Honda Shadow Forums banner

Missouri House Endorsed 'No Helmet' Law

17K views 33 replies 17 participants last post by  tlib96 
#1 ·
#6 · (Edited)
:D Good!!!
Happy Dance :D


Hopefully Georgia will approve free choice soon...

BUT it still has a long way to go...
Call your house and senate members...
 
#8 ·
That's good, but you know that it gives insurance companies a reason to raise rates. And don't think that they won't.

Not trying to creating an argument, I am all for choice.
 
#10 ·
Gotta love the ability to choose.. Well done MO-FO's. .. That would stand for "Missourians For Options", Old Dad ;) ... :mrgreen:
 
#11 ·
I'll always support people's rights to choose what kind of protection they want to wear, however after my spill, I'll always wear a full face helmet... Wrecked a sports bike doing about 50 on a mountain highway, spill ripped through my armored glove and broke two fingers, one of which required pins and several months of PT. Helmet saved my life though. Rolled off the bike and slapped the back of my head on the asphalt, without the helmet I would be dead for sure.

Like I said, I'll always support individual rights to wear/not wear gear, but I always advocate for Full gear on every ride.
 
#12 · (Edited)
...Like I said, I'll always support individual rights to wear/not wear gear, but I always advocate for Full gear on every ride.
:shock: ..Glad you made it through that Okay..

Like you say.. It's always gonna be nicer than not to have the option..

There are guys and gals on this forum who wouldn't ride if they had to look like me.. And.. As I see it.. Those types of people ..y'know. THOSE "Types" (with no style) - Well.. They have the right to ride and feel comfortable on two wheels too :roll: .. :mrgreen:

Don't mind paying a-little more for my insurance if that's what it takes. :wink:
 
#15 · (Edited)
ABATE of GA has tried getting actual crash reports to research...

Just try getting these from officials...
IF & When you do find a source to receive the facts, Please let me know how to....

 
#16 ·
If you don't want to wear a helmet and your state doesn't require it...then don't wear one. But please God...don't try and justify your actions by what ifing the crash data...or what has alway been COMMON SENSE knowledge...which is having a protective helmet over your brain will help you survive should you bump your noggin. No.. crash data doesn't contain every piece of information we wish it did so we could really say helmets are safer or not...but did you need an infrared heat gauge with triple flux capacitors to know the stove was hot...or was it just common sense? I don't need crash data to tell me that a helmet is safer than no helmet...or that a full face is better than a half helmet...I know this already. And I for one would not want to live with myself if someone died or became a vegetable because I talked them out of wearing a helmet for my own stupid anti helmet propaganda reasons. So in closing...I am pro choice...I think it should be an option....but don't try and say helmets dont help, or gun locks don't protect children, or condoms are black magic, or democrats are good for this country....all equally ridiculous statements in my book ??
 
#17 ·
Well said!
I am also pro choice and have this discussion with my brother on a regular basis.
I choose to were a helmet he chooses not to. We ride together all the time me with a helmet and leather him with a bathing suit, flip flops and a very small non-DOT approved little skull cap.
Different stroke for different folks.
Bottom line, I'm all for freedom of choice.
 
#20 · (Edited)
True, I think all statistics are quoted to serve that which a statistician would seek to prove..

But, Neck damage? I have heard that one too.. Who really knows that, or could prove that one way or another?

The same faulty math would need to apply..

It's probably more likely to PROVE that the use of helmets prevent loss of profit to emergency rooms.. As a helmet might prevent more superficial injuries that go unpaid after a person is patched up.

But, Motorcycle accidents - every-single last one of them, is different.. Because a person's body is being flung around like a rag doll and there's impacts here, there, and everywhere..

It's not crash dummy time, where the dummy hits the object the same way under the same angle, at the same speeds every-single time. So I think it's IMPOSSIBLE to prove that the use of helmets save lives..

I think a person can apply a little logic and say that they Can Help to prevent Some Injuries under Certain Circumstances..

But yes.. I wholly agree.. Due to the variations in what happens when any motorcyclist is bouncing off the road's surface, you couldn't possibly say that helmets save lives..

You could imagine it to be true.. But that's not proving it.. I can't see how that could be even remotely possible to prove. Just too many variations in impact data to properly ascertain.

So.. Most definitely then, a helmet should be thing of choice.. Should be the same choice as choosing to wear an armored jacket, pants or gloves (for example)..
 
#25 ·
This is very hypothetical. But, the best thing that could happen is if you do go down, is that you stay down. No clue what kind of coverage or insurance you have. I always worry, what if I survive, but can't work ever again? Now I'm a useless sack of meat that needs taking care of. I just can't bear the thought of putting my wife through something like that.
 
#33 · (Edited)
Well this thread went as predicted.

That link is from 2013. The bill passed. One of two times it passed recently. The governor vetoed it (A passed bill is not a law until it's signed). Unsure if there was an attempt to override the veto but likely not enough of a supermajority to do so anyway.

It's a dance that happens when a seat comes up. Congresspersons throw up a bill to appease a lobby or group of voters they they know full well won't become a law. Gov. Nixon has promised to veto any law that allows riders to go helmet-less. Period. So while the current governor is in office any bill doing the same is simply a waste of our time as taxpayers. Just fluff to get in the news.

Interestingly, both times this was originally going on I saw helmet-less riders in my area. Probably heard on the news a headline to the effect of "House passes bill allowing..." and, since they didn't pay attention in the 3rd grade; they thought that meant they can go without their helmet! (For a refresher; first passes House, then has to pass Senate. Then on Governors desk to be signed, vetoed, or ignored. Signed, it becomes law. Vetoed, it can go back for a vote and if it passes both houses by 2/3rds it becomes a law without the need for the Governors signature. So don't get too excited when the headlines exclaim that the bill passes the House. It probably will again and again and again. But it won't get past our current Governors desk).
 
#34 ·
One thing I've never understood is how my neighbor can get on his 50cc scooter and head to the store with no helmet, no motorcycle license, no insurance and no tag, but if I take my motorcycle to the same store I have to have all the before mentioned items. Now I understand the license, ins, and tags but he can run all around town without a helmet why shouldn't I be able too? Is it not just as dangerous for him? I would think more so, his scooter is smaller thus making him less visible. And one mite say well he can only go 30, but yet he's going down the same road I am that is marked 45 mph.
Anyway, I am a helmet wearer, but I would like to just be able to run up to the parts store without it if I so desired. But yea, this all is probably a moot point.

Great verse Romans5.8 BTW
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top