Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

News Gear Up Every Ride Initiative By USA Motorcycle Industry Council

Discussion in 'Motorcycling News' started by NetriderBot, Apr 28, 2015.

  1. The US Motorcycle Industry Council – the industry body that looks after the interests of motorcycle manufacturers, distributors, dealers and retailers of bikes, gear, parts and accessories is launching a a new initiative built around ways to encourage riders to use proper motorcycle apparel.

    The official launch will happen during May’s Motorcycle Safety Awareness month. The website is already up but will officially launch this Friday with an online contest featuring nearly $10,000 in prizes and growing.

    “Gear Up is designed to be more of a movement than a public awareness campaign,” said Eric Anderson, chair of MIC’s Rider Safety Committee. “We want to inspire a fundamental shift in the way riders think, encouraging them to express themselves and the independent spirit of motorcycling through their riding gear. At the same time, we want to help motorcyclists make educated decisions. It’s not about shaming riders to do the right thing. It’s about providing good information and encouragement to make wise choices.”

    According to the Council, Gear Up Every Ride is based on the core principles of education, preparation and inspiration. The Gear Up team believes that informing riders of the latest developments and trends in protective equipment will allow them to make the best decisions about the gear they wear. Gear Up is also designed to better prepare riders for the road ahead, guiding them toward the right apparel to take on the challenges that the road and weather might present.

    It’s a great looking campaign and is in stark contrast to the American Motorcyclist Association that continues to hold on to its archaic view on the use of motorcycle helmets. Their official position statement on helmet use includes such gems as, “Mandatory helmet laws do nothing to prevent crashes”. At least the Motorcycle Industry Council realizes that in order for its members to remain profitable, it needs customers that are alive.


    Continue reading...
  2. The slight problem with criticizing this "gem" is that it is absolutely correct.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. The statement "Mandatory helmet laws do nothing to prevent crashes" is absolutely correct. Anyone who argues differently is ignorant.

    But this is the bit that gets me

    "At least the Motorcycle Industry Council realizes that in order for its members to remain profitable, it needs customers that are alive."

    Bullshit - the MIC realizes that in order for it's members to remain profitable it needs customers.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  4. It is a gem when it's used as an argument not to have mandatory helmet laws. I don't think anyone in their right mind believes helmets stop crashes but obviously they help keep people alive in the event of one.

    That's an argument you'd expect from a teenager, not the peak national body that supposedly has riders interests at heart. It'd be much more honest of them to say that they don't want their freedom infringed and ignore the safety aspect entirely.
  5. "It's my right to wear whatever I choose".
    "It's my right to risk becoming totally dependent".

    Taking extreme positions on subjects like this is not very useful IMO.
  6. Helmets can saves lives in some crashes, make no difference in others, and in some circumstances the can make things worse. Pretending that the first option is always going to be the case is either ignorant or misleading.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Please provide evidence of this and not some crackpots blog.
  8. In some circumstances the helmet itself can cause rotational injuries, particularly if the chin piece on a full face helmet catches on something, like the a protrusion on the road.

    Now, please tell me what is wrong with the statement "Mandatory helmet laws do nothing to prevent crashes". Surely your not suggesting that a rider is better spending their hard earned money on PPE than on training?
    • Like Like x 1
  9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21768134

    "However, when the samples were further subcategorized into different crash modes, it was found that helmets affect the incidence of a severe cervical spine injury. In frontal collisions, the use of helmets significantly reduces the severity of cervical spine injury, whereas in rear-end, side impact, and skidded accidents, the use of helmets increases the probability of a severe cervical spine injury. However, in the latter crash modes, a motorcyclist without a helmet will have to trade-off with head injury. A logistic regression model has been developed with respective crash modes and the probabilities of risk in having severe cervical spine injury have been calculated. Future designs in motorcycle helmets should therefore consider the significance of nonfrontal accidents and the interaction of helmet with other parts of the body by possibly considering the weight of the helmet."

    • Like Like x 1
  10. Dunno about the "obviously"... as for keeping folk alive in the event, are we sure that this is a good thing?

    Any stats I've seen about how helmets "save lives" all seem to be tick a box if the person is still breathing and has heartbeat after X hours/days/weeks.

    The never seems to be any follow up, to see if the life saved is now worth living, as in "quality of life".

    Dunno about the rest of you, but I've read of "survivors" of crashes who have been in such a state that, I'd really rather not survive.
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Above 60km/h, a solid impact head strike into an object, with or without a helmet, is as equally likely to be fatal.

    The sliding type impacts and the low speed impacts are where a helmet will very likely save your skull.

    American's are a funny breed. I used to stalk a couple of US motorcycle forums... they'd argue black and blue about the life saving benefits of ABS brakes and that they'd rather have it even for that once in a life time event... yet they'd argue black and blue not to wear a helmet because it's their right - irrespective of the likely increase in complicating injuries or death without one.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. that's like saying Timtams do nothing to prevent satellites crashing...

    also true, but equally irrelevant :D
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. You honestly think that the statement "Mandatory helmet laws do nothing to prevent crashes" is irrelevant to motorcycle safety?

    Try again, but before you do have a think about it.
  14. Here's one: "Mandatory helmet laws add a discouragement factor that may deter a number of complete fools from riding motorcycles in the first place".

    This is a deliberately inflammatory statement to demonstrate that even a basically logical proposition can be made to look biased and unfair by the way it is framed. Pay attention to the way statements are framed (not aimed at you, B12).
  15. geez mick.. maybe you could do a bit of thinking..

    there's two aspects of safety, they are playing one off against the other., obviously...

    prevent the accident = safety A
    mitigate/minimise damage after accident = safety B

    purpose of Helmet is safety B, not safety A. how is it relevant to dis helmet laws because they don't do anything for something that cannot have any effect on?

    do you seriously believe helmets are mandatory because they PREVENT accidents?
    apart from distractions from road debris/bugs etc, how can a helmet prevent an accident?

    it's like saying "olive green cigarette packets do nothing to prevent cancer in people who still smoke just as much regardless of packet colour"... duh :p
  16. I smell an attempt to sell more gear to the easily frightened and those who believe in the power of talismans.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. So the statement is relevant to motorcycle safety.

    Here let me extrapolate it out for you.

    Mandatory gear never prevented an accident. The money spent on gear would be better spent on training that way the gear is far less likely to be required.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. I totally agree, be the best rider you can be, exercise the best rider skills you can. This will intrinsically decrease the FREQUENCY or LIKELIHOOD of crashes, but mostly in the part of the spectrum that you the rider have the most influence over. There are some factors that riders have limited influence over - animals, other drivers, unexpected obstacles, camouflaged road conditions, equipment failure etc. But even here, most of the time there are signs that can give rise to predictable scenarios to keep an eye out for.

    Gear largely reduces the size of the CONSEQUENCE from a fall, so it's passive protection. I say largely because in certain circumstances, gear can directly influence the likelihood of a crash either positively or negatively... e.g., cold (not warm enough), wet (not dry enough, cold, distracted), ill fitting (too floppy, too tight, cutting off circulation), distracting (noise, flapping, wind leaks etc) , uncomfortable (bit tight in the crotch/shoulders, restricting movement, pressure points), hot (not cooling enough, heat build up), etc etc.

    It's actually a complex issue which is why non helmet related gear should NEVER go near mandatory legislation.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  19. That's a really good point. But does that include mandatory fluro vests ? :wacky:
  20. Abso*********lutely yes.
    • Agree Agree x 1