The Honda PCX / Forza / ADV150 / SH Forums

There are actually states in the United States that do not require the wearing of helmets on motorcycles. I believe the argument was that the government should not have the right to dictate whether you wear one or not. In such states I think those who do not wish to wear a helmet should sign a waiver releasing the insurance of responsibility for paying for treatment for head injuries. If the rider lives, maybe he can figure out how to pay for his right to be an idiot. Everytime I drive through one of those states where there is no helmet law, I see many, many riders not wearing helmets, and I can only shake my head. Just because you don't HAVE to do something, it doesn't mean that it is a good idea to not do it.

zanggerk wrote:Just wondering: in what countries is it allowed to ride without a helmet?

This is a hotly contested "states rights"/"riders rights" issue here in the USA.
South Carolina is one of the states where helmets are optional, once you are older than 21.

However, insurance costs more if you don't wear a helmet, so that helps some. And you can't ride onto the local Army base without one, so that helps some.

Most of the folks who ride with no helmet are moped riders or tough-looking Harley dudes.
And the rest are crazy sportsbike riders, who ride with their helmet decorating their bike
(in case they find a crazy woman who wants to ride with them, maybe?)

zanggerk wrote:Just wondering: in what countries is it allowed to ride without a helmet?

I have no idea what it is for other countries, but here in the US, I varies by state. Did a Google search and found this handy map. I could search for other countries...but here

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Motorcycle+helmet+laws+by+country

Don't generally do that, but the results are. Bit of a Mess and I don't have the wherewithal to muddle through them at present.

Mel46 wrote:There are actually states in the United States that do not require the wearing of helmets on motorcycles. I believe the argument was that the government should not have the right to dictate whether you wear one or not. In such states I think those who do not wish to wear a helmet should sign a waiver releasing the insurance of responsibility for paying for treatment for head injuries. If the rider lives, maybe he can figure out how to pay for his right to be an idiot. Everytime I drive through one of those states where there is no helmet law, I see many, many riders not wearing helmets, and I can only shake my head. Just because you don't HAVE to do something, it doesn't mean that it is a good idea to not do it.

Just like a lot of things, due to the unique way the U.S. Constitution is written (and/or interpreted), Americans should have a fair amount of say over their own destiny. Of course, the same states that allow helmets to be left at home require seat belts to be worn in cars...but not school buses...and all manner of car seats for children under 12...but no restraints in buses...because those blinky red lights and stop signs are all powerful you know.

Personally, I believe both seat belts and helmets should be a personal choice for adults. In a society that says we believe in survival of the fittest, what else makes sense? Let the stupid people off themselves through natural selection I say.

I'll just keep wearing both a helmet and a seatbelt.

Let the Darwin Award Games begin......

MikeP wrote:Let the Darwin Award Games begin......

Did he wear a helmet?

I agree partially. Those who do not wear a helmet and have a motorcycle accident are highly likely to die. However, there are a lot of resources expended on them if they have not died immediately, and hospital bills are very high, usually picked up by insurance companies. We pay higher premiums because of those riders AND if they recover what is the chance that they will do the same thing again? As long as their actions affect others, directly or indirectly, we all pay for their stupidity.
As far as seat belts on school buses go, I am not sure why the state can not see the logic of it. Too many school bus accidents have ended with students being thrown around a injuried. But government moves slowly on everything except their salaries. Eventually it will happen.

Not only does it drive up everyone's insurance rates, it costs all of society when costly severe head injuries exceed insurance coverages and hospitals and doctors or mediicaid and local governments are expected to eat the bill.

If someone makes a stupid choice to not wear a helmet and they get unlucky, they should be on their own. If they cant pay for their medical care then they shouldn't bother seeking it. How's that for personal responsibility...

You might all be being a teenyweeny bit literal/serious?

Why do people in cars have to wear seat belts and those who ride motorcycles don't, Why do bicyclists have to wear a helmet and motorcyclists do not.Just not consistent. Its prudent to wear a helmet but in my opinion should not be mandatory as well as seat belts should not be mandatory. There is a price to pay for liberty and freedom. That's what this country was founded on. Freedom is not free.Freedom is about choice, and less government intervention. Where does it stop..Should the government mandate a fire extinguisher in every room of the house, should they ban alcoholic beverages which is costly to health care and medical costs, should they ban motorcycles becausethey have higher injury rates than cars.. Where does it stop.Freedom is not free and that's the price for liberty and choice.Do you want to be free with choice , be allowed to be stupid, or do you want the government dictating every one of your moves.

easyrider wrote:Why do people in cars have to wear seat belts and those who ride motorcycles don't, Why do bicyclists have to wear a helmet and motorcyclists do not.Just not consistent. Its prudent to wear a helmet but in my opinion should not be mandatory as well as seat belts should not be mandatory. There is a price to pay for liberty and freedom. That's what this country was founded on. Freedom is not free.Freedom is about choice, and less government intervention. Where does it stop..Should the government mandate a fire extinguisher in every room of the house, should they ban alcoholic beverages which is costly to health care and medical costs, should they ban motorcycles becausethey have higher injury rates than cars.. Where does it stop.Freedom is not free and that's the price for liberty and choice.Do you want to be free with choice , be allowed to be stupid, or do you want the government dictating every one of your moves.

Oh ffs

Step away from the inner Trump

This fellow was wearing a helmet. If he walks away, it will only be because he wore one. Notice how the blue car ran the red light. Totally unaware......

http://youtu.be/LfeG-eST-HU

MikeP wrote:This fellow was wearing a helmet. If he walks away, it will only be because he wore one. Notice how the blue car ran the red light. Totally unaware......

http://youtu.be/LfeG-eST-HU

I'm more worried about the red car running the blue light. Which one would you choose?

MikeP wrote:This fellow was wearing a helmet. If he walks away, it will only be because he wore one. Notice how the blue car ran the red light. Totally unaware......

http://youtu.be/LfeG-eST-HU

That one is pretty old. I believe the rider did not survive.

America, the land where toddlers regularly shoot people.
Gotta love that wunnerfool American freedumb.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... erica.html

gn2 wrote:America, the land where toddlers regularly shoot people.
Gotta love that wunnerfool American freedumb.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... erica.html

No need to insult other's homelands. Very uncouth.

honkerman wrote:

gn2 wrote:America, the land where toddlers regularly shoot people.
Gotta love that wunnerfool American freedumb.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... erica.html

No need to insult other's homelands. Very uncouth.

Insulted?
Seriously?
Did you read the article in the link?

gn2 wrote:

honkerman wrote:

gn2 wrote:America, the land where toddlers regularly shoot people.
Gotta love that wunnerfool American freedumb.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... erica.html

No need to insult other's homelands. Very uncouth.

Insulted?
Seriously?
Did you read the article in the link?

I did. Interestingly enough, the numbers kept changing through the article. hard to take something as a serious article if it doesn't remain consistent.

You insult all Americans with your...slur. Were I to do the same to all Englishmen, would you not be offended?

I will say, while the British often say Americans are arrogant, many certainly do so from a position of experience.

I do not wish to argue further as I've found in the past that trying to convince another of an opinion is often fruitless. I've said my piece and that is that.

honkerman wrote:You insult all Americans with your...slur. Were I to do the same to all Englishmen, would you not be offended?

No, I would be delighted.
Slur away.