Ever since I joined the H-D Forums, I noticed that one of the most popular and heated topics revolves around issues such as helmet and noise laws. In most cases, the most outspoken members tend to be those who are against such regulations. More often than not, statements are made along the lines of "It's not the government's job to protect me!" or "It's my right to chose if I want to risk my life!"

Not that there is anything wrong with the above. Everyone is entitled to their thoughts.

On the other hand...

I have recently seen more than several local news reports on TV about large groups of riders who are rallying and lobbying for laws to protect them from other motorists. One recent case (I wish I had reference to post but it was a report that I caught while surfing my local news channel) was of a large group of riders who were upset because some "well known" area rider was killed by a motorist in a car. Some cries were for laws concerning how drivers behave on the road and some were for stricter punishment for motorists who hurt motorcycle riders. As they showed footage of the riders roaring into some local arena to have their say (maybe in front of a government building in Jacksonville or something) you could see that most were wearing almost no safety gear and the standard garb was leather vests and dew rags with the occasional non-DOT looking helmet making an appearance.

I have to say that I found it very ironic that so many people who claim to cherish their personal freedoms and shun any act on the government's part to enact laws that might help protect them are so quick to ask those same governments to tell everyone else on the road (who is not on a motorcycle) what they can and can't do. Further more, they expect harsh punishment for those other motorists who CHOSE NOT TO OBEY. It's obvious that riders WANT the government to enact laws to protect them...so long as those laws don't tell riders what to do and only specify what OTHER have to do to keep riders safe! In other words it seems like riders are saying "Attention EVERYONE ELSE! Give us the road and watch out for us so that we can exercise our freedom of not having to watch out for ourselves!"

How does our choice of being on two wheels instead of four entitle us to more liberties and considerations? Is it that riding is inherently more dangerous and so we should be excused because of our choice to face the added risks? I think it's obvious that most citizens of this country (rider or otherwise) expect some level of protection from their government and in fact appreciate that we live in a country that does fairly well at looking after it's people (if you disagree, please state what country you are planning to move to in order to better your circumstances). I just find it rather obnoxious that riders have such a tendency to contradict themselves and to take for granted the very system that gives us the freedom to ride almost anything we want, where we want and when we want to.

 

I think you are looking at this wrong.

The non-helmet and loud pipes do not put anyone else in danger. These laws are protecting us from ourselves.

Here are some instances that could be avoided by creating laws:

The elderly that can't see very well and should not be driving any longer - manditory road test after age XX

The youngster's that can't judge stopping distance / speed ratios and don't have the experience behind the wheel - Extend driving requirements or road coarse classes

The texter that crosses center lines while reading / writing a text - Make it illegal while driving

The cell phone yak'er that pulls out in front of you cause they can't turn their head away from the phone - Make it illegal while driving

If these laws were created, they would protect people (all people) from others not from ourselves.


Just my two cents on the subject

 

Thanks for the response.

Makes sense. However, wouldn't you say that it's all part of the same package? I know not wearing a helmet doesn't hurt anyone else. But then if you want to be protected then why not contribute to you own safety instead of just telling everyone else to look out for you?

And loud pipes don't "hurt" anyone but that's not to say that plenty of folks can't be bothered by them. Don't get me wrong. I like nice loud exhaust. I can understand if loud pipes were NECESSARY. Otherwise, what about other's rights to not be exposed to undue noise?

 

Of course it's double standards. They want the government to impose restrictions on everyone else that would protect them but by God don't be telling them they have to do something to protect themselves.

 

I agree with Sinister. The only hypocrisy with riders who don't want to wear helmets is, they want the freedom to not wear them, but they want to impose the costs of their head injury on others. If you want the rights, take the responsibility yourself.

I am usually against government involvement, but texting drivers is becoming a public safety issue. Making it illegal only made it worse, in WI. Now they text from their lap, attempting to avoid detection.

I think phones are going to have to be disabled from texting while moving. Even though it will inconvenience passengers, the innocent will have to be inconvenienced for the actions of a few. Maybe someone will come up with a better solution, but something needs to be done.

 

I agree with everything you say but the point above in particular is one that I share with you and have always thought of when considering the issue of helmet laws. In fact I brought that very point up in another thread about helmet laws and most of the anti-helmet guys thought I was smoking something at the suggestion. I wasn't even suggesting that there should be helmet laws but simply making a suggestion as to why the government might deem them necessary beyond the stated notions of "The Man trying to keep me down". One member totally went off on my thought and before he was done he was on some tangent about how illegal immigrants were to blame for everything...

I just get the sense that as soon as someone throws a leg over a motorcycle they suddenly become some sort of devil-may-care rebels sticking it to THE MAN. Riders tend to become extremely short sighted and won't bother to consider that "consequences" aren't always and immediate and direct result. Your point above being a good example of something that I see consistently overlooked by the riding community.

 

Man, I thought the OP was off-base until I read your reply. He's not even in the same league as you - you're way out in la-la land while the OP is merely confused.
Dude, it's not about the freedom to not wear helmets, it's about the freedom to CHOOSE not to wear one.
And if it's a head injury issue you better contact your legislator about mandatory helmets inside cars since number of head injuries in car crashes lead motorcycles by more than 10,000 to 1.
And the cost of those motorcycle head injuries? You can't possibly be serious. The number of non-insured auto drivers simply dwarfs the motorcycle number.
Now I'm as against texting while driving as anyone else but more laws against such are unnecessary. We already have laws against such distractions. If someone kills someone else while texting, charge them with manslaughter and put them in prison.
As Sinister says there's no hypocracy here, only citizens that don't need "Big Brother" protecting us from ourselves.

 

Helmet laws and cagers negligence killing riders have nothing to do with each other. Rolling them all up into 1 package together makes no sense.
Seriously. How do you find the commonality between the 2,because they are laws I guess.

 

In my opinion, I think that all drivers should be required to learn to ride a motorcycle first before learning to drive a car. If everyone experienced what it is truly like to be on a motorcycle surrounded by cars with distracted drivers, they would probably become much more aware and pay attention while driving.

Lessons learned first hand seem to teach more than just a monetary fine.

 

Well, like my Dad used to say, "Two wrongs don't make a right". Just because there are a lot of uninsured drivers how does that justify people demanding treating their million dollar head injury that could have been prevented by a helmet?

I had a patient last year who just learned how to ride. She was on Medical Assistance. She hit a deer and her only injury was her eye and orbital area. Her injury cost the taxpayers over 250K dollars. When I asked her if she was going to start wearing a helmet she said no.

Pretty sure if she had to pay the 250k herself, she would have looked at a helmet as a good investment. Flame on!

I enjoy riding without a helmet occasionally, and understand why people do it. But don't kid yourself. It is dangerous.