Why is it that so many states have strict seat belt laws but no law regarding motorcycle helmets? It would seem to me that it should be both or neither.
And it would seem to me that if you choose not to wear a helmet, your insurance premiums should be much higher because of the increased risk.
I would wear a helmet on a motorcycle. Some give the argument that a helmet restricts vision. Perhaps some think it is “uncool”. It is most uncool when you go sailing because your cycle stopped but your body continued to move at the speed you were doing.
I've often wondered the same thing and agree with you.
And it would seem to me that if you choose not to wear a helmet, your insurance premiums should be much higher because of the increased risk.
Insurance companies don't like helmet laws. It's a different dynamic with motorcycles than with cars. In cars, the difference between no seatbelt and seatbelt can be the difference between being killed or seriously injured and walking away. With a motorcycle, the difference between no helmet and a helmet can be the difference between getting killed and being traumatically injured.
Insurance company bean-counters figured out a long time ago that dead policy holders are cheaper to care for than traumatically injured policy holders.
I think everyone in automobiles and trucks should be required to wear helmets as well. Why not?
If you’re wearing a seatbelt in an accident it is less likely that you will lose control of the vehicle. This affects other vehicles (people) on the road.
Not so much for a motorcycle helmet.
Because seat belts keep you in a position where the air bag won't kill you.
Because they are going to have to 'look for' the driver of a motorcycle, anyway, but it is a real pain in the butt to pick up the car and look under it.
Because there is far more revenue to be gained from citing auto drivers for not wearing a strap than there is for citing a motorcyclist for not wearing a lid.
Because car drivers submitted, and motorcyclists have remained a credible political force against such laws.
The bottom line, in either case, is that if the highways were populated with attentive, capable, and undistracted drivers, the need for safety devices would be far less, primarily confined to instances of mechanical failure.
What people don't realize, at least those who do not ride, is that driving with your 'car roof' on your head is tiring, reduces the ability to identify and respond to traffic situations which readily and rapidly develop into life-threatening ones.
If you can avoid a wreck, you need neither seat belts nor helmets.
Now, prayers up for the family and friends of the rider. I wonder if the brake malfunctioned?