When I was 19 I was in an accident and went 30’ over the handlebars and landed on the pavement chin first. I shudder to think what I would have had to deal with if I had not had a full face helmet on. As it was I only ended up with a few stiches to reattached some damage from where the helmet pushed into my face. You guys do what you want but I’m ugly enough without the addition of any road rash.
In all seriousness my philosophy is to protect my head first and foremost. I can afford to lose some hide but brain and facial damage is too much for me.

 

One problem with your 'logic' is that your examples take many years to create a 'bad' effect. A motorcycle accident can have a 'bad' result during the first ride. And every subsequent ride.

 

Actually and unfortunately instant, or even a soon death, is not an automatic result of a head injury. Considering the odds, a head injury recipient is far more likely to 'live' the rest of their 'life' at less then full potential, sometimes much less.

 

I am also doing the helmet search. I bought a HD branded 1/2 with the flip down visor but extreme mushroom. After 2 yrs of knee surgeries I am back to wanting to ride again. I am looking for 3/4 or modular right now.

Lil story about a helmet when I was in Fallujah Iraq 2004. I know not bike related but a lesson for me anyhow. I was up on a trailer unchaining about a 20 ton forklift. I had my issued Kevlar on, I was worn out tired from multiple missions inside the city. Climbing down I hit a hydraulic oil spill spot and it was on. I dislocated my shoulder and elbow trying to stop the fall. My head hit the heavy frame above the forks. Apparently what I was told, my helmet hit the frame, bounced me back, the helmet flew off and my bare head hit the frame again, knocking me out cold for the first time in my life. I came to a few mins later laying on the sand by the trailer after falling about 7 ft.

Lesson I learned was....it happened so fast I could not stop it and if I had not had a helmet on, the first and hardest impact without a helmet, my wife and sons would have gotten 400K in life insurance.

I am no way preaching as most everyone on here has a ton more riding experience than I have. Each his own...but my fat ugly mug will have a lid on it.

 

we both share the same biker mentality....but ''in a caring society'' which clearly doesn't exist,least not here in the states. Todays society is me first, you second....and be quiet about it or I'll call a cop.....no body cares and the ones that do are usually too late. As For helmets...2 of them both ff'd whether I wear them is up to me not a law dictating I must.

 

None of which is in anyway either your business nor the governments rj883. As a ret police officer I saw many accidents. It goes with the job and certainly wasn't limited to helmetless riders. The fact is that at hwy speeds helmets seldom make much difference. The speed with which a behavior happens has nothing to do with the govt interest in it in fact, if cost is your ridiculous argument then outlawing unhealthy eating practices listed above make much more sense as they cost trillions more across time. You payroll your statist eyes all you like the fact is it is neither your ridiculously authoritarian business nor the host's what a rider chooses to put on their head.

 

You mean statist society because this is not a caring society. It s supposed to be a free society. If you think that helmet will help at highway speeds you are clueless. I went to gruesome accidents all the time. If one doesn't care for that they should find other work.worry about your own head it appears to need it.

 

You may be more at home in the scooter forum.

 

I'll play.

You have me confused with someone else, I didn't bring up cost to society, at least this time. I was merely pointing out that if someone considers 'cost' important, the costs because of certain lifestyles, such as eating bad foods or smoking, take many years to have an effect. A motorcycle accident can have a bad affect immediately and every time we go for a ride. Do you understand the difference? Apparently the member that brought up bad food or smoking doesn't. You are correct "It goes ... certainly wasn't limited to helmetless riders". And you are also correct that "The speed with which a behavior happens has nothing to do with the govt interest" because 'speed' is irrelevant.

But as long as you, unlike me, brought it up and apparently consider that to be relevant, you do understand that barring a very rare scenario due to as an extreme amount of speed or bad luck when hitting something which causes a physical injury, etc., it takes a lot of blunt force trauma, road rash, etc. to alter/end a person's life? A head injury is very different in that it is relatively easily obtained, regardless of speed, lasts as long as the person with such injury 'lives', and is usually not repairable by taking a pill, shot, or other 'medical' intervention.

But 'cost' probably should be a consideration in that most of society doesn't, and wouldn't, ride a motorcycle. And may not be appalled, or even concerned, by laws aimed at reducing rider injuries or costs to society. As a police officer did you arrest, or ticket, people because they broke laws and not because what they were doing was immediately obviously harmful to the general public? Did you let your superiors know that some things have "nothing to do with the govt interest"? If you didn't you are a hypocrite.

Of course doing a lot of things can be seen as being harmful to the public in general. Things such as an addiction to drugs may lead to criminal activity to pay for it, or a loss of productivity that affects society at large because of said addiction, and result in laws designed at altering personal behavior. Yet some people are of the opinion that it is unfair to penalize people for 'what ifs'. Wouldn't that apply if people drive too fast, or recklessly, because there 'may' be a time their action adversely affects other drivers.

Is it possible society may see families/lives adversely affected, and create an unneeded social cost, by possibly easily preventable head injuries and take action in response? That IMO as long as you brought me into the discussion. Also "The fact is that at hwy speeds helmets seldom make much difference" isn't relevant because most riders spend more time at less then 'hwy speeds'.

 

first of all I apologize for my snarky tone it wasn't necessary and isn't generally like me. I actually don't consider "cost to society" important at all when weighed beside freedom of choice. The argument, whomever made it, has been used to force spectacularly failed policy down the throats of the public. Think prohibition or obamacare. Beyond that I think you may not be terribly informed as to statistics of survivability of motorcyclists at highway speed. Seldom do they survive. At around town speeds they do help. The problem I have is that this is an infringement on the free choice rights of the individual. We have insurance to cover societal costs. Further, if you apply the logic that "somebody must scrape your head off the pavement" then a good many activities would be banned or overly controlled by what is fast becoming a nanny state. Perhaps we should only allow surfing swimming pools? Skydiving is gone. Scuba diving only in the bathtub perhaps? First responders see bad stuff. We knew that getting into it. I would always wear a helmet because of what I have seen but I lost a good friend awhile back to a 30 mph accident he would have survived with a helmet. He and I argued all the time and in fact had good maturely argued earlier that week. He adamantly opposed being forced to wear a helmet and would still not be wearing one today were he alive. But it's his head and his life. This comes down to a very wide gap in philosophy. Should the state have the final say in every corner of our lives? The answer, according to every historical document or debate from those that founded this country is a resounding "no". It simply is not the business of anybody save possibly my family what I put on my head. By the way life jackets are optional for adults in boating in every state I am aware if, airbags can be turned off in vehicles etc. I suppose we will never agree here but I will never believe it is anybody else's business. Btw over 60% of the country agree's it should be option so for adults. Ride safe. Enjoy it while we still have that freedom.