12-04-2014, 12:29 PM
I read most and skimmed the rest of this thread. Not sure that I agree at all with any argument that since a taxpayer may have to pay for our injuries, that we should therefore be required to wear safety gear. That logic leads to the concept that motorcycles should be banned all together. However, we can go round and round on that and it's unreasonable to assume that laws will change anytime soon to mandate gear, even helmets. Which leads me to the helmet/seatbelt comparison that I really want to talk about.
A MSF instructor and Illinois State Motorcycle Trooper I met this summer had and interesting point on this subject. He favors seatbelt rules, but not helmet rules because, he says, the seatbelt not only protects the wearer, but also prevents him from becoming a projectile and injuring someone else. He is a crash investigator and says that many many people are injured by an unbelted fellow occupant's head or other body part striking them. The motorcycle helmet really only protects the rider and it's his head. I am not sure that I even ink seatbelt usage should be mandatory, but I found his logic compelling.
A MSF instructor and Illinois State Motorcycle Trooper I met this summer had and interesting point on this subject. He favors seatbelt rules, but not helmet rules because, he says, the seatbelt not only protects the wearer, but also prevents him from becoming a projectile and injuring someone else. He is a crash investigator and says that many many people are injured by an unbelted fellow occupant's head or other body part striking them. The motorcycle helmet really only protects the rider and it's his head. I am not sure that I even ink seatbelt usage should be mandatory, but I found his logic compelling.