why wearing a helemt is a bad idea..too funny.

Capt America, Good points... the better skilled the rider, the better he fairs on the road. But that won't stop the 18year old girl from making a left turn where it is posted "NO LEFT TURN" right into the side of TWO bikers, cuase her mapquest directions told her that was the street... I was on the scene when this occurred. Shit happens! The helmet helped both riders, but did not protect their legs

Capt America wrote:

I can't see why with all the new age materials we have that helmets can't be made lighter and closer to the skull, out of kevlar or a kevlar resin mix etc...

Keep in mind that the space between the skull and shell is what save lives. There are also shells that use Kevlar, but Kevlar does not absorb the impact, more of a penetration protection (crack resistant). That is why ballistic protecting vests still crack ribs... the penetration or bubble on the non-impact side of the vest causes the trauma... in that case much less severe then the penetration of the bullet

His new laws sound good but you still can't stop an 18 yr old girl from turning left, right in front of you. I'd be dead if I wasn't wearing mine.

Mark

well....i just learned a BIG lesson on helmets today.......

story follows...

Gonaa meet one of my nephews that just got their act together and is doing really good now....he is at a picnic with a bunch of sober folks.......i make it a point to go and see the kid and make arrangments -get driections.....

i take my kz as it's at a regional park and i wanna ride in and it's super hot out,cruise the park areas to scope him out ect......

well he sees me -leaves this big picnic- walks down to the road and waves me down......i pull over and we speak...he says there is some bikes parked together up the path.....i put my arm through my helmet and elbow it...tell him to hop on ,and we start up the path.........

COP sirens....bawoooop bawooop.......

Bronco state parks marine haircut corn fed kiddy cop.....

gets us off the bike and gets all my paper work....runs it .......gives me the are you on parole or probation...any warrants...ect...ect....guess he knew there were ex-party people at the park......and figured i was a bad guy

gives me back my papers and warns me ...tells me it is 450.00 each for no helmet and i had two citations coming....

450 pr helmet off.......

at least i was able to show my nephew that by me having current reg/insur/ and license...and you'll most often get a warning and go free...i even had the cop repeat it with me to my nephew for effect.... last year the kid was liking drinking at the beach and cruising around with his loser buddies ...untill he did 15 days in the local gangbanger jail and had to pay a shitload of fines.......anyhow.....on a dirt path with my kid bro and off the beaten road..only going 50ft.....none of that mattered..900.00 fine .....whew

I really think a helmet is a good idea. They're very much proven to save lives, as Mark's did, and I'd be even worse looking if I didn't wear one after my off bike excursion. Not wearing proper safety gear is a stupid thing to do in my opinion. And with the government for the most part being the one who ends up paying for health care, at least in Canada, they should be able to legislate mandatory helmets, just like they are trying to deal with smoking and obesity.

I'm all for individual freedoms, but going to the hospital, even if you have good medical coverage, costs other people money. Also, governments want to be seen doing something because society as a whole blames the government when people die for some reason.

$450.00 per head wow!!!!!

i'm gonna google it and see if that is right...i guess it is enough to make the second fine 1000 or somthing...so rich folks can't just afford to ride without one....

i found this on quick search

---

STATUTE:

California Vehicle Code, Division 12, Chapter 5, Article 7, Section 27803.
"(a) A driver and any passenger shall wear a safety helmet meeting requirements established pursuant to Section 27802 when riding on a motorcycle, motor-driven cycle, or motorized bicycle.
"(b) It is unlawful to operate a motorcycle, motor-driven cycle, or motorized bicycle if the driver or any passenger is not wearing a safety helmet as required by subdivision (a).
"(c) It is unlawful to ride as a passenger on a motorcycle, motor-driven cycles, or motorized bicycle if the driver or any passenger is not wearing a safety helmet as required by subdivision (a).
"(d) This section applies to persons who are riding on motorcycles, motor-driven cycles, or motorized bicycles operated on the highways.
"(e) For the purposes of this section, 'wear a safety helmet' or 'wearing a safety helmet' means having a safety helmet meeting the requirements of Section 27802 (see :Standards" below) on the person's head that is fastened with the helmet straps and that is of a size that fits the wearing person's head securely without excessive lateral or vertical movement.
"(f) In enacting this section, it is the intent of the Legislature to ensure that all persons are provided with an additional safety benefit while operating or riding a motorcycle, motor-driven cycle, or motorized bicycle."
FINE:

Only in California . . . it depends on who you ask.
The LAW says (in pertinent part):
Section 40303.5:

"Whenever any person is arrested for any of the following offenses, the arresting officer shall permit the arrested person to execute a notice containing a promise to correct the violation in accordance with the provisions of 40610 unless the arresting officer finds that any of the disqualifying conditions specified in the subdivision (b) of Section 40610 exist: . . . (d) Any infraction involving equipment set forth in Division 12 (commencing with Section 240000) . . . (Note: which includes section 27803, the helmet law.)"
Section 40610(b) states:


"Pursuant to subdivision (a), a notice to correct violation shall be issued as provided in this section . . . unless the officer finds any of the following:
"(1) Evidence of fraud or persistent neglect.
"(2) The violation presents an immediate safety hazard.
"(3) The violator does not agree to, or cannot, promptly correct the violation."
Therefore, a violation of California's helmet law is -- as a matter or Law according to the language of the statutes -- an equipment violation, and carries with it only a need to show "proof of correction" and the payment of a $10 fine. However, . . .

The CHP (California Highway Patrol) says:

CHP Enforcement Bulletin #42, issued in May, 1994, states that a violation of CVC 27803 constitutes an "immediate safety hazard" and is therefore not correctable as provided in Section 40303.5 (see above). The California Judicial Council affirmed this edict, and for the most part the California courts pretty much disregard everything but the wishes of the CHP . . . and that includes disregarding the Law.

So, the fine for violation of California's helmet law can be anything from $10 and "proof of correction" up to $250.00 and one year's probation. It all depends on who you ask!

or the county your in..around here a seat belt ticket starts at 25.00 but by the time all the other agency's add their $$$ it ends up around 125.00

I personally cannot see the argument against helmets. In my experience of riding motorcycles and bicycles over the last 25 years, I can't see the advantage of going unprotected.

I will go on record as saying that "Loud pipes save lives" is TOTAL BULLSHIT!!! I have done thousands of miles on the side of city streets, farm to market roads, state highways, US highways, and Interstate highways on my roadrace bicycle, and I am constantly surprised by oncoming motorized vehicles. You could not find a more quiet vehicle than my bicycle. Anybody in the vicinity of Spring, TX is welcome to take a test ride on 2920 to see what I mean. It is called the Doppler Effect, google it!

Second, anyone who tells you that he has been in a 70 mph accident is FLAT OUT LYING! He was doing 70 when he hit the brakes, and probably 35 or less when he made impact. The human brain is terribly impressionable, and is suspect at best when it comes to assesment of bang-bang situations. Look at the recent missed call in the Gallaraga perfect game by a super-experienced, top-notch MLB umpire. Everyone agrees he got it wrong, including himself based on the incontrovertible evidence of instant replay.

On my bicycle I have been hit with rocks, sticks, beer bottle caps, cigarette packs, etc all thrown from passing cars. On my motorcycles, I have been hit with all of the above and more, but you must consider that the closing speeds are usually at a minimum of three times the speed. The ouch and distraction factor is very high when struck on the kneecap by a 1" diameter rock at 70mph.

Visibility argument is BULLSHIT! Get a clean visor and make sure the helmet is properly fitted. If your prephipral vision is restricted by a modern full face, then it is way wrong on size or you are a barn owl.

Hearing argument is BULLSHIT! The wind noise is soo great above 35 mph, that you are actually better off with a helmet on, than without. You are even better off with earplugs in inside your helmet.

Not to mention, the amount of seriously juicy bugs that I would have eaten if not for wearing a full face helmet.

That guy in the video raises some very good points about educating drivers, but the MC helmet advice is short sighted and uninformed at best. The fake biker-butch attitude is unattractive in a very commercial way. Please don't preach to me while wearing a local news billboard on your forehead in the form of a do-rag. Also, please remember that 97% of the vehicles on the road have four wheels, and don't give a rats ass about how bad your ass is on your motorcycle if you prevent them from getting home even 5 seconds late.

In closing, I'll say to keep your eyes peeled, ride like you are invisible, and in spite of all that I have said, I still believe that it should be the rider's choice to wear a helmet or not. If you want to be a statstic, then go ahead and roll the dice.

I live in a free state. In other words, helmet optional. I also was the victim of a left turn by a cager. My head hit the asphalt not the car. Fortunately, I had a helmet on. I'll continue to wear a helmet.

Edit to add: But I won't make YOU wear one.

supercharged wrote:

Capt America, Good points... the better skilled the rider, the better he fairs on the road. But that won't stop the 18year old girl from making a left turn where it is posted "NO LEFT TURN" right into the side of TWO bikers, cuase her mapquest directions told her that was the street... I was on the scene when this occurred. Shit happens! The helmet helped both riders, but did not protect their legs

Capt America wrote:

I can't see why with all the new age materials we have that helmets can't be made lighter and closer to the skull, out of kevlar or a kevlar resin mix etc...

Keep in mind that the space between the skull and shell is what save lives. There are also shells that use Kevlar, but Kevlar does not absorb the impact, more of a penetration protection (crack resistant). That is why ballistic protecting vests still crack ribs... the penetration or bubble on the non-impact side of the vest causes the trauma... in that case much less severe then the penetration of the bullet

I agree totally, shit happens and you can't avoid everything. I mean, I've even seen a guy on a motorcycle T-bone another guy on a motorcycle on route to PD13. He was hell bent to stay with his friends and bolted through a yellow that turned red before he even entered the intersection, and the guy approaching from the other way never bothered to check left and right to see if traffic had obeyed the light and actually stopped. I guess both riders were at fault, but it was a crazy/scary thing to see.

Forgive me on the helmet thing I sometimes forget to type all my mind is thinking.

I meant to say kevlar as a shell and a new age compound as a shock absorber. I saw a guy from England years ago that developed a foam rubber type compound. As a demonstration, he was able to have a 1" piece covering his hand and it was hit with a 10 lb sledge hammer. Not only did he not flinch, but the compound completely absorbed all the shock.

So a I'm thinking a 3/4 inch liner of that compound, or some other new type, and kevlar as the shell. As you said, kevlar won't tear or split.

I am pro helmet, though as I said it should be a personal choice not a law.

It is my personal belief that the fiberglass shells they use are way outdated, they are heavy, catch the wind badly, and literally split in two with a good impact. At which point they're totally useless. It was a good design in 1960, but it is now 2010.

Well if we are talking about future products (current today)... then why have we not seen more of the helmet air bag? This could eliminate much of the snapped necks and broken collar bones caused by the helmet jamming into the bones.

Probably because there is actually a cost to the air bag system and the manufacturers won't have the ability to mark it up 1000%. Think about it, after insurance... the most expensive process of a new helmet is the PAINT!