Buckle up in your car or get a ticket, yet motorcylists don't have to wear helmets?

Great question dude, if a person crashes over 40mph on a motorcycle without a helmet on, there's a pretty good chance they're going to die. If a person crashes in a car without a seatbelt at 40mph, there's a pretty good chance they will live through it with minor injuries.

I probably see more people without helmets on motorcycles than with them, probably because they're uncomfortable is my guess. But you'll be pretty uncomfortable bleeding to death on the pavement with your skull cracked or living as a vegetable for the rest of your life.

Here in Arizona I found the laws to be rather odd. I lived in California for a long time and there is a helmet law over there, but you are allowed to lane share. Here in AZ you don't have to wear a helmet, but lane sharing is illegal. The other thing that always throws me off here is that its completely legal to ride in the back of a truck, with no seatbelt, but if you're up front you have to have a seatbelt on. I always thought that was really odd.

reply to post by links234



What the hell are you going to do? For starters: Not come into a thread and answer the wrong question. The person wants to know why *they* have to wear a seat belt but a biker (me) does not have to wear a helmet. simple question... that's what ATS IS FOR....well, part of it anyways. Someone needs help understanding something they come into ATS and ask. Your comment appears to be one where you feel or think this Poster was asking you directly...they weren't! They were asking those who would WANT to answer. In your case, go to the ATS POST where you can offer something instead of..." what do you want me to do about it!! " Quit acting so entitled!

The question to others btw.. is NOT what happens to us when we crash a bike compared to a car and what injuries do you sub-stain? the question was... err basically... Why do gorgeous bikers like that Trace get to choose whether to wear a helmet or not...knowing it could save her life...but I driving a car am forced to wear a seat belt! (lol)



btw...I'm not a lawyer... I have rode Harley all my life and I'm now starting to think I really should wear a helmet. When you're young, you're invincible.. and when you get older you finally figure it out...all cars are out to get you!! They want you dead...lol jj but serious..watch for us..will yea? lol

However: I do NOT want anyone to make that choice for me when it comes to a helmet or seat-belt. I'm one of those people that was saved NOT wearing a seat-belt. Had a worn one I would have been..*gulp* decapitated. Instead I just broke 9bones and lacerated 3 organs..lol Others would say... a seat-belt saved me...bottom line...we should be able to choose for ourselves.

Originally posted by illuminatitanimulli
Lots of times helmets cause deaths in motorcycle accidents. It should be up to the rider.

Freedom wise it should be up to the rider;otherwise; Got any figures to back that up? I 'm a long time proponent of "ATGATT"( all the gear;all the time").I learned to ride as a child ; playing in the dirt(where you fall off alot how important helmets are.)
Frankly believe that claim is baseless AND RIDICULOUS.

Originally posted by illuminatitanimulli
Lots of times helmets cause deaths in motorcycle accidents. It should be up to the rider.

Lots of times air bags burn faces and seatbelt cause internal organ damage that would likely NOT have happened if the driver was thrown clear of the vehicle!!!!
So what's your point again???
BTW...have experience both vehicle accidents with and without seatbelts and seen that it is split 50/50 how much death/injury happens without a seatbelt as opposed to with a seatbelt. So 50/50 odds IMO are not worth jack squat!

Originally posted by Pimpish
Here in Arizona I found the laws to be rather odd. I lived in California for a long time and there is a helmet law over there, but you are allowed to lane share. Here in AZ you don't have to wear a helmet, but lane sharing is illegal. The other thing that always throws me off here is that its completely legal to ride in the back of a truck, with no seatbelt, but if you're up front you have to have a seatbelt on. I always thought that was really odd.

Trucks and Arizona are like "peas in a pod" - - - lots of farmers with lots of kids and field workers who ride in the back of trucks.

It doesn't serve Arizona to not allow riders in the back of trucks. I think they've tried - - - but there would be too much opposition.

reply to post by Annee


Doesn't change the fact that its just weird. Why require a seatbelt up front when you can sit in the back with no safety equipment at all?

Originally posted by Pimpish
reply to post by Annee

 

Doesn't change the fact that its just weird. Why require a seatbelt up front when you can sit in the back with no safety equipment at all?

In Arizona its kind of a cultural thing. There is a big problem with unrestrained children and babies held in laps.

But - as most people don't realize that Arizona is an agricultural state. You have to have a way to transport workers.

There is current legislation to prevent children from riding in an open truck: www.freerepublic.com...

There was a motorcycle helmet law - - but it was repealed by protest from riders.

Originally posted by ldyserenity

Originally posted by illuminatitanimulli
Lots of times helmets cause deaths in motorcycle accidents. It should be up to the rider.

Lots of times air bags burn faces and seatbelt cause internal organ damage that would likely NOT have happened if the driver was thrown clear of the vehicle!!!!

"thrown clear of the vehicle" is the absolute worst outcome! as the odds the tumbling vehicle tends roll over the victim are pretty high. The chances the human projectile launched at random with enough force to send a 180lb body flying; surviving such a "flight" are low.
Facts are: wearing a seatbelt you have a better chance of remaining conscious enough to extricate yoursel ffrom A BURNING OR SINKING VEHICLE . Without the belt you become a RAG DOLL tossed around inside ( or worse out of the vehicle.

Originally posted by ldyserenity
So what's your point again???
BTW...have experience both vehicle accidents with and without seatbelts and seen that it is split 50/50 how much death/injury happens without a seatbelt as opposed to with a seatbelt. So 50/50 odds IMO are not worth jack squat!

Ask yourself why you are driving the way you are that requires you to wear a seatbelt.

Wearing a seatbelt does not stop dangerious driving.

However, you can always fit your own multi-point static harness instead of the 3 point reactionary belt.

That way wherever the seat goes, you go. no need for airbags.

What is wrong with driving carefully and slow? Must you race about?

Many times people have overtaken me in rage and at speed and I meet them 2 minutes later at the next lights.


It is very rare I even get close to the speed limit at all except on motorways and even then sometimes I am below it.

Even when overtaking, unless I really need to, I don't because usually I don't need to.

I do like sitting at the speed limit or below it where known static speed cameras sit. oh yeah rage past me. FLASH.

I also do not agree with a law that requires seatbelts to be worn, i like to think of it as survival of the fittest.
Only the smart will live or walk away without serious injuries from crashes and the ones who dont want to wear a seatbelt will no longer contaminate the gene pool.

On a side note, I dont know how it is in your states, when a crash results in a fatality it ties up a lot of emergency personel until the coroner arrives. On Maui there is no coroner for traffic crashes and the road will stay closed for 6-8 hours until the coroner can come from one of the other islands, meanwhile 3 fire trucks and 6 cop cars have to wait and keep the scene undisturbed for the coroner.

Additionally there is also a law that allows people to ride in the backs of pickup trucks that are over 14 years of age here, and people die every year in crashes because they were in the back.

But really, how can we expect law makers to take a rational approach to law when all that really matters is that the police chief wants to make more money, because the seatbelt law by itself wasnt ever meant to save lives, it was always about revenue. If lawmakers were serious about saving lives they would outlaw ridng in the back of trucks, bikes without helmets in addtion to the seatblet law, but then how would the coroner and insurance companies make money..... balance.

reply to post by 46ACE


Really cause I know someone who was thrown clear of their vehicle and had they not been thrown clear of the car (which was mutilated by another vehicle) would have been mulitated along with their body, so they had injuries but they were not dead. Sometimes it causes death too, but still it's 50/50... so it's no better or worse either way.

Originally posted by zookey
What is wrong with driving carefully and slow? Must you race about?

You obviously do not live in "Snowbird Country".

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by zookey
What is wrong with driving carefully and slow? Must you race about?

You obviously do not live in "Snowbird Country".

Whereever that is.

Anti seat belt people...

If you hit someone not having their kids seat buckled...which is the parents responsibility...yet you caused the accident and they died...and there was no seat buckle law...but otherwise would have been unharmed if they had been wearing them...

Would you want that on your conscience? Or would you simply think, oh well it's not my fault the kids parents didn't buckle them up?

I know I wouldn't...which is why I keep my seat belt on and make anyone who drives with me wear one.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the seat belt law and I'm glad it's there. It's not a hindrance and it takes 2 seconds to take it on or off. BIG DEAL. We've all been doing it for years. I actually feel safer when I have mine on because I know if i'm going to be hit by something I won't fly through the windshield or eat the steering wheel.

I recently read a study that said 90 percent people think most people can't drive or drive worse than themselves. Funny eh?

The seat belt law is a good law...wish more people followed it.

I live in southwest CT. have all my life, im 36. I know 2 people who have died using a motorbike, one with a helmet, but its a technical death* in CT, u must wear a helmet or risk being ticketed.
Around 1990, i was 15. A freind of my younger sister, he was 22, really active, cool guy, never a complaint about him. steve was his name. cute guy, good looks all that. One night, he was on our merrit parkway, near our city. From what i remember, it was likely he was drinking ( drunk) and riding his kawasaki bike fast ( he was into the fast sport motorbikes)... long story short..it took the police 45 minutes to find his head.... it appears he had fallen asleep riding his bike super fast, veered off the road at night, and a tree branch took his head off.
Another kinda freind of my older sister, 1989. he was around 19 at the time. riding his 'bike' during rush hour raffic on a heavily congested road at evening. He had his helmet on. He hit a huge pothole traveling fast, ddint see it, and threw him over his handlebars. threw him a good 40 feet. his head hit the ground...the helmet saved his life...exccept.. he got up and a bus ran him over. he was at hospitol on life support and passed away 4 1/2 hours later.
i dont ride bikes, and never will. hearing and knowing the true storys of my sisters 2 friends, gorey as they are, sad and seemigly unfair..totaly turned me off from them.

reply to post by ExPostFacto


Sounds like federal blackmail to me.

Originally posted by zookey
Ask yourself why you are driving the way you are that requires you to wear a seatbelt.

Wearing a seatbelt does not stop dangerious driving.

However, you can always fit your own multi-point static harness instead of the 3 point reactionary belt.

That way wherever the seat goes, you go. no need for airbags.

What is wrong with driving carefully and slow? Must you race about?

Many times people have overtaken me in rage and at speed and I meet them 2 minutes later at the next lights.


It is very rare I even get close to the speed limit at all except on motorways and even then sometimes I am below it.

Even when overtaking, unless I really need to, I don't because usually I don't need to.

I do like sitting at the speed limit or below it where known static speed cameras sit. oh yeah rage past me. FLASH.

edit on 29-5-2011 by zookey because: (no reason given)

Yes, good point if they took "dangerous driver's" off the road forever...ie. break speed and reckless driving laws (meaning the police have to do their jobs) or get 3 dui's then you should be off the road forever then there wouldn't need to be seatbelt laws. But, oh that's too much work for the police to get every driver who repeatedly speeds/drives reckless or drinks and drives, too much work for states to pass these 3 strike laws (but they have done it for criminals?). Why if driving IS a Privelege can they not take that privelege away permanently the third time you disobey the laws of the road?

reply to post by ldyserenity


A quick google search showed many results for seat belt statistics. I found none that are close to your fifty fifty that you are stating as fact. Simple research people!

Originally posted by David9176
Anti seat belt people...

If you hit someone not having their kids seat buckled...which is the parents responsibility...yet you caused the accident and they died...and there was no seat buckle law...but otherwise would have been unharmed if they had been wearing them...

Would you want that on your conscience? Or would you simply think, oh well it's not my fault the kids parents didn't buckle them up?

I know I wouldn't...which is why I keep my seat belt on and make anyone who drives with me wear one.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the seat belt law and I'm glad it's there. It's not a hindrance and it takes 2 seconds to take it on or off. BIG DEAL. We've all been doing it for years. I actually feel safer when I have mine on because I know if i'm going to be hit by something I won't fly through the windshield or eat the steering wheel.

I recently read a study that said 90 percent people think most people can't drive or drive worse than themselves. Funny eh?

The seat belt law is a good law.

I believe in the child seat/ and seatbelt laws for children's safety...but as an adult I am responsible for what happens to me not the state not the federal government, nobody else. Being a mother I would always make my child wear a seatbelt. But as an adult I should not have to wear mine (I always do so my kids won't whine) But now they're older so most of the time I am not travelling with them in the car and I only use my seatbelt when I am riding with them to set by example. I never wear it when riding alone. So far I haven't gotten busted. I don't really care if I do, because I have had two in the long past before I had kids and got out of those too. I just simply use the not gulty plea the fifth...but now I am ready to go all out of my way to take this fight to the Supreme Court about our rights.
However, a good parent will know to lead their children by example because you know if you don't wear your seatbelt your child wont want to either.
But the laws for children I agree 110% with.
Because some parents...well let's face it they shouldn't be parents cause they don't have any sense...too bad.