(Please visit one of our advertisers)

No donations or subscriptions are required

   OR   
   
Subscription choices:
Board Karma = 40  (3488 positive of 3870 votes is 40 %pts higher than a neutral 50%)
All Things (Safety Oriented) Motorcycle   
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

You can the entire collection of Safety Tip articles in a 33 Megabyte PDF Portfolio

 All Forums
 Motorcycle Safety
 Polls
 Helmet, how often?
Previous Page
Member Previous Topic Discussion Topic Next Topic
Page: of 4

Dannytheman
Male Junior Member
43 Posts


Philly, PA
USA

(None)

Posted - 07/19/2008 :  8:26 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rioguy

quote:
A good teacher at any MSF class would always tell you to cross Railroad crossing at 90 degrees.



Danny,

Once again, your facts are lacking. Look on page 29 of the MSF book here.

quote:
For track and road seams that run parallel to your course, move far enough away from tracks, ruts or pavement seams to cross at an angle of at least 45. Then make a deliberate turn. Edging across could catch your tires and throw you off balance.

Usually it is safer to ride straight within your lane to cross tracks. Turning to take tracks head-on (at a 90 angle) can be more dangerous - your path may take you into another lane of traffic.


Whether you agree with the advice or not, you made an appeal to authority by citing MSF as the authority. When you do that, you should show a reference.




Wasn't safe in this circumstance was it? And I didn't quote the book, I quoted MY MSF instructor.(Any Good one) You probably wrote the book. Great idea making it harder than it needs to be. Probably caused this guys death and head crushing at walking pace.
Go to Top of Page

Dannytheman
Male Junior Member
43 Posts


Philly, PA
USA

(None)

Posted - 07/19/2008 :  8:27 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rioguy

quote:
A good teacher at any MSF class would always tell you to cross Railroad crossing at 90 degrees.



Danny,

Once again, your facts are lacking. Look on page 29 of the MSF book here.

quote:
For track and road seams that run parallel to your course, move far enough away from tracks, ruts or pavement seams to cross at an angle of at least 45. Then make a deliberate turn. Edging across could catch your tires and throw you off balance.

Usually it is safer to ride straight within your lane to cross tracks. Turning to take tracks head-on (at a 90 angle) can be more dangerous - your path may take you into another lane of traffic.


Whether you agree with the advice or not, you made an appeal to authority by citing MSF as the authority. When you do that, you should show a reference.



BTW, which way would you turn here? from 45 degrees toward 90 degrees, correct??
Go to Top of Page

Dannytheman
Male Junior Member
43 Posts


Philly, PA
USA

(None)

Posted - 07/19/2008 :  8:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rioguy

quote:
A good teacher at any MSF class would always tell you to cross Railroad crossing at 90 degrees.



Danny,

Once again, your facts are lacking. Look on page 29 of the MSF book here.

quote:
For track and road seams that run parallel to your course, move far enough away from tracks, ruts or pavement seams to cross at an angle of at least 45. Then make a deliberate turn. Edging across could catch your tires and throw you off balance.

Usually it is safer to ride straight within your lane to cross tracks. Turning to take tracks head-on (at a 90 angle) can be more dangerous - your path may take you into another lane of traffic.


Whether you agree with the advice or not, you made an appeal to authority by citing MSF as the authority. When you do that, you should show a reference.





http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety...peration.htm
http://www.maineol.org/key.htm

I guess it depends on what book you read....

Edited by - Dannytheman on 07/19/2008 8:46 PM
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17292 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 07/19/2008 :  11:24 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Dannytheman,

I, too, grow weary of your 'debating style' here. You have elected to demonstrate a certain crudity in your language, an aversion to hearing rational argument, a willingness to rationalize instead of analyze, and you take cheap shots.

I don't care if you wear a helmet or not. Being a 'safety officer', in some organizations, involves setting an example as well as educating others. Your example is lacking and your educating methods are as well.

So, from now on, friend, feel free to post here if you can behave like an adult without a chip on his shoulder. Otherwise, preach to the 'converted' over that pool table in that bar.
Go to Top of Page

dfpd273
Male Senior Member
303 Posts


Princeville, IL
USA

Yamaha

warrior

Posted - 07/19/2008 :  11:26 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Dannytheman
What do you see more of, automobile accidents or Motorcycle accidents? I'm sure you see more car accident victims, and do they look better than bikers do? Why don't we make them wear a helmet? Isn't there a false sense of security around having some tin and recycles steel surrounding us? Why do Race car drivers wear helmest, but not car drivers?



I agree, we saw far more motor vehicle accidents than motorcycle accidents. You are also correct in that if cars were built like race cars and people wore 6 point harnesses and HANS devices than the death rate would be lower.

My story has no faults in it. I only repeated the wife's story and told you a minimum of my own account. The only reason to have brought it up in the first place to to show this scenario: The husband and wife fell at the same speed, in the same direction, hit the same area of their skulls, and landed on the same surface. My observations were that if he had been wearing a helmet he may have survived as his wife did.

Granted this is speculation. He may not have survived, but the odds are substantially improved if he had been.

On a personal note, I do not agree in the state telling you what you should and should not be wearing. If you want to wear a helmet fine, if not that's fine too. I do believe that no long term medical care should be provided by the state or government if you choose not to wear the proper gear (seltbelt or helmet). This opinion is drastic, but hey, we have plenty of other people that deserve a shot too.

My only point is to really think about your decision. It affects more than just you. Wearing proper gear is not the be all end all, however. You are very much correct in stating that education and practice and safe riding techniques are very important, maybe even more so than wearing full gear. I believe that a rider who puts as much practice and time toward safe techniques as some on this site, would always wear full gear just because that is the safe thing to do. Why go half way. If you want to known as a safe rider shouldn't that include all safety items as well as years of safety training, safe riding practices, sobriety, etc...

Bravo on your years and miles of accident free riding. I hope that you continue to inspire your peers to always ride safe. I do also hope that they take your wisdom and then move on to include the proper decision to always wear a helmet. Sorry, no offense, but here is were our differences of opinion are irreconcilable
Go to Top of Page

Dannytheman
Male Junior Member
43 Posts


Philly, PA
USA

(None)

Posted - 07/19/2008 :  11:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by James R. Davis

Dannytheman,

I, too, grow weary of your 'debating style' here. You have elected to demonstrate a certain crudity in your language, an aversion to hearing rational argument, a willingness to rationalize instead of analyze, and you take cheap shots.

I don't care if you wear a helmet or not. Being a 'safety officer', in some organizations, involves setting an example as well as educating others. Your example is lacking and your educating methods are as well.

So, from now on, friend, feel free to post here if you can behave like an adult without a chip on his shoulder. Otherwise, preach to the 'converted' over that pool table in that bar.



This is your site and I respect that. I was only defending my position, even though I was obviously outnumbered 20-1 on a Safety site. I will respect your wishes. Some of my attempts at humor may have been lost on some.

Have a good day..
Go to Top of Page

bachman1961
Male Advanced Member
2266 Posts
[Mentor]


colorado springs, co
USA

Honda

CB750 NightHawk

Posted - 07/20/2008 :  1:09 AM

+ Promoting safety training, practice and teaching others

+ Reminding me that some people in the 'Bar' go there for a sandwich and soda water

I can't help but wonder if this thread would have self destructed much earlier (like those Mission Impossible assignments) if this debate faced the real balance.... I missed it if it's here.

Please remind me of the other perspective... What exactly is the downside of wearing a Helmet.... ?

Sorry, it takes me a while to wake up sometimes.

~brian

Go to Top of Page

dfpd273
Male Senior Member
303 Posts


Princeville, IL
USA

Yamaha

warrior

Posted - 07/20/2008 :  1:56 AM
quote:
Originally posted by bachman1961


What exactly is the downside of wearing a Helmet.... ?
~brian



They are hot!

I remember when I used to go without, I hated the feeling of having something on my head. I also felt like it interfered with my peripheral vision. Luckily the experience didn't kill me.

Other than the comfort issues, which the body easily adapts to, I fail to see another downside.
Go to Top of Page

bachman1961
Male Advanced Member
2266 Posts
[Mentor]


colorado springs, co
USA

Honda

CB750 NightHawk

Posted - 07/20/2008 :  4:08 AM
Yeah,, that is pretty much it I suppose ... comfort.
I guess much of the safety gear in general and in many other facets fall into the convenience or comfort trade off.

I grew up in a helmet mandatory State (Michigan) and never really experienced the wind in my hair except for my topless Jeep. The free feeling of no (fullface) helmet is tempered by the blast of wind in my face above 35 mph (no windshield on mine), the bugs or debris possibilities and the wind noise (w/o ear plugs). Actually, quite a few little gripes but no match for the fleshy thud. It still strikes me as a terrifically unbalanced scale to weight comfort against the odds people are willing to put to the test.

Maybe an interesting poll would be the responders to the ratio of Non-Helmet riders that gamble at Casinos versus the Helmeted riders that gamble at Casinos.

btw ,, I agree with your idea related to long term medical care limits versus those that invest in personal safety gear and wear, act, drive responsibly.
My employer absorbed over $$ 70 million $$ in uncompensated medical care for patients in the previous year.

~ brian
Go to Top of Page

dfpd273
Male Senior Member
303 Posts


Princeville, IL
USA

Yamaha

warrior

Posted - 07/20/2008 :  4:29 AM

My employer absorbed over $$ 70 million $$ in uncompensated medical care for patients in the previous year.
~ brian
[/quote]

I can't even fathom the total amount the government and private insurance is spending.
Go to Top of Page

dfpd273
Male Senior Member
303 Posts


Princeville, IL
USA

Yamaha

warrior

Posted - 07/20/2008 :  5:12 AM
I don't know if anyone is still interested in continuing this discussion but I did find what I thought was very credible info on this site from a post in 2005. The following was written by
subvetSSN606.

With a little digging, here's one study that just looked at admissions and releases of motorcycle accident victims to a hospital in Arizona.
So there's no ambiguity about other factors that can rightfully be raised in some statistics.

Pure and simple... admissions and releases over a one year period to one hospital of motorcycle accident victims. NOTE: This particular study only looks at survivors!

Bried, J.M., Cordasco, F.A., & Volz, R.G. (1987). Medical and economic parameters of motorcycle-induced trauma. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 233, 252-256.

Data:
Non-helmeted riders with head injury: 27
Non-helmeted riders with no head injury: 26
Helmeted riders with head injury: 3
Helmeted riders with no head injury: 15
And: "Of the 12 patients who became permanently impaired, none had been wearing a helmet and 10 sustained a severe head injury."

So...
Non-helmeted riders had a 50.9% rate of head injuries.
Helmeted riders had a 16.7% rate of head injuries.
Non-helmeted riders had a 22.6% rate of permanent impairment.
Helmeted riders had a 0% rate of permanent impairment.


From a Wisconsin study of victims of police-reported motorcycle crashes in 1991.
Karlson, T.A., & Quade, C.A. (1994). Head injuries associated with motorcycle use - Wisconsin, 1991. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 43(23), 423, 429-431.



No comparison to previous years, no skewing of data due to increased number of motorcyclists...
Just straight accident data from one year in one state.

Total Unhelmeted: 2015
Total Helmeted: 994
Total Unknown: 175

Unhelmeted Fatalities: 55 (55/2015 = 2.7%)
Helmeted fatalities: 19 (19/994 = 1.9%)
Unhelmeted Head Injuries: 153 (153/2015 = 7.6%)
Helmeted Head Injuries: 34 (34/994 = 3.4%)
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17292 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 07/20/2008 :  6:02 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
quote:
This is your site and I respect that. I was only defending my position, even though I was obviously outnumbered 20-1 on a Safety site. I will respect your wishes. Some of my attempts at humor may have been lost on some.

Thank you!

This thread is evidence that a contrary opinion is tolerated here, but it comes close to being locked by me as it is verging on becoming a 'gang bang'. That is, a thread where a group of people 'take on' a member to cause that member discomfort (or worse).

To be sure, I'm delighted to see so many rally in defense of the wearing of helmets, and I am particularly pleased that they (the group) have so far been civil in that defense. The 'cheap shots' have been essentially non-existent. Bravo!

And I noticed that more than one member here has made it clear that in many ways they agree with Dannytheman's position on laws versus the wearing of helmets, for example, instead of simply disagreeing with whatever he has had to say. That, it seems to be, is integrity being evidenced and a healthy way to argue. Thank you all.
Go to Top of Page

dfpd273
Male Senior Member
303 Posts


Princeville, IL
USA

Yamaha

warrior

Posted - 07/20/2008 :  6:11 AM
Sorry if it seemed like a "gang bang". Just being passionate about a safety topic that is close to all our hearts. Agree or disagree, the helmet debate has to be one, if not the most, hotly debated issues on this or any other safety site.

I hope no one quits a discussion or feels discriminated against when they have a "contrary opinion". I like these chances to argue and see what others think and believe.

Sorry again if any comments were out of line or deemed personally attacking to any member.
Go to Top of Page

RoadGlider63
Male Junior Member
25 Posts


Riverside, CA
USA

Harley-Davidson

RoadGlide

Posted - 09/14/2008 :  10:43 PM
Cal is strict helmet enforcement.....and yet we can split lanes...hmmmmm Still, lots of riders HD and otherwise wear those idiotic novelty helmets and don't get bothered much by LEO.

100% of the time even if no law. I never get used to seeing riders on the freeway without helmets when I ride through a NHL state.
Go to Top of Page

Mako
Male Starting Member
2 Posts


MYRTLE BEACH, SC
USA

Honda

Goldwing

Posted - 10/22/2008 :  7:23 PM
My state SC does not require a helmet. But I wear one 100% of my riding time, I value my head very much.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 4 Previous Topic Discussion Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
Jump To:
All Things (Safety Oriented) Motorcycle © Master Strategy Group Go To Top Of Page
  This page was generated in 1.91 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05