"Helmets dont really help you in a crash"

[desertrat]

Well, there is some reason why they are illegal in cages, and I was told that was it.

aps45819 told me this, sorry he was incorrect, sorry I repeated his error.

Now, can you tell us why they are illegal for use in cages?
That would be helpful.

It makes it very difficult for the police to drag you out of your car and rap your skull with a night stick. Don't tell anyone else, it's top secret info.

 

[BeHereNow]

Yes, I see.
Mum's the word.

 

[aps45819]

It makes it very difficult for the police to drag you out of your car and rap your skull with a night stick. Don't tell anyone else, it's top secret info.

I was repeating old info from my ABATE days

 

[itsbob]

I can never understand people who stick their nose into a conversation, then run for cover saying "I don't care."

I have to admit, I've been wondering how long it is that you wore a half helmet before switching to full face, since you know so much about both.

Half helmets are for the half wits..

I wore one ONCE, and will never wear one again if I can help it.

I wear a flip up which is considered a VERY noisy helmet, but after wearing a half helmet it seems VERY quiet.

There is no way in hell if you are going over 45 or 50 that you can hear a damn thing in a half helmet unless you are sitting behind a barn door going down the road.

Half helmet is ok at least for the intial impact, but for the ensuing face slide on the asphalt not so good.

Of course it's real hard to look cool on a cruiser in a full face, but I think it would be much harder to look cool with my face ground into hamburger..

 

[BeHereNow]

Some of my friends, and relatives, say anyone who rides a motorcycle is a halfwit.
Guess I'm in good company.

My argument is for choice.
Wear a Sherman tank if you want. That'll give you more protection that that flip up when a minivan plows into you.

I ride for comfort, not style. I wear my padded leathers in 80 degrees, 'cause I want to. It feels right.
I do take it off at 90. Gotta get that Kevlar.

 

[BeHereNow]

Okay, so nothing amusing/odd about a full face helmet.
A full face hemet, with shorts and short sleves and tennis shoes, an odd sight.
In one case the rider was popping a wheelie on the main road in front of a strip mall, with over 50% of his skin showing. Bad judgement on top of bad judgement. An accident waiting to happen.
Looked like a plucked chicken gone nuts.

 

[desertrat]

Okay, so nothing amusing/odd about a full face helmet.
A full face hemet, with shorts and short sleves and tennis shoes, an odd sight.
In one case the rider was popping a wheelie on the main road in front of a strip mall, with over 50% of his skin showing. Bad judgement on top of bad judgement. An accident waiting to happen.
Looked like a plucked chicken gone nuts.

Well there's always at least two ways to learn something like that. Listen to the voice of experience or live the experience.

 

[aps45819]

I think it would be much harder to look cool with my face ground into hamburger..

:shrug: Can't decide whether or not that would be an improvement

 

[itsbob]

Some of my friends, and relatives, say anyone who rides a motorcycle is a halfwit.
Guess I'm in good company.

My argument is for choice.
Wear a Sherman tank if you want. That'll give you more protection that that flip up when a minivan plows into you.

I ride for comfort, not style. I wear my padded leathers in 80 degrees, 'cause I want to. It feels right.
I do take it off at 90. Gotta get that Kevlar.

Bottom line, every time you go out, your probablility of being in an accident increases..

If you take experience out of the mix, the more you ride the more probable you are that you are going to taste the asphalt.. You ARE going to hit the pavement sooner or later.. how you come out the other end is entirely up to you.

I've known people that have gone down at >60MPH and walked back to their bike, and caught a ride home.. I've also known ones who've gone down at LOOOW speed and CTB'd.

Totally your choice what outcome you'd prefer, as you are, after all, an adult.

 

[BeHereNow]

itsbob If you take experience out of the mix, the more you ride the more probable you are that you are going to taste the asphalt.. You ARE going to hit the pavement sooner or later.. how you come out the other end is entirely up to you.

Listen, we don't know each other, so it is presumptionus of me to ask if you are a moron, but it certainly is tempting.

"If you take experience out of the mix..."
What kind of assumption is this?????

If you take experience out of the mix. . . NO ONE would hold a motorcycle operators license, or any other, so no one would ride, so there would not be any motor vehicle accidents, cars and trucks included.The only way anyone is granted a drivers license is if they have experience. The govenment must think experience has value, even if you do not.


Bottom line: The more you ride, the more experience you have, the less likely you are to be involved in an accident, and the more likely it will be minimized.


You just lost all credibility with me, not that you care.

~ ~ ~ ~

Motorcycle riders aged below 40 are 36 times more likely to be killed than other vehicle operators of the same age.

Motorcycle riders aged 40 years and over are around 20 times more likely to be killed than other drivers of that same age.

BHN: In other words, if you are under age 40 and ride a motorcycle, you are nearly twice as likely to be killed in a motorcycle accident (compared to those over age 40). This has nothing to do with experience, JUST age.
Nothing to do with helmets, just age.
Age alone reduces your statistical odds on being killed in a motorcycle accident.
I will add that as more and more older riders, who have no previous motorcycle experience start riding, these numbers will change.

News flash for itsbob: Motorcycle riding exprience reduces deaths more effectively than helmets.
You really want to save live? Make a law that if you don't ride at least 5000 miles per year, you lose your license. That will save lives.

I said it before, and I'll say it again. If helmets are a good idea for older and experienced motorcycle riders, they are equally a good idea for young and inexperienced car drivers.

If your sales pitch is too good, we'll have have the prophylactic effect. That's were someone is so confident their protective gear will prevent accidents, they will take risks they normally would not.

~ ~ ~

Here's a good article on motorcycle helmet use.



More.

~ ~ ~ ~

If you want to start a real debate on helmet use, helmet laws, who and how they should be used, I'm here.
You tell all those dumb sh*t kids helmets are going to save their lives.
Helmets won't hurt them, all things considered, I mean yeah, a few will suffer more injury because they wore a full face helmet, but not many.
If I were a young dumb sh*t and had it to do all over I'd still wear a helmet.
Great idea for young dumb sh*ts.

You want to know a really bad idea. Some middle aged wanna be buying a 60hp two wheeled vehicle and given a license to drive the thing. Oh, but it's okay, they'll wear a helmet, so the'll be safe.
Helmets make you safe. Yeah, right.

 

[desertrat]

Listen, we don't know each other, so it is presumptionus of me to ask if you are a moron, but it certainly is tempting.

"If you take experience out of the mix..."
What kind of assumption is this?????

If you take experience out of the mix. . . NO ONE would hold a motorcycle operators license, or any other, so no one would ride, so there would not be any motor vehicle accidents, cars and trucks included.The only way anyone is granted a drivers license is if they have experience. The govenment must think experience has value, even if you do not.


Bottom line: The more you ride, the more experience you have, the less likely you are to be involved in an accident, and the more likely it will be minimized.


You just lost all credibility with me, not that you care.

~ ~ ~ ~

Motorcycle riders aged below 40 are 36 times more likely to be killed than other vehicle operators of the same age.

Motorcycle riders aged 40 years and over are around 20 times more likely to be killed than other drivers of that same age.

BHN: In other words, if you are under age 40 and ride a motorcycle, you are nearly twice as likely to be killed in a motorcycle accident (compared to those over age 40). This has nothing to do with experience, JUST age.
Nothing to do with helmets, just age.
Age alone reduces your statistical odds on being killed in a motorcycle accident.
I will add that as more and more older riders, who have no previous motorcycle experience start riding, these numbers will change.

News flash for itsbob: Motorcycle riding exprience reduces deaths more effectively than helmets.
You really want to save live? Make a law that if you don't ride at least 5000 miles per year, you lose your license. That will save lives.

I said it before, and I'll say it again. If helmets are a good idea for older and experienced motorcycle riders, they are equally a good idea for young and inexperienced car drivers.

If your sales pitch is too good, we'll have have the prophylactic effect. That's were someone is so confident their protective gear will prevent accidents, they will take risks they normally would not.

~ ~ ~

Here's a good article on motorcycle helmet use.



More.

~ ~ ~ ~

If you want to start a real debate on helmet use, helmet laws, who and how they should be used, I'm here.
You tell all those dumb sh*t kids helmets are going to save their lives.
Helmets won't hurt them, all things considered, I mean yeah, a few will suffer more injury because they wore a full face helmet, but not many.
If I were a young dumb sh*t and had it to do all over I'd still wear a helmet.
Great idea for young dumb sh*ts.

You want to know a really bad idea. Some middle aged wanna be buying a 60hp two wheeled vehicle and given a license to drive the thing. Oh, but it's okay, they'll wear a helmet, so the'll be safe.
Helmets make you safe. Yeah, right.

You just entirely misinterpreted what he was saying. Read it again.

 

[aps45819]

You want to know a really bad idea. Some middle aged wanna be buying a 60hp two wheeled vehicle and given a license to drive the thing. Oh, but it's okay, they'll wear a helmet, so the'll be safe.
Helmets make you safe. Yeah, right.

60 hp
you must ride a Harley


FYI nobody has claimed helmets will "make you safe"
The concept is to provide some protection for your head.
You get to decide which parts of your head are important to you.
Some folks think that only a small portion at the top of their skull is an important part of their body while others think their entire head is important to their lifestyle.

 

[BeHereNow]

60 hp
you must ride a Harley


FYI nobody has claimed helmets will "make you safe"
The concept is to provide some protection for your head.
You get to decide which parts of your head are important to you.
Some folks think that only a small portion at the top of their skull is an important part of their body while others think their entire head is important to their lifestyle.

And some people just don't think.
They're called sheep.

I guess cage drivers don't value any part of their head.

Speaking of unthinking sheep, I see you're still carrying that bogus Jefferson quote.

Too many crashes with no helmet?

 

[aps45819]

And some people just don't think.
They're called sheep.

I guess cage drivers don't value any part of their head.
Too many crashes with no helmet?

the cage, with seat belts and airbags, provides a lot more protection than a helmet

Do you really not understand that?

 

[itsbob]

You really want to save live? Make a law that if you don't ride at least 5000 miles per year, you lose your license. That will save lives.

This is the ONLY thing you said that makes sense, but I don't think the motorcycle industry can take a hit of losing 90% of it's market.

There is a difference between Statistics, and Probablility, when you figure out the difference come back.

There is always the probablility of a someone hitting you, no matter your experience, or your age, or if you are wearing a helmet or not. This probability doesn't change, as your experience riding a motorcycle is seperate from the 90 year old driving a car that didn't see you.

Your experience also is not going to make the gravel or oil in a corner any less slippery.. nor is your experience going to make your skin and face withstand the grinding effect of the asphalt.

You can be the most experienced rider in the world, and have a million miles of experience but the asphalt will taste the same as the guy on his first rde. A LOT of things are not in your control when you are on your bike, and the only constant you have is the probability of what will happen.

Just the same as you driving your car. The 18 year old in Loveville is no more dead than the 58 year on Flat Iron Rd.. Experience and age were irrelevant in both.

 

[BeHereNow]

This is the ONLY thing you said that makes sense, but I don't think the motorcycle industry can take a hit of losing 90% of it's market.

There is a difference between Statistics, and Probablility, when you figure out the difference come back.

There is always the probablility of a someone hitting you, no matter your experience, or your age, or if you are wearing a helmet or not. This probability doesn't change, as your experience riding a motorcycle is seperate from the 90 year old driving a car that didn't see you.

Your experience also is not going to make the gravel or oil in a corner any less slippery.. nor is your experience going to make your skin and face withstand the grinding effect of the asphalt.

You can be the most experienced rider in the world, and have a million miles of experience but the asphalt will taste the same as the guy on his first rde. A LOT of things are not in your control when you are on your bike, and the only constant you have is the probability of what will happen.

Just the same as you driving your car. The 18 year old in Loveville is no more dead than the 58 year on Flat Iron Rd.. Experience and age were irrelevant in both.

Do you actually ride a bike?

You think experience does not reduce my ability to avoid shale or oil in the first place, and adjust to control when I do hit it?

I know the difference between probability and statistics.

I know that in over half of all motorcycle deaths, the rider was wearing a helmet, so the helmet did nothing to reduce or prevent injury. Dead is dead.

I know that most accidents happen with inexperienced riders. Do you think that is an 'accident'? Inexperienced rider do not even know where the danger lies, so they take no precautions to avoid it. If you do not try to avoid it, it will probably happen.

If you are not in an accident, you do not need a helmet.
If you are young and/or inexperienced the probablity is high you will be in an accident.
If you are older or/more experienced the probability you will be in an accident is much lower, so the 'need' for a helmet is much lower.

Some of us old timers have been talking about these training courses they are offering. On the surface a very good idea, but we notice a trend to cause students to 'over think' the riding experience.
They suggest always riding with two or more bikes. With two riders with two different skill levels you are looking for trouble. Someone is going to be pushing their skill lever to keep up with their friend who is better. Been there, done that, had friends who crashed because of that.
Other examples, but never mind, don't want to discourage at lease SOME training.

When I started riding they were no training courses, no need to have an MC drivers license, no mandatory helmet law. And I've never crashed. I put a lot of miles on bikes under 250cc. No training course will match that. I am typical from my old H.S. gang, no make that 'group', don't want to give any wrong impressions.

You say "Bottom line, every time you go out, your probablility of being in an accident increases."
Yes, this is true, IF we disregard experience.

Here's what I tell people: 'The more you ride, the better driver you will become, and the less likly you will be involved in an accident'.
Do you want to tell me that is not true?

Statistically, the more miles you drive the more likely you will be involved in an accident.
The probability of being involved in an accident is reduced by riding more miles and gaining experience.


Please explain to me how I do not understand the difference betweeen statistics and probability.
Really, not a rhetorical comment. Explain to me how you are better versed on probability and statictics than I am.

Not all miles are equal.
A mile for an inexperienced rider is filled with danger, a mile for an experience rider is a pleasant cruise, except for the cage drivers of course.
Your claim is that all miles are equal. Hogwash.

~ ~ ~ ~

aps45819

No lawyer sites:

In the United States traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of death for persons under age 45. TBI occurs every 15 seconds. Approximately 5 million Americans currently suffer some form of TBI disability. The leading causes of TBI are motor vehicle accidents, falls, and sports injuries.


Sixteen percent of all head injuries are caused by automobile accidents.

In the United States, head trauma is among the most important causes of morbidity and mortality in young people.

Head and neck injuries account for as many as 70% of all injuries sustained in automobile accidents, one of the most frequent types of accidents.

Add: Okay, so that first reference says "motor vehicle", which would include motorcycles.

 

[toppick08]

Do you actually ride a bike?

You think experience does not reduce my ability to avoid shale or oil in the first place, and adjust to control when I do hit it?

I know the difference between probability and statistics.

I know that in over half of all motorcycle deaths, the rider was wearing a helmet, so the helmet did nothing to reduce or prevent injury. Dead is dead.

I know that most accidents happen with inexperienced riders. Do you think that is an 'accident'? Inexperienced rider do not even know where the danger lies, so they take no precautions to avoid it. If you do not try to avoid it, it will probably happen.

If you are not in an accident, you do not need a helmet.
If you are young and/or inexperienced the probablity is high you will be in an accident.
If you are older or/more experienced the probability you will be in an accident is much lower, so the 'need' for a helmet is much lower.

Some of us old timers have been talking about these training courses they are offering. On the surface a very good idea, but we notice a trend to cause students to 'over think' the riding experience.
They suggest always riding with two or more bikes. With two riders with two different skill levels you are looking for trouble. Someone is going to be pushing their skill lever to keep up with their friend who is better. Been there, done that, had friends who crashed because of that.
Other examples, but never mind, don't want to discourage at lease SOME training.

When I started riding they were no training courses, no need to have an MC drivers license, no mandatory helmet law. And I've never crashed. I put a lot of miles on bikes under 250cc. No training course will match that. I am typical from my old H.S. gang, no make that 'group', don't want to give any wrong impressions.

You say "Bottom line, every time you go out, your probablility of being in an accident increases."
Yes, this is true, IF we disregard experience.

Here's what I tell people: 'The more you ride, the better driver you will become, and the less likly you will be involved in an accident'.
Do you want to tell me that is not true?

Statistically, the more miles you drive the more likely you will be involved in an accident.
The probability of being involved in an accident is reduced by riding more miles and gaining experience.


Please explain to me how I do not understand the difference betweeen statistics and probability.
Really, not a rhetorical comment. Explain to me how you are better versed on probability and statictics than I am.

Not all miles are equal.
A mile for an inexperienced rider is filled with danger, a mile for an experience rider is a pleasant cruise, except for the cage drivers of course.
Your claim is that all miles are equal. Hogwash.

~ ~ ~ ~

aps45819

No lawyer sites:

In the United States traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of death for persons under age 45. TBI occurs every 15 seconds. Approximately 5 million Americans currently suffer some form of TBI disability. The leading causes of TBI are motor vehicle accidents, falls, and sports injuries.


Sixteen percent of all head injuries are caused by automobile accidents.

In the United States, head trauma is among the most important causes of morbidity and mortality in young people.

Head and neck injuries account for as many as 70% of all injuries sustained in automobile accidents, one of the most frequent types of accidents.







Add: Okay, so that first reference says "motor vehicle", which would include motorcycles.

 

[aps45819]

I know that in over half of all motorcycle deaths, the rider was wearing a helmet, so the helmet did nothing to reduce or prevent injury. Dead is dead.
What kind of helmet? Was the ONLY injury a blow to the head? The padded salad bowls count as a helmet for the statisitic guys, but only offer protection from a ticket.

If you are not in an accident, you do not need a helmet.
Brilliant
~ ~ ~ ~

aps45819

No lawyer sites:

In the United States traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of death for persons under age 45. TBI occurs every 15 seconds. Approximately 5 million Americans currently suffer some form of TBI disability. The leading causes of TBI are motor vehicle accidents, falls, and sports injuries.


Sixteen percent of all head injuries are caused by "automobile accidents".
So 84% are caused by something else :shrug
In the United States, head trauma is among the most important causes of morbidity and mortality in young people.

Head and neck injuries account for as many as 70% of all injuries sustained in automobile accidents, one of the most frequent types of accidents.
Were they all wearing seat belts? Did they have front and side airbags?
.

I really don't care if you feel your head is not worth protecting. That's a decesion only you can make. Personally, I like my head the way it is so I wear a full face helmet.
The concept that "people in cars don't have to wear a helmet" is
That's the way it is and they will never be required to wear them as long as a women have a hair stye other than a Marine Hign'n'tight

 

[BeHereNow]

aps45819
Here's our middle ground.

It's a different world we live in that I grew up in.
I rode for three seasons before I had a bike that would do the speed limit on an uphill grade.
Flash forward. I have a friend who's son just got his first bike. He got what his friends were getting. I asked my buddy what kind of bike. He is younger than me but was riding when 'you meet the nicest people on a Honda', hasn't riden in several decades. He said,'It's not big, a 600cc or something like that.' I asked him what the red line is, he didn't know. The son couldn't finance the bike himself (21 yo college student), but he managed to get some money together, and with a small personal loan paid cash, and because of that saved about $500 on insurance.
I told my friend he should have his son put all that money he saved into a good helmet, since his first bike turned out to be a gixxer (Suzuki GSX-R).

One of his friends recently dumpted his, trying to avoid a squirrel. I've heard lots of 'swerved to miss a deer', accidents, but a squirrel, new on on me. Doubt it. I'd bet money his speed exceeded his skill level.

With guys riding first bikes capable of speeds in excess of 150mph, they should make full face the minimum requirement for inexperienced riders.
That is not beyond common sense.

For me motorcycle riding is about the experience, and the half dome gives me all the protection I feel I need, and still an enjoyable experience.
I like the triple digits, but I know how and when.
Not to say I won't be struck by a meterite or cell phoned soccer mom.

 

[BeHereNow]

BTW, in the last 12 months there have been at least 6 times I came around a blind curve, or over a hilltop and faced a deer standing in the middle of the road (two other time times they were on the move, so 8 total encounters).
Not even a skid mark, in full control the whole time.
That's not luck or statistics, that's experience.