got nothing to do on but DOT. Some are good and some aren't.

And around here, with a nudge and a wink, you can buy a DOT sticket to afix in you illegal helmet. There's a complexity to the don't help uninsured/unhelmeted riders.

[SlartyBartFast]

My point was, if the law was for safety, it should be an arrestable offense, with a clearly defined, safe, list of approved helmets. As it is, in NJ it's $25 fine, with no points, with no list of approved helmets. That is not a law for safety, that is a nuisance law, which infringes on personal freedom, which in my book, in unjust.

Fine. With no set standards as to what is an accepted helmet and what isn't the law sucks and is unjust. I'd argue that demerit points aren't really required for seat belts or hemets as ultimately it is the driver that is at increased risk. You only want to revoke liscences when the driver is a risk to others.

But arrest everyone? Are you off your nut? How on Earth would you finance the policing of such a law? Make all riders pay extra on their plates? Or, do it the fair way and make those that are breaking the law pay for it's enforcement through fines?

A large part of a police departments budget SHOULD come from fines. Until such a point as all the laws are being followed and the police can be scaled back.

[SlartyBartFast]

How would not wearing a helmet increase the number of accidents, BTW? Would unhelmeted riders cause more accidents, requiring more EMT repsonses?

It the increase in severity that matters. How many helicopters for medivac do you need standing by in an area? It's all down to statistics. You want to be able to have so many units be able to respond to so many accidents in a given amount of time. Anything that increases the statistical probability of more severe injuries will increase the number of units required on standby and increase the costs to the system.

[cphilip]

And around here, with a nudge and a wink, you can buy a DOT sticket to afix in you illegal helmet. There's a complexity to the don't help uninsured/unhelmeted riders.

Thats a shame. But I think more and more police are being trained to look elsewhere for the tags too. At least in Helmet restriction states. But thats is deplorable is it not?

[SlartyBartFast]

Thats a shame. But I think more and more police are being trained to look elsewhere for the tags too. At least in Helmet restriction states. But thats is deplorable is it not?

Yes it's deplorable. But the law is also poorly worded here and doesn't correctly reflect the state of the helmet industry.

The illegal stickers is a prime example of why Government and Policing DO need to keep getting bigger and bigger. The unending depths of human stupidity.

Even if they get the law right, we're going to need liscences and inspectors to verify the cycle shops to make sure they're not selling substandard helmets.

Want to limit the growth of Government? Self-police any group you're in. Shun idiots without helmets, put sugar in the gas tanks of bikes with modified mufflers. Stop the idiots before they're a problem to the general public and the police won't be called to put an end to it.

[cphilip]

Most of the groups I am in do just that. And I almost believe its more effective. If they do it by choice and good common sense they are apt to buy top quality product as they really intend it for protection and not just to not get pulled over. So I am not certain I completely agree with your premise. But I understand where it comes from.

The Harley groups seem to be the largest portayers of this bad boy no helmet image. Perhaps its just darwinism at work. But it does need to change. And from within I feel is more effective.

[bofh]

You only want to revoke liscences when the driver is a risk to others.

And why would I want to penalize a person when they are only a risk to themselves? But you argued that a helmet-less motorcyclist is a danger/burden to everybody. Therefore why no points then?

But arrest everyone? Are you off your nut? How on Earth would you finance the policing of such a law? Make all riders pay extra on their plates? Or, do it the fair way and make those that are breaking the law pay for it's enforcement through fines?

Most arrestable offenses also carry fines. How does New York make it an arrestable offense?

A large part of a police departments budget SHOULD come from fines. Until such a point as all the laws are being followed and the police can be scaled back.

I actually haven't argue that police shouldn't be funded, I've maintaned that helmet laws are unjust, and shouldn't be used as revenue.

It the increase in severity that matters. How many helicopters for medivac do you need standing by in an area? It's all down to statistics. You want to be able to have so many units be able to respond to so many accidents in a given amount of time. Anything that increases the statistical probability of more severe injuries will increase the number of units required on standby and increase the costs to the system.

Two questions, Do you believe that helmet laws reduce the number of accidents? And I'm not following your logic. EMT gets called for an motorcycle accident, how many more units will get called if there's an unhelmeted motorcyclist? Where do these costs come from now? Motorcycle accidents in general are more dangerous than cars, it's a fact that cycleists have to deal with.

Also, as much as I hate to say it, have you seen the accident rate of motorcycles in no helmet law states compared to Full Helmet law states?

1993 statistics

Sure it's not an biased source, but looking thru the numbers, Helmet laws do not make the roads safer. Read that twice, Helmet LAWS do not make the roads safer.

[cphilip]

Helmets do increase the chance of survival of one of the main causes of fatality in a motorcycle accident and thats brain injury.

We can all agree on that.