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.

[US] New Hampshire rider fatilities jump

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by dan, Jan 5, 2006.

  1. And that's a big deal because it's not mandatory to wear helmets there...

    So the government reaction was:

    a) pull out the legislative 3-wood from the bag and belt a new law down the fairway
    b) suggest more rider training and education

    they went for b, which is quite refreshing indeed.
    Leaving aside the usual helmet debate that has been done to death here.... Perhaps our governments could look to the same option before getting the 3-wood out as a knee jerk reaction to any road safety issue.

    Full story: http://motorcyclebloggers.com/2006/01/04/clear-heads-in-new-hampshire/
  2. Sorry mate but you can't leave the helmet debate out of any discussion relating to rider fatalities in the US, that is the core issue period.

    Americans are so fcuking dumb. When are they gonna wake up and stop using the 'consitution' as a right to kill themselves :roll:
  3. I don't have my copy of the Australian Road Rider magazine on my desk at the moment, but there's a very interesting article in there relating to the actual stats of helmeted vs un-helmeted riders in accidents.

    The short story- There is no difference in the cost of hospital care in related accidents between a helmeted rider vs unhelmeted rider.

    I can't remember what it said about the fatality rate.
  4. Yep, better education might reduce the number of accidents but if they're not wearing helmets most of those accidents are still going to be fatalities.
  5. According to the NHTSA 2004 stats 44.7% of fatal motorcycle accidents involved riders not wearing a helmet. Furthermore helmet use was found to have saved 1316 riders, and could have saved 671 more ie more than a third of fatalities could have been prevented by wearing a helmet.
  6. I know a couple of americans who ride - they're sensible people, who always wear a helmet & they live in states where it's not law (in some states it IS law but not in all). In fact when I got my licence they said "always wear a helmet!" and when I told them it's law throughout the country they thought that was amazing!!!

    However on the majority yes you're right. There's a real "open highway with the wind in your hair" mentality there. They associate not wearing a helmet with freedom & the american way of life. In fact I've even had a debate with some americans over helmets in which they said "wearing a helmet is dangerous, it decreases your visibility & awareness of the outside world".

    I argued "Then driving a car is dangerous too." They thought my logic was flawed.
  7. The USA is such a large country with such a wide and diverse population that you can always find some weird and wacky behavior and ideas there, somewhere.

    The USA are heavily anti-government. Their left-wing political parties, the Democrats, makes Australia's "right-wing" Liberal party look only marginally less left than the Communist party in China.

    USA politics are all about minimalist government intervention, and that goes right down to the little things like forcing people to wear helmets. In the USA it's all about choice. Their approach to life can simplistically be summed up as: "You can believe whatever the hell you want, and do what you want, just don't go expecting or forcing me to think the same as you or do the same as you, and we'll all get along just fine."
  8. Well summed up Cathar. Most people in the US are more content dealing with issues of personal safety day to day than having the government dictate it to them, to the point where you have an over-legislated society like ours.

    Before you know it, you end up with so many laws that you can't fart without getting a fine. Just like the situation with lane-filtering it's up for banning just because someone in a position of power reckons it's should, and has nothing better to do.

    As Thomas Jefferson said, "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."

    Rings true for me personally.