Highways and Helmets Go Together!

Being a citizen of the United States certainly has advantages and opportunities for all. “Home of the free and land of the brave” are words that make one proud to be part of this great nation.

Some make a career defending such proclamations to help ensure these freedoms remain in place for future generations. However, there exists a group of men and women that utilize these words in hopes of driving home a point to our state and federal lawmakers. These individuals feel that it is their freedom of choice to wear a protective helmet while utilizing our nation’s roads and highways. As the national debate of helmet laws continues in the media and courtrooms, the proponents need to continue moving forward with stricter laws--thus reducing the number of fatalities and catastrophic injuries.

Never has the importance of head protection been more evident than it is today. One just needs to look around on the streets, ice rinks, roller rinks and ski slopes to witness individuals using the common sense approach to practice safe recreation. Not long ago these individuals would've been looked at as nerds. Prejudiced thoughts may have been common in those days, as those wearing a helmet while riding a bike were the minority. By today's standards, it is the cool thing to do. After all, some of these helmets can actually be looked at as works of art. This public display, of the acceptance of head protection, is a sure sign that the push needs to continue toward motorcyclists as well. How can so many be wrong?

As a spin can usually be put on an argumentative point, numbers are hard-pressed to be twisted to one's favor. The bottom line is that those states not requiring motorcyclists to wear a helmet hold higher fatalities than those that do require head protection. States that have helmet laws in place and later repealed these laws can attest to the increase in fatalities and injuries. Pennsylvania lawmakers repealed helmet laws in 2003. Researchers studied deaths and injuries over the next two years from this repeal and reported “that decision had lethal, and expensive, consequences” (Bakalar, 2008).

These results should come as no surprise to anyone with a smidgen of common sense. Whether a person holds a degree from an Ivy League university or has not yet completed preschool, life’s lessons let's all know that a human head, with no protection, will suffer when it meets pavement. Duh!

Opponents of the helmet laws make it known that they are well aware of the consequences involved in not wearing a helmet. The main argument is simple: It is all about them and what they want. You see, it does not matter what others think nor what opinions others may have about them. To them, black is black and white is white. Entertaining the thoughts of others is just not comprehendible.

This type of personality brings back memories of a college instructor who stated to the students, “If anyone is sick, please stay home. However, if your teacher is sick, he will be present as this is a job." By all means this was a comical point made by the instructor. Make no mistake, this is the type of mind-set that opponents have and there is nothing amusing about their selfish beliefs. This way of thinking is what fuels the advocates to push these laws as the self-righteous actions of some, can affect others with the consequences of a bad choice.

There are some valid points made about wearing a helmet as being cumbersome. The fact of encasing the head in fiberglass filled with foam can be uncomfortable on a hot summer’s day. The ability to hear the passenger becomes difficult, depending on the type of helmet worn. And God forbid, the helmet will certainly mess with the hairdo. However, manufacturers of helmets are continually making improvements in comfort and effectiveness. The past 15 years have seen significant advances in motorcycle helmet design and materials. As a result, the newer helmets afford a much greater degree of protection against potentially fatal head injuries. (Motorcycle Helmet Effectiveness Revisited, 2004).

As the manufacturers of these helmets continue to improve the effectiveness, comfort and looks they are also taking away some of the grievances voiced by the opponents. There is no doubt that helmet company’s stress the importance of wearing a helmet for safety reasons; they also want to appease the consumers with a product that leaves no room for criticism. Perhaps all in the name of making a buck as a company would hope for. Maybe again, just plain common sense to protect the head while on the road!

A pamphlet made available to the public from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration states, “In the event of a crash, no existing strategy or safety equipment offers protection comparable to a FMVSS 218 compliant helmet” (National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety, n.d. ). An avid motorcyclist with 40-plus years of riding offered an interesting opinion when asked about his feelings towards helmet laws. The response was, “There are those that have fallen and those that haven't fallen yet." How can anyone argue these words? 

In pursuit of opinions, statistics and articles in regards to helmet safety laws, it sure becomes hard to digest the fact there are still those that refuse to believe. The push for mandatory helmets needs to continue thus ending this debate.

How can such an issue with commonsense resolution exist? Part of the reason just may be that they're too many involved in just laying the laws down on a national level. An example of this was when NTSB Vice Chairman Robert Sumwalt was asked the question: Why has the NTSB only made recommendations to states to make laws rather than make a recommendation to reinstate mandatory helmet laws in order to seek highway funds? His response was: We're trying to move this with federal political resolve, state political resolve, any way we can. So far we just have not been as successful as we would like to. It basically comes down to people have to get outraged about this safety issue that's causing so many deaths needlessly.

This answer shows the frustrations involved with this subject. Mr. Sumwalt actually states there needs to be more outrage for this safety issue. How can this be possible? It surely seems that there would be enough outrage over this issue. Again, are we not simply talking common sense?

Regardless of whether one loves motorcycles or despises them, the more thought given to the benefits of wearing a helmet far outweigh the consequences of not. Freedom of choice needs to go beyond that of selfish individuals. One needs to consider the ramifications of a bad choice that will affect loved ones and friends forever. The possibility of living in a vegetative state increases by this dreadful decision thus needing round-the-clock care while the remaining years are spent in a rehab center. These thoughts and statistics make it more evident than ever that the need for helmet laws needs to continue. The next time a motorcyclist debates the need for a helmet, they will give a second thought and perhaps even scratch their heads for a moment and make the responsible decision. By the way: The smart ones will need to remove the helmet before scratching!

“Safety is not the equivalent of risk free”

                                                -United States Supreme Court, 1972

References

Bakalar, N. (2008, June 24). Safety: Deaths Soar After Repeal Of Helmet Law. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://nytimes.com

National Highway Safety Administration

Motorcycle Helmet Effectiveness Revisited. (2004).

Remarks by Deborah Hersman, Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board; Christopher Hart, Vice Chairman, NTSB; Robert Sumwalt, Member, NTSB; Mark Rosekind, Member, NTSB Subject: THE STATUS OF ITS MOST WANTED LIST OF TRANSPORTATION SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AIMED AT STATE GOVERNMENTS TIME: 10:30 A.M. EST Date: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 (Part 7)." Transcript Wire Service 17 Nov. 2010. InfoTrac Newsstand.

US Department of Transportation National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety. (n.d.).