MO Helmet law may be repealed

[PeteSC]

Posted on Fri, Apr. 29, 2005
 
 
 

 
 
 
RICH SUGG/The Kansas City Star  
John Angell of Kansas City, Kan., enjoys riding without his helmet, as he demonstrated recently in Kansas, where the practice is legal. In Missouri, where he must wear a helmet, a proposal to couple a helmet repeal with a strengthened seat-belt law has stirred controversy.  
 
 
RICH SUGG/The Kansas City Star  
Bikers Tim Davis, (from left) John Angell and John Monk all like the idea of Missouri doing away with the mandatory helmet law for adults. “I don't think anybody who doesn't ride a motorcycle should tell me what to wear when I ride mine,” says Monk, who nevertheless credits a helmet with saving his life in a wreck.  
 
 
 
 

BALANCING SAFETY, CHOICE


Seat belts on, helmets off: Missouri weighs 'schizophrenic' bill

By DONALD BRADLEY and SARA LUBBES

The Kansas City Star


Missouri legislators are debating a combined highway safety bill in which the two main components seemingly collide.

One part would allow police to stop drivers who aren't wearing seat belts. Statistics show this would save lives.

The other part would repeal the state law requiring adult motorcycle riders to wear helmets. Statistics show this would cause deaths.

The two bills were combined in the House of Representatives, a move that did not please state Sen. Jon Dolan, chief sponsor of the seat-belt proposal, which passed in the Senate earlier this month.

“It makes me look silly and I'm not too happy about it,” Dolan, a Republican from Lake St. Louis, said Thursday. “It's intellectually dishonest and it's schizophrenic, but that's how things happen sometimes in legislation.”

Rep. Gary Dusenberg, a Blue Springs Republican who wants to repeal the helmet requirement, said he hopes the issues can be separated through amendments on the House floor.

“I'm in a ‘Catch-22,' ” Dusenberg said. “I'm against the primary seat-belt law. I don't really want to have to vote for it, but I will if I have to.”

Dolan said the stronger seat-belt law would save nearly 100 lives in Missouri each year, but he does not support the helmet change.

“Instead of saving 91 lives, we may also add 11 motorcycle riders who volunteered to be brain-injury victims,” Dolan said.

But the possibility of tossing the helmet law sounded good to John Monk and other members of El Forastero motorcycle club who gathered Thursday at Antoinette's Restaurant & Lounge in the Northland.

A couple of years ago, Monk, of Kansas City, North, was speeding to a meeting on his Harley when he crashed broadside into a car that turned in front of him.

He said he'd probably be dead if not for the helmet he was wearing.

But if the state says he doesn't have to wear one, Monk said, “I'll throw mine in the trash.”

The issue, Monk and other riders say, is freedom, not safety. Their mantra: Let those who ride decide.

“It's the wind in your hair, man,” Monk said. “I don't think anybody who doesn't ride a motorcycle should tell me what to wear when I ride mine.”

Politics is behind the strange marriage of the two bills: There is enough support in the House to pass the two measures together, but not separately. The Missouri legislature has considered both measures before.

On Thursday, the House Rules Committee sent the combination bill to the whole House and set no time limit for debate.

Lawmakers aren't alone in thinking combining the two measures does not make a lot of sense.

Mike Right, a spokesman for AAA Auto Club, condemned the plan. He said states that have repealed their helmet laws have seen significant increases in the number of motorcycle deaths. In some states, fatalities have doubled.

Most of those killed are over 21, he said.

Right estimated that passing both provisions could be a wash in terms of fatalities.

“This is not going to help anything,” Right said.

Insurance and health officials say the safety benefit of helmets is clearly shown by what happened in Texas and Arkansas after those states repealed helmet laws in 1997.

Within a year, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, helmet use fell from 97 percent in both states to 66 percent in Texas and 52 percent in Arkansas.

Fatalities rose 31 percent in Texas and 21 percent in Arkansas.

Medical-care costs also would be affected.

Dale Findlay, executive director of the Missouri Safety Council, said the seat-belt law would save Missouri $10 million a year in Medicaid costs, but changing the helmet law could end up costing hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Tony Shepherd, a Missouri field representative for the American Motorcyclist Association, discounted those arguments. He said the debate boils down to personal freedom: Missourians should have the choice of whether to wear a helmet.

“Helmets build up a false sense of security,” he said. “The only safe motorcycle accident is the one you can avoid.”

Shepherd said the helmets are heavy and prevent motorcyclists from hearing. But most Missourians probably would choose to wear helmets anyway if the legislation passes, he said.

That would include Dave Brown of Blue Springs, who said he would wear a helmet regardless of the law.

“It's not always about how good a rider you are,” Brown said Thursday at Fat Chance Bar & Grill, an Independence bar popular with bikers. “It's about the other drivers on the road — like the driver who's arguing with his wife and he's looking at her instead of the road and runs a stoplight.

“We don't wear chaps and leather jackets just to look cool. They save you when you go down. Helmets, too.”

But El Forastero rider John Angell said helmets can be a risk. His helmet nearly strangled him, he said, after an accident when the chin strap cut off his breathing while he lay unconscious.

Angell also told about his brother who died of massive internal injuries from a motorcycle crash in 2000.

“Because he was wearing a helmet, he probably had to lie there and feel all that pain when he should have died instantly,” Angell said.

Rider Tim Davis of Kansas City said a quick death from no helmet is preferable to a brain-damaged life with one.

“Then you're not a burden to your family or your club brothers,” Davis said.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 20 states and the District of Columbia require all motorcycle riders and passengers to wear helmets. But Michigan could soon drop from those ranks. On Thursday, its Senate passed a bill that would allow adult riders the option. The legislation has yet to pass the House.

Twenty-eight states, including Kansas, demand younger riders, generally those under 18, wear helmets.

Three states, Colorado, Illinois and Iowa, have no requirement.

Dolan's proposed seat-belt change would allow officers to ticket motorists who are not buckled in. The infraction would not constitute probable cause for a search of the driver, passenger or vehicle. Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia now have such a law.

Currently in Missouri, a driver must be stopped for another traffic violation before a ticket can be given for no seat belt.

The same rule applies in Kansas.

Lt. John Eichkorn, public information officer for the Kansas Highway Patrol, said there has been a recent push to make driving without wearing a seat belt a primary offense, but it failed last year.

 

[Red01]

“We don't wear chaps and leather jackets just to look cool.

And chaps do so much to save your butt as it slides down the road?  

[dsartwell1]

I agree that helmet usage should be the riders choice. Seatbelts too. I also think anyone who doesn't use the safety equipment available to them is nuts! I wear my gear religiously and will continue to do so regardless of what the law says. I find it humorous that one segment of the biking community is struggling to remove safety gear while another is always looking for better safety equipment.

[PeteSC]

I won't ride a bike on the street without a helmet.  A few minor mishaps made me realize that my thick head, ain't that thick!

  I don't like excessive government regulations, either.

   What the idiots do on bikes ends up biting us in the butt, though.

     I'd be in favor of required, separate insurance policies for riders who refuse to wear helmets.....where legal.

    As long as they're lumped into the same insurance group as riders who do wear helmets.....WE'LL pay more for our insurance.


        I'm kind of surprised at the 'AMA Rep' quoted in the article.
  AMA loves kissing cruiser butt, but, I didn't know it had a public policy to promote the right to ride without a helmet?



 

Chaps do so much to save you butt as it slides down the road?

Paul, what 'safety' purpose do the leather, flappy, fringey things serve?

  I guess you could tie them together, and make a tourniquet....
 

[Red01]

Chaps do so much to save you butt as it slides down the road?

Paul, what 'safety' purpose do the leather, flappy, fringey things serve?

  I guess you could tie them together, and make a tourniquet....
 

That's kinda my point. I suppose they offer abrasion protection to the legs.

Had a HD rider here at work ask me about riding pants a few days ago.
The came one and he realized how useless chaps are as protection.

[PeteSC]

Most of that stuff is 'fashion' stuff, and in reality, has nothing to do with motorcycles....except you see people riding cruisers wearing them.

  Do they have kevlar 'doo rags'?

   I admit,  30 some years ago, I'd ride sometimes in shorts, t shirt, helmet, and sandals...

[Red01]

30-some years ago, I'd even ride without a helmet from time to time, too. (I even have a scar on my head from riding my dirt bike on the powerline behind my old house that's probably only 12-15 years old - the absolute LAST time I went w/o one)

Can't ever recall wearing sandals on a bike, and even shorts was pretty rare (can't recall doing it, but probably did a few times), but a t-shirt was pretty common in the summer. Didn't take to many spills in the dirt to change my mind though.

[txbanditrydr]

30 some years ago the cagers weren't as numerous or idiodic....   We would ride without our helmet out in West Texas (Big Bend trip - awesome) where you saw maybe one car every 5 miles or so.  Still not the the brightest thing to do but times have certainly changed and drivers attitudes have as well.   It is war out there and to many - we are the enemy......   Gotta use all the gear we can to our advantage.

[Jacknife]

Kevlar, its good for the Army its good for my head! Ok UK laws, states you must wear a helmit. but why would I choose not. See to many Brain dead drivers not to.

Full leather too! cant be to careful, it is war at the end of the day!

[onebohemian]

No helmet law here in MN.  Nonetheless, I lost two friends who were not wearing helmets in separate accidents over the past three years.  One was an excellent rider and the other was a novice.  Both accidents were rider error (too fast for conditions) and neither involved any other vehicles.  Head trauma is very severe, whether you're traveling at 95 mph in the open or when you're only going 45 and you leave the road into a group of trees.  Screw the "government shouldn't tell me what to do" arguments.  If you won't wear your helmet for yourself, wear it so the ones you'll leave behind will know you did everything you could to stay alive.  Your kids should be allowed to feel and enjoy the same love for motorcycling that you do -- don't mess their lives up because you were too cool to wear your helmet.

One other thing, before the last guy died, a number of people in the club I'm in would sign their emails or wear t-shirts stating that saying about not going through life and reaching death quietly but instead going boldly through it.  Contrary to the attitude expressed by those reaperware t-shirts, having your helmet-less head bashed against the pavement repeatedly for 200 feet does not qualify as living life to its fullest.

My justified rant (this is the first year riding without one of those friends),

Mark
Minneapolis, MN

[PaulVS]

No helmet law here in Illinois... which is the way I like it even though I wear a helmet 95% of the time.

I think the law should be that you don't have to wear a helmet (or seatbelt for that matter) if you carry major medical insurance.

If you want to crack open your skull... no problem.  Just don't expect Joe Taxpayer to foot the bill.

[billythefish]

10 years ago whilst living in Greece i never wore a helmet, mostly due to the heat. nowadays i would never swing my leg over a bike without 1.
I feel vulnerable if i'm not wearing full leathers now.
In the UK  if you put a tinted visor in that helmet its illegal. of course nobody takes any notice.

[scooter trash]

Lets look at this another way. The earth is becoming more and more over crowded. Our natural resources are being drained at an alarming rate. And there are more and more dumb people being born everyday. Survival of the fittest. It happens in the animal kingdom everyday.
Now here is my plan. Go back to the fifties. No seat belts. No air bags. Uncovered steel dashboards. No energy-absorbing anything on a car or truck. No anti-lock brakes or any crash avoiding device. The only thing in every vehicle is a sticker saying, “ If you drive like and idiot in this vehicle going faster than 25 mph YOU ARE GOING TO DIE ! Now I will admit that an occasional innocent may also be lost. But isn’t that happening now? People are flying down the streets in 2 ½ ton death machines without a clue on how to drive. You see it everyday. Cars flipped over in single car accidents. How can you be so dumb and still survive? And in our area the latest demons of death are young girls. You see a car coming up behind you at three times the speed it’s usually a young girl.
This is my opinion. If everyone had to drive like their life depended on it maybe we would have some sanity on the roads.

[PeteSC]

The only problem is, here in the US, we've got the medical technology to keep the idiots alive if they don't do themselves in, totally.

  Guess who pays for it?
  (Directly, or indirectly....)