I put about 11,000 miles on my bike in 2004. All of them with a helmet. I am very aware of the drawbacks to wearing them. They get very hot in the tropics. I am also very aware of the benefits, having been in a crash where the helmet kept my head in one piece.
I fully support someones right to decide for themselves if they want to wear a helmet or not. If, for example, someone thinks they are too hot, fine. That is good enough for me. Go enjoy yourself. The problem I have is people who need to invent facts to justify their decision. The argument is very similar to someone who might say, "I don't wear a seatbelt becuase it prevents me from being thrown from the car in the case of a crash. If I am thrown from the car, there is less chance of me being hurt."
Being thrown from the car has nothing to do with it. Personally, I wear a seatbelt about 50% of the time. I do it because it is more comfortable with out. It is that simple. I would respect non-helmet wearing riders a lot more if they would just admit the same.
The problem I have with groups like ABATE is the lies they spread in order to further their agenda. The most dangerous time for a biker is when they are first learning. It is when they need the helmet the most. How many have been killed because they believed the anti-helmet propaganda and thought it was somehow more dangerous if a rider is wearing one?
As a former ABATE rep (American Bikers Aiming Toward Education, for 16 years), I'd like to say you are wrong. We are the ones who have our own personal safety in mind. We are the experts, not non-riders.
In our state, we have had rider education for nearly 20 years, and it has been free for most of those. We have advocated education over legislation, driver awareness programs, and even voluntary helmet use, but we have also worked hard to keep legislation which requires helmet use off of the books for adults. Note that riders under 18 must still wear a helmet in our state.
We do not argue that inexperience is not a killer, which is why we have advocated rider ed for so long. No matter what you wear, you can get killed by not operating your vehicle correctly.
As for anti helmet propaganda, no, I have not seen it. I have seen a lot of anecdotal evidence regarding situations in which helmets have or could have caused damage exceeding that which would have been caused (allowed?) by the absence of a helmet.
I have been over many of the seminal studies which purport to substantiate that helmets are some sort of safety panacea, and found them to be seriously mathematically, statistically or logically flawed as a rule.
They do not address the issue of helmet use logically, and base conclusions on conclusions of other, pervious and flawed studies.
If you did a study of children who died as a result of injuries from falling off of couches, and started with the mortality statistics, without allowing for the children who were not injured, you would advocate banning couches.
What we never see included in the studies are the stats on people who were not injured without a helmet, (or with) in an accident, and probably never will.
There is a tendency to pick the bike up and ride it home, or call a friend and load it up which skews non-injury data.
There are almost no studies which state that a helmet ever caused an injury, even though there should be (knowing humans, nature, etc, and with abundant anecdotal information) at least a few instances of helmet-induced injury, even if these are considered "freak" occurances.
All we have ever advocated is education, and the freedom to choose whether we, individually, wish to employ safety devices and when to do so.