Do people have a legitimate gripe when they say I shouldn't be forced to wear a motorcycle helmet?

Answer 1

It's your funeral. Doesn't bother me.

Answer 2

"I think it is still important to allow people the freedom to make their own choices about helmets (and shoes), but at the same time I don't want to hear about how dangerous MOTORCYCLES are because idiots choose to crack their heads open."

THIS IS THE GREATEST STATEMENT regarding the ongoing helmet debate I'VE EVER HEARD!!!

There's PLENTY of great, unobtrusive gear out there you can wear, or not. Check out ICON, they've got good stuff that looks "normal" for the street. But it's not the motorcycles that are dangerous; how PREPARED are you for the crash? A 20mph fall can do permanent damage without a helmet, but with a helmet at 20mph you dust yourself off, pick up your bike and continue down the road.

Ever watch a Moto GP race? Have you seen the sh*t these guys wear? When they crash it's at about 150 to 180 mph, and they just get up. It's not because of anything other than wearing FULL GEAR. This "it doesn't matter" bull you hear from guys saying "my cousin's best friend's aunt was an EMT and she said you're dead no matter what..." These people obviously know nothing about roadracing. They just know what happens to irresponsible squids.

Answer 3

It all depends on if you feel that we should be making laws to make people use common sense.

My personal feeling is that there should be no such laws on the books. But I also feel that if you want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet you shouldn't have a licence. You obviously don't have enought intelegence to ride so you should be able to do it legally (that's those that won't wear a helmet not anyone in particular here).

Do they have a legitimate gripe? If they're complaining because they don't want to wear one then obviously the law is needed and so no they don't.

Answer 4

Not now, not ever. The argument that they use most often is that all the injured bikers will be paid for by the "taxpayers". Well, bikers are taxpayers too & in a study funded by the Feds, done by the Univ. of North Carolina, is showed conclusively that more bike riders carry insurance that other motorists, and also that motorcycle accidents are less than 1% of all motor vehicle accidents. Add on the fact that I have a very hard time believing that complete strangers, that wouldn't piss up my a** if my guts were on fire, really care about my safety. I have no idea where these people got the idea that they know what's best for me or anyone else. In my state(PA.), we won the right to "Let those who ride decide!" & it only took us 35yrs!

Answer 5

Here's an analogy:

Let's say that a certain pair of shoes is very popular, and everyone is wearing them. They're comfortable, look cool and keep hot asphalt from burning your feet, etc. Now for the sake of argument let's just say that YOU don't like them, and you don't want to wear them. You'd rather go barefoot instead.

So WHEN you burn your feet on hot asphalt one day, or you stub your toe, or step in poo or any one of a hundred bad things that can happen, should the government step in and mandate that you MUST wear these shoes?

And if not, does everyone else get to hear you whine about having burned feet? Would you go so far as to say something like, "If I burn my feet, I'd rather have them amputated anyway!"

I think it is still important to allow people the freedom to make their own choices about helmets (and shoes), but at the same time I don't want to hear about how dangerous MOTORCYCLES are because idiots choose to crack their heads open.

I wear one ALL the time, EVERY ride. My helmet doesn't hang off the back seat like a $400 Christmas ornament. I have crashed, I have used my helmet, and know others who were VERY happy to have worn theirs instead of losing their face.

It's still your choice to be stupid or not, and that's a freedom we should all agree on.

Answer 6

No, you shouldn't be forced to wear a helmet. However, when lawmakers (in individual states) look at this law they take into account the individual cost of a non-insured, helmet-less motorcyclist suffering a head injury in an accident. It's incredible how much of a drain on taxpayers money a head trauma can be.

Answer 7

How's your medical insurance? LOL.

There have been days when I'd rather have gone helmetless, but hey, not very often. I like my helmet. It makes my head more aerodynamic on the freeway.

Try on several different varieties of helmet. There's a good number to choose from. You will probably find something that you can live with that's legal. I've tried open face and full face. I prefer the full face.

Answer 8

Those that oppose helmet laws usually do so on the freedom of choice platform. They feel that it should be up to the individual, and that gov't has no business protecting us from ourselves.

Seeing as we are in a country where individual rights are supposed to be paramount, they have a point. If they'd stop right there with their argument they'd probably win more people over to their cause.

They lose most rational folks when they start their rhetoric claiming that helmets don't really protect, or cause more harm than good.

I'm of the mind that the helmet and seat belt issue should be left up to the individual. I do have a problem with the gov't getting into individual freedoms. I feel that after age 21 you should be able to make up your own mind. I also feel that if the individual chooses to ride lidless, and/or drive belt less they should be required to have additional insurance AND pre-sign a do not resuscitate waiver to cover themselves in the event of an accident. Their dumb asses shouldn't be a burden on the ones they love, and especially those that don't even know them.

As long as them enjoying the right to exercise their personal freedoms doesn't cost me my rights or money, let them have at it. Unfortunately it usually doesn't work like that.

Answer 9

Well there are only two types of motorcycle riders, the ones that have been in an accident and those that will be. So wearing a helmet should be a no brain-er.

Answer 10

What the dummies who adovcate the "freedom" not to wear a helmet do not realize, is that their decision affects all other motorcyclists as well -- not to mention the cost of healthcare.
Even a very slight fall of a bike w/o a helmet can cause severe head trauma -- well beyond what the rider's insurance premium costs. This means the restof us have to pay extra on our insurance because we pay the cost of the care.
Of course, the "costs" ot the injured rider's family & friends is immeasurable.

Answer 11

I don't believe the government should protect us from ourselves.

That being said, I think that not wearing a helmet is remarkably foolish, that people should be denied health insurance for it, and anyone who dies without a helmet should be an automatic organ donor - with or without consent.