"U.S. Officials Seek Mandatory Helmet, Training"

[John in VA]

Washington Post article today:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/06/AR2008100603148.html

 

"The steady rise in motorcycle crashes has become a top concern of the U.S. Department of Transportation, said Secretary Mary Peters, who broke her collarbone a few years ago when she crashed her Harley-Davidson Road King at 40 mph. A helmet saved her life, she said.

 

To address the problem, the Transportation Department is developing national standards for entry-level riders and has launched an educational campaign on the importance of wearing helmets and other safety gear. Congress has also become involved, authorizing $2 million for a study of crashes' causes."

[Wooster]

While the civil libertarian (now that's not the political party but an attitude) in me cringes at more government involvement in one of my favored pastimes, I can't see the harm in emphasizing training and mandating helmets (wouldn't change my day to day behavior). And that the Secretary of Transportation (Ms Peters) was (hopefully is) a rider, well, that's great !

 

Wooster with three street helmets yet no formal training

[bobbybob]

The article cited states:

"2 percent of all vehicles on the nation's roads last year were motorcycles, yet they were involved in 11 percent of all traffic accidents."

 

Five times the automobile crash rate. However, I wonder what % of the moto accidents were the result of either DUI or stunting/hooning/etc. on the streets? In other words, 2 causes that Federally mandated helmets and training will not really change (except in states that have no helmet laws). If people want to be stupid, neither helmets or training will save them from themselves. I suspect these 2 causes account for a large percent of that 11%.

[Deadboy]

The reporter forgot to ask why riders, who make up approx. 11% of the accidents are the recipient of only 1% of the 402 funds which are given to states for driver/rider safety programs....

 

If this was such a priority then NHTSA should be seeking to increase spending. Never mind the fact that Ms. Peters had never taken a rider education class herself at the time of her accident….and that she ran into her husband who was stopped in front of her….

 

[bobbybob]

Hi Nick, I see you made it out of Hells Canyon without a bicycle for a hood ornament!

[knight88]

The article cited states:

"2 percent of all vehicles on the nation's roads last year were motorcycles, yet they were involved in 11 percent of all traffic accidents."

 

Five times the automobile crash rate. However, I wonder what % of the moto accidents were the result of either DUI or stunting/hooning/etc. on the streets? In other words, 2 causes that Federally mandated helmets and training will not really change (except in states that have no helmet laws). If people want to be stupid, neither helmets or training will save them from themselves. I suspect these 2 causes account for a large percent of that 11%.

 

I wonder how many of these were not at fault accidents, such as a cager making a left in front of the bike, rear ending, etc. Maybe they also need to emphasize motorcycle awarness driver education for all new drivers.

[Deadboy]

That I did....I meant to post a ride tale but never did. Here is a shot from that day in the canyon.....and yes, those bicycles were a pain, luckily we got away from them soon after. The rest of the trip was just as nice.....great roads, weather and camping....

 

Heading out again soon....

 

[John in VA]

Mary Peters' PSA:

 

http://www.nhtsa.gov/multimedia/TV/mc_safety_CC.wmv

 

[dogboy11]

Congress has also become involved, authorizing $2 million for a study of crashes' causes."

 

$2M for a study? .... tell you what, give me the $2M and I can tell you the cause of motorcycle accidents. (1) Careless behavior by the motorcyclist or (2) Careless behavior from a cage driver.

 

Better yet, put the $2M into education for riders AND (here's a new concept) education and awareness campaigns for drivers to watch for motorcyclists.

 

DB

[bmurphypdx]

FWIW, I am confident that the involvement of our federal government with this issue will certainly lead to something, or maybe not, 10 or 20 years from now if not later. I'm equally confident the federal government will spend the measly $2M by allocating $1.5M to consultants, only 10% of whom will issue reports (with meaningful conclusions like wearing helmets is safer than not wearing helmets) and the remaining $500,000 will be allocated to administrative costs. Just saying . . .

[upflying]

What are the fatalities per 100,000 miles? 5,100 fatalities doesn't mean much without knowing how many deaths occur per 100,000 mi of travel. My first reaction to this is further government "nannyism" and intrusion into our choices and freedoms. Sadly, recent events tends to show American's are in favor of more socialism.

 

[chrisolson]

... I'm equally confident the federal government will spend the measly $2M by allocating $1.5M to consultants, only 10% of whom will issue reports (with meaningful conclusions like wearing helmets is safer than not wearing helmets) and the remaining $500,000 will be allocated to administrative costs. Just saying . . .

Just think of it as a bail out for the motorcycle consultant industry.

[yabadabapal]

I think this is great news. I see so many knucleheads trying to beat the price of gas by riding motorcycles without any training.

I wish that people who have regular drivers licenses would be required to take a written motorcycle general multi choice test so that car drivers will better understand how to work with Motorcycle drivers. And then if they pass the 10 question test, they might be awarded an additional savings on their car insurance. Just another silly Idea. I have plenty of them.

 

[Deadboy]

Actually the money was allocated long ago and is made up of private and public funds....

 

http://www.amadirectlink.com/news/2008/amadot.asp

 

http://www.amadirectlink.com/news/2007/study.asp

 

 

[tallman]

What are the fatalities per 100,000 miles? 5,100 fatalities doesn't mean much without knowing how many deaths occur per 100,000 mi of travel. My first reaction to this is further government "nannyism" and intrusion into our choices and freedoms. Sadly, recent events tends to show American's are in favor of more socialism.

 

Socialism would be if they bought us the bike and the helmet first, then said we had to wear the helmet.

[upflying]

What are the fatalities per 100,000 miles? 5,100 fatalities doesn't mean much without knowing how many deaths occur per 100,000 mi of travel. My first reaction to this is further government "nannyism" and intrusion into our choices and freedoms. Sadly, recent events tends to show American's are in favor of more socialism.

 

Socialism would be if they bought us the bike and the helmet first, then said we had to wear the helmet.

 

Ah yes, a great proletariat motorcycle would be the Ural from the old USSR.

[MotorinLA]

The article cited states:

"2 percent of all vehicles on the nation's roads last year were motorcycles, yet they were involved in 11 percent of all traffic accidents."

 

Five times the automobile crash rate. However, I wonder what % of the moto accidents were the result of either DUI or stunting/hooning/etc. on the streets? In other words, 2 causes that Federally mandated helmets and training will not really change (except in states that have no helmet laws). If people want to be stupid, neither helmets or training will save them from themselves. I suspect these 2 causes account for a large percent of that 11%.

 

I wonder how many of these were not at fault accidents, such as a cager making a left in front of the bike, rear ending, etc. Maybe they also need to emphasize motorcycle awarness driver education for all new drivers.

 

My thoughts exactly. Motorcycle collisions may be higher, but how many of those collisions were caused by the driver of a car? It doesn't help to educate motorcyclists, if the collisions are being caused by another group of drivers...

 

[MotorinLA]

My guess is that this is the main reason why...

[RichEdwards]

I think we should bundle new motorcycle training and helmet rules with the soon-to-arrive banking/Wall Street regulations.

[ltljohn]

I think we should bundle new motorcycle training and helmet rules with the soon-to-arrive banking/Wall Street regulations.

I think it was in the bailout bill, heck everything else was.

[Deadboy]

So what do you figure, 80 in a 35?

[tallman]

The article cited states:

"2 percent of all vehicles on the nation's roads last year were motorcycles, yet they were involved in 11 percent of all traffic accidents."

 

Five times the automobile crash rate. However, I wonder what % of the moto accidents were the result of either DUI or stunting/hooning/etc. on the streets? In other words, 2 causes that Federally mandated helmets and training will not really change (except in states that have no helmet laws). If people want to be stupid, neither helmets or training will save them from themselves. I suspect these 2 causes account for a large percent of that 11%.

 

I wonder how many of these were not at fault accidents, such as a cager making a left in front of the bike, rear ending, etc. Maybe they also need to emphasize motorcycle awarness driver education for all new drivers.

 

My thoughts exactly. Motorcycle collisions may be higher, but how many of those collisions were caused by the driver of a car? It doesn't help to educate motorcyclists, if the collisions are being caused by another group of drivers...

 

Actually, last MCN survey (to best of recollection) showed 1/2 of accidents were on 2 lane roads w/no other vehicles involved, in good weather, w/good road surfaces.

We have met the enemy, and he is us.

 

Remember all you Wall Street bashers, the problems go back to Bills from 1975, 1977, and 1995.

Who ran the asylum then?

 

[TonyS]

My thoughts exactly. Motorcycle collisions may be higher, but how many of those collisions were caused by the driver of a car? It doesn't help to educate motorcyclists, if the collisions are being caused by another group of drivers...

 

I've been riding motorcycles on the street since 1973 and have had seven near accidents. By near accidents I mean situations where a little luck was critical to my survival. Two of those were caused by owls (like being hit by a flying bowling ball). One was a car that pulled out in front of me, another a pickup truck being driven way too fast that slid around a corner and took up all but maybe eighteen inches of my lane. (That one kept me off the bike for few months.) Three of the near misses were other motorcycles!! One sport bike, one Harley, and one BMW, all being ridden out of control and much too far into my lane. I did have some swerve room in all three cases to avoid the wayward bikes. A friend on a GS was hit head on by a sport bike last year. He saw it coming, the rider out of control on a curve, and was all the way over to the right of his lane. He was OK, his bike totalled. Way too many of the motorcycle accidents around here are single vehicle, including two fatalities on Jalama road a week apart, and another on Foxen Canyon. Both roads are my frequent rides. I did stop recently on Foxen Canyon to offer assistance to a rider who explained that was trying to reach 100mph on a short straight and then couldn't make the curve. The enemy may indeed be us.

[Bud]

IIRC 50% of motorcycle accidents are single vehicle. Large percentage involve drinking.

[drzep]

Helmets for all. Its about time.

[David]

If health moves more toward a nationalized system at some point, it wouldn't surprise me to see some sort of helmet mandate accompany it.

[MotorinLA]

My thoughts exactly. Motorcycle collisions may be higher, but how many of those collisions were caused by the driver of a car? It doesn't help to educate motorcyclists, if the collisions are being caused by another group of drivers...

 

I've been riding motorcycles on the street since 1973 and have had seven near accidents. By near accidents I mean situations where a little luck was critical to my survival. Two of those were caused by owls (like being hit by a flying bowling ball). One was a car that pulled out in front of me, another a pickup truck being driven way too fast that slid around a corner and took up all but maybe eighteen inches of my lane. (That one kept me off the bike for few months.) Three of the near misses were other motorcycles!! One sport bike, one Harley, and one BMW, all being ridden out of control and much too far into my lane. I did have some swerve room in all three cases to avoid the wayward bikes. A friend on a GS was hit head on by a sport bike last year. He saw it coming, the rider out of control on a curve, and was all the way over to the right of his lane. He was OK, his bike totalled. Way too many of the motorcycle accidents around here are single vehicle, including two fatalities on Jalama road a week apart, and another on Foxen Canyon. Both roads are my frequent rides. I did stop recently on Foxen Canyon to offer assistance to a rider who explained that was trying to reach 100mph on a short straight and then couldn't make the curve. The enemy may indeed be us.

 

Motorcycle education will never be able to eliminate a lack of common sense. Single vehicle collisions are a clear example of rider error most of the time (with another small fraction being other factors). IMO education will do little to eliminate this percentage of collisions.

 

I'm guessing, but my intuition and experience tells me that a disproportionate number of the multi-vehicle collisions are caused by the other driver. Education of motorcycle riders may reduce this number slightly, but not by much.

 

I'm all for motorcycle helmets, but I fear that mandated motorcycle training programs will not have the impact that some of these law makers are hoping to achieve.

[MotorinLA]

So what do you figure, 80 in a 35?

 

The sad thing is that the motorcyclist probably was not really speeding. My guess based on the distance covered and the time elapsed (approximately 50-60 feet in just under a second, would give an estimated speed of about 40-45 mph. The video is deceiving, because the area viewed is small and the direction of motion is perpendicular to the camera angle, giving an appearence of greater speed.

 

I was trying to illustrate a violation of right-of-way (VC 21801(a) in California); failure to yield to on-coming traffic when making a left turn.

[ghaverkamp]

Remember all you Wall Street bashers, the problems go back to Bills from 1975, 1977, and 1995.

Who ran the asylum then?

 

Odd. I wouldn't have guessed such involvement.

 

Looks like Lou Saban, Jim Ringo, and Marv Levy.

[11101110]

I think that any cager who is convicted of an offence where the offendee is a motorcycle, the cager should be required to take a basic MSF course and PASS it. Maybe some of the LEOs here would start recomending it in lieu of driver re-education?

 

I also think all non motorcycle riding LEOs should take it as part of basic training. I have personal experience that there are some who just don't understand the physics of cycling much less what is tought by the MSF. Of coures there are more riders than LEOs who need a good physics lesson.

[Quinn]

I think that any cager who is convicted of an offence where the offendee is a motorcycle, the cager should be required to take a basic MSF course and PASS it. Maybe some of the LEOs here would start recomending it in lieu of driver re-education?

 

I also think all non motorcycle riding LEOs should take it as part of basic training. I have personal experience that there are some who just don't understand the physics of cycling much less what is tought by the MSF. Of coures there are more riders than LEOs who need a good physics lesson.

 

So, you have a cager who is so inattentive that he hits a motorcycle and you want to help him become a rider? Don't think I agree.

 

 

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Dear Ms Peters,

Go for it.

 

See my avatar.

 

[russell_bynum]

I think that any cager who is convicted of an offence where the offendee is a motorcycle, the cager should be required to take a basic MSF course and PASS it. Maybe some of the LEOs here would start recomending it in lieu of driver re-education?

 

I also think all non motorcycle riding LEOs should take it as part of basic training. I have personal experience that there are some who just don't understand the physics of cycling much less what is tought by the MSF. Of coures there are more riders than LEOs who need a good physics lesson.

 

Does that mean if you run into a car when you're on your bike that you should have to take a driver's education class?

 

 

[11101110]

I think that any cager who is convicted of an offence where the offendee is a motorcycle, the cager should be required to take a basic MSF course and PASS it. Maybe some of the LEOs here would start recomending it in lieu of driver re-education?

 

I also think all non motorcycle riding LEOs should take it as part of basic training. I have personal experience that there are some who just don't understand the physics of cycling much less what is tought by the MSF. Of coures there are more riders than LEOs who need a good physics lesson.

 

So, you have a cager who is so inattentive that he hits a motorcycle and you want to help him become a rider? Don't think I agree.

 

 

Never said anything about the offender becomming a rider but if they do I bet Darwin will take care of it. Some non-cyclist have no clue whay motorcycles do what they do.

[russell_bynum]

I think you guys are spending way too much time worrying about what the other guy is going to do to ensure your wellbeing.

[11101110]

I think that any cager who is convicted of an offence where the offendee is a motorcycle, the cager should be required to take a basic MSF course and PASS it. Maybe some of the LEOs here would start recomending it in lieu of driver re-education?

 

I also think all non motorcycle riding LEOs should take it as part of basic training. I have personal experience that there are some who just don't understand the physics of cycling much less what is tought by the MSF. Of coures there are more riders than LEOs who need a good physics lesson.

 

Does that mean if you run into a car when you're on your bike that you should have to take a driver's education class?

 

 

I have been involved in two collisions in my life. Neither my fault. In both cases the at fault drivers were told to take a re-education course. So yes. I did attend a re-education coures to get a discount on my insurance. It was so unhelpful (other than insurance discount) and I firmly believe that taking a MSF basic course would make someone a much better driver than a driver re-education course, regardless if they ever buy a bike themselves.

[Hoover]

I think you guys are spending way too much time worrying about what the other guy is going to do to ensure your wellbeing.

 

Bravo.

 

I see morons everyday I am on the road. Some days, the moron is me. No one is perfect and will obey all traffic laws 100% of the time. It is up to YOU as a responsible rider to be responsible for your own actions, and the situations that you are placing yourself in. I promise you, if you get in an accient where you impact a car with a bike, you will lose, not the car, no matter who the officer determines is at fault.

 

I think that any cager who is convicted of an offence where the offendee is a motorcycle, the cager should be required to take a basic MSF course and PASS it.

 

We all take risks everytime we climb aboard these machines. Just knowing someone else has the training to understand how to control a bike does not/will not make them apply themselves any differently.

 

All I am saying is that it seems like we need to be worrying about ol' #1 while we are out there. Others are going to do what they are going to do, whether by inexperience, whether by mistake or whether it is intentful to harm the rider (although these bastiges should have the book thrown at them).

 

I am fully supportive of stronger measures against repeat offenders, no matter what they drive or ride. If you get a ticket for improper lane change, then another, then another, then another it is apparent you are not learning your lesson and you are a danger to anyone on the road, not just motorcyclists.

 

[DaveTheAffable]

Socialism would be if they bought us the bike and the helmet first, then said we had to wear the helmet.

 

No... socialism would be when the teachers and administrators tell your kid at school that they should 'ride' anything they want. Don't listen to your parents! Every one is doing it.

 

Just come to the school nurses office and we'll give you a 'helmet' that will keep you perfectly safe. No consequences.

 

And if there is an 'accident', society will pick up the tab.

 

Ooops... we sorta already do that.

 

-----------------------------------------

 

On a more serious note. Training will save more lives, but as others have said, won't save all.

 

We have a pretty decent MSF course in the area associated with Cerritos College.

 

 

[gottabmw]

I'm all for motorcycle helmets, but I fear that mandated motorcycle training programs will not have the impact that some of these law makers are hoping to achieve.

The impact they're trying to achieve is a reduction in deaths and serious injury. I haven't seen anyone put a number on it, as in a goal of a certain percentage reduction. Nearly every serious study done has concluded that the most effective means to better safety statistics is rider training. In Oregon, we have the nation's best rider safety training program. Since it's inception, fatalities have been reduced nearly 50%.

 

Of course you can't mandate common sense and there will always be people who fall through the cracks, but mandating training will save the lives of a lot of responsible people who would otherwise lack the knowledge of the dangers of motorcycling and how to mitigate those dangers.

 

I have to ask: How many lives saved is worth the price of mandatory training? 10,000? 1,000? 100? 1? What's a life worth?

 

There will be a bill introduced in the 2009 Oregon Legislature requiring training for all riders wanting an endorsement. Current endorsed motorcyclists are exempted. Eventually, all riders in Oregon will be trained. That will have a huge impact! What if that were nationalized? Florida recently passed a similar law. My understanding is that it wasn't thought out very well, was rammed through the legislature and they're having trouble providing the infrastructure to carry it out. I guarantee Oregon won't make that mistake.

 

I use my training every day. Sometimes consciously, sometimes unconsciously. I'm pretty sure I'd be dead if I hadn't known what to do in some situations.