wow!! mr. lynch, i did not know that. i only knew michigan auto laws were some of the screwiest in the country but i could not have invisioned such a law. makes me glad i live in california.
I pay in to MCCA on 3 motorcycles. I get nothing out of it unless I am involved in a crash which involves an automobile. 2/3 of all motorcycle crashes are caused by automobile drivers committing a Right of Way violation. It would make more sense to prevent crashes by educating automobile drivers on driving around motorcycles. Also enact a fine and penalty for right of way violations causing the death or injury of a motorcyclist severe enough to make even the worst automobile drivers look for a motorcycle before turning left or entering an intersection. This would also alleviate many of the cases of paralysis, limb loss, blunt force trauma injuries, and comprehensive othopedic injuries far more common in motorcycle crashes than head injuries and will never be prevented by a helmet.
The Insurance Czars of the country are not interested in keeping my head safe, and they are not interested in keeping insurance consumers money in their pocket. They are only interested in keeping their gold lined coffers full. The easiest way for them to do that is to focus on the lie of helmets. Helmets have a limited amount of function in the grand scheme of motorcycle safety. However to many of their automobile driving consumers annually kill and maim bikers and the insurance companies are loathe to pay those claims. So they perpetuate lies upon the american public with the intention of turning the will of the public against bikers. If every biker in this country agreed to wear a DOT approved motorcycle helmet every time they got on a motorcycle, we in ABATE would still be outraged that anyone believes it is enough. Abate is made up of long term motorcyclists with millions upon millions of miles of motorcycle travel on Michigan roads and thousands upon thousands of years of combined experience. We know what comprises motorcyle safety far better than these pharisees and pariahs, these money changers. The have Governor Granholm bought and paid for, having been major contributors to her campaighn. She knows nothing of riding motorcycles and therefore is quick to pay back her dues to her benefactor. Gas prices will have even more motorcycles on the road. We want to be safe. Helmets are nothing more than a piece of crash related safety equipment. There needs to be a comprehensive program put into place that addresses a cell phone ban (proven to be as dangerous as drunk driving), creates comprehensive training of automobile drivers on sharing the road with motorcycles, and enacts severe penalties for right of way violations causing death or injury to a motorcylist.
No state that has has repealed their helmet law has raised their insurance rate because of repeal, just as no state has reduced their rates because of enacting a mandatory helmet law. Also if Michigan truly was concerned about motorcycle safety it would have a basic motorcycle awareness program in place for new drivers as many states already have. Currently Michigan does nothing in this area.
Waiting Breathlessly, YOU GET REAL! To suggest that people cannot see a 750 pound vehicle with at least one bright headlight on, legally traveling at the speed limit towards them is rediculous. Its an excuse and a damn poor one that has taken the life or limbs of to many of my freinds. Tell me they do not see Semi Trucks either, because the same right of way offenses is also reportedly the biggest complaint of truckers. Although the consequences are dramatically different.
As far as the SQUIDS (squished kids) are concerned, the average crotch rocket rider is under 21 years of age, and in almost every incidence I have seen is wearing a full faced expensive helmet. And I have seen a few in my line of work as a law enforcement officer. I firmly stand for programs that address this issue! Including wearing a helmet. Of the conciencious Sport Biker Riders out there with the maturity and sense to ride within the law, I would venture that every one of them would continue to wear a high quality helmet as well as other high speed race quality safety equipment when they ride. Its a different style of riding and much more prone to crashes, and as responsible adults they know this and make good decisions on their own without government (Insurance Company) intervention.
I cannot deny that I am Arrogant. However this has nothing to do with the big Insurance Companies lies, nor the ineffectiveness of MANDATORY helmets as a cure all for motorcyle safety.
I also will not deny I have a chip on my shoulder. I am insulted that the State of Michigan, ( that I was born and raised in, and from where I voluntarily served over 10 years in the military, (Including being deployed over a year since 9-11 as a reservist, missing my wife, and my daughters entire 9th year of life, and having worked in the service of Michiganders as a law enforcement Officer for over 11 years),
would allow Governor Granholm to continue to perpetuate AAA\’s lie to our citizens about helmets, and how they are a panacea for all motorcylist safety issues.
Another dose of reality for you is that these are NOT ACCIDENTS. These are CRASHES. This is what they are termed as by Michigan State Police Traffic Services Division. This is what they are termed as by the NHTSA. Take you argument up with them. \”Accident\” implys lack of fault. Thats B.S. and if you \”got real\” you would agree that is simply not the case.
The majority of bikers in Michigan are adult, employed, well paid, and well insured. The wisest seeking additional Uninsured and Underinsured coverage because of the POORLY INSURED AUTOMOBILE DRIVERS. We love to ride as a means of recreation, economical transportation, and a way to blow off the workaday stress, if not just because its our lifestyle. The majority of us in ABATE are long term riders with a combined resource of millions of miles on the road, and thousands of years of experience riding motorcycles. Anyone waiting breathlessly to expound upon their imaginations as a non rider about the ramifications or issues which face motorcyclists is at best, smoking crack. (This would mean more to you if you ever dealt with a crackhead)
If Michgan wants to GET REAL;
The argument here ITS NOT ABOUT THE UTILITY OF HELMETS, ITS ABOUT THE FUTILITY OF HELMET LAWS!
Concentrate on the mile of road BEFORE the crash.
Was the rider properly trained and endorsed?
Was the rider on a bike that was appropriate for his/her abilities and experience?
Was the rider sober and straight?
Was the Automobile driver on a cell phone, DVD player, eating, changing CD\’s, yelling at kids, or doing anything but paying attention
while driving?
Was the Automobile driver trained and well versed on driving on roadways with motorcycles, and aware of the importance of
watching for them?
Were there severe enough penalties for Right of Way violations causing death or injury in place to make even the worst driver fear the
consequences of not looking for motorcycles before entering an intersection or turning left?
Was the Automobile Driver sober and straight?
This is what ABATE is all about. Education, including education on the merits of helmets as a meaningful part of a much bigger and more
complex picture. Not Helmet laws as the myopic minded CURE for Motorcycle Safety. Most of us will continue to wear a helmet at those
times we feel it is useful and prudent. We are not stupid, suicidal, or interested in living on the edge. We are experienced long term riders,
and are quite certain that we can decide for ourselves what kind of safety devices will best benefit our riding situation.
We do not need the government under the false pretense as pushed by Insurance Companies that they know what is best for us, to FORCE a helmet to be worn on our head. It is unconstitutional and unamerican.
If all the questions listed above could be answered \”yes\” there would be a more dramatic effect on the frequency of head injury related deaths and injuries in Michigan than helmets ever will have. Not only that, it would dramatically reduce limb loss, paralysis, blunt force trauma, and other severe injuries that helmets do nothing to prevent, and which encompass the majority of cases where longterm or lifelong medical care is necessary from motorcycle crashes.
My helmet saved my life. The person across the room from me in the hospital after my accident didn\’t have a helmet on and had permanent brain damage. The accident was the fault of a driver who didn\’t look and backed out in front of me. So wbat? Helmets save lives. Quote any numbers you want to refute that. I don\’t care. I will always oppose your viewpoint on this subject.
Auntie, glad you had your helmet on, a good choice if riding in an environment where dumb drivers are plentiful. I suspect you would CHOOSE to continue to wear one if were YOUR choice.
I do not believe I suggested no one wear a helmet.
Nor, did I argue about the effectiveness of a helmet to prevent TBI in conditions as set forth by Motorcycle Manufacturers.
In fact, what I did state was that helmets should be part of a much larger and more comprehensive motorcycle safety program. One that if were in place may have prevented yours and the vegetable across the room for you a crash in the first place.
I\’m not sure if I would necessarily consider making motorcycle riders wear helmets a violation of the 14th amendment since it\’s not similarly required on automobile operators (if you consider helmets and seatbelts \”similar\” safety equipment). Granted, seatbelts in cars are probably more effective than helmets are on motorcycles, but the reverse argument (manditory seatbelts on motorcycles) would be a terrible idea. If you have to lay it down, being strapped to a sliding 600 lb chunk of metal just sounds like a bad idea. I\’m just not sure if this argument violates the true spirit of the 14th amendment. I guess I can see the argument of the 14th amendment violation, but would like to see the courts duke that one out.
As far as the money end of things (which will truly dictate what happens as far as proper training and education), it\’s a dang-tough situation. I\’m actually roommates with a state rep here in michigan (not going to specify democrat/republican, and that I\’m an independant, have voted both both sides of the isle the last 3 elections). He has been on the house appropriations committee the last two terms, and all I can say is that I in no way envy the work they go through to decide how to divide up the state budget (and more often than not lately, cutting). I just don\’t think when it comes to deciding where they\’re going to spend money, additional driver education is going to lose to medicare and school funding. And if the government thinks it can reduce hospital expenses by making people wear helmets on motorcycles, to reduce the severity of injuries when accidents occur, and it\’s not going to cost that much for them to do so, they\’re going to go that route. If there isn\’t a do-not-recessitate order on the person, the hospital has to do whatever it takes to keep that person alive, no matter the expense. When that exceeds what insurance is covering, the bill is going to get passed on to the government.
I know the argument concerning the monitary effect on safety is a colder/harsher one, but at the end of the day I think that\’s where many decisions end up being made. Of course, if you consider that lower hospital expenses results from less severe injuries, that arguement becomes stronger.
I can\’t remember who brought up the issue of the insurance industry backing manditory helmet laws, but people always seem to scream about insurance companies trying to reduce what they have to pay in claims. In motorcycle crashes the two expenses that are going to occur mainly are damage to the bike and the medical expenses of the rider. When compared, the medical expenses will far exceed those of the damage to the bike (especially when just a trip to the ER can cost a couple thousand dollars). The insurance company will pay the medical expenses. If it can somehow use loss prevention methods to reduce the possibility and severity of losses, they will pursue those. I know somebody might think, \”Yep, just another insurance company trying to hang onto their money\”. People forget that if the insurance company doesn\’t have to pay as much in medical expenses, that\’s probably because the claimant didn\’t get hurt as badly.
Okay, I know this a very heated subject, and I by no means claim to know everything (or much some days). I\’m not trying to get anybody riled up with this stuff, just partly giving my opinion and playing devils advocate. I guess take this (and all the other comments) into consideration for the sake of arguement.
I\’m not sure that I totlally understand the $20,000. I believe that is a minimum and that most of us have much more insurance through work or retirement. Don\’t be thinking everyone will just have $20,000 in insurance.
Let those that ride decide, not everyone else. Safetey is a matter of training and education of both bikers and cagers.
I suppose you don\’t know the whole story, if a motorcycle rider runs off the road hits a tree and disabled, they are not covered by MCCA. You have to hit a car, truck or bus to collect from MCCA after insurance has paid $350,000 in costs.
Someone said Michigan has goofy insurance laws, this is one of the goofiest parts. We all pay into MCCA, in fact at our house we pay 6 times, 2 bikes, 2 cars and a truck. Fortunately for me, I\’ve never collected on cent, hope I don\’t have to, but I\’ve paid a small fortune into that damn fund.
No question, additional training is needed. It would not have prevented my accident. They backed accoss a road and left me nowhere to go. A ditch and pole on one side and a concrete bridge on the other. Training could not have done a thing. My opinion is that helmets are necessary. I am stating that as a part of the same freedom that allows everyone else to state their opinion. Don\’t like the laws, change them, if you can. Don\’t blame insurance companies. Blame people like me who don\’t buy into the arguments.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
wow!! mr. lynch, i did not know that. i only knew michigan auto laws were some of the screwiest in the country but i could not have invisioned such a law. makes me glad i live in california.
I pay in to MCCA on 3 motorcycles. I get nothing out of it unless I am involved in a crash which involves an automobile. 2/3 of all motorcycle crashes are caused by automobile drivers committing a Right of Way violation. It would make more sense to prevent crashes by educating automobile drivers on driving around motorcycles. Also enact a fine and penalty for right of way violations causing the death or injury of a motorcyclist severe enough to make even the worst automobile drivers look for a motorcycle before turning left or entering an intersection. This would also alleviate many of the cases of paralysis, limb loss, blunt force trauma injuries, and comprehensive othopedic injuries far more common in motorcycle crashes than head injuries and will never be prevented by a helmet.
The Insurance Czars of the country are not interested in keeping my head safe, and they are not interested in keeping insurance consumers money in their pocket. They are only interested in keeping their gold lined coffers full. The easiest way for them to do that is to focus on the lie of helmets. Helmets have a limited amount of function in the grand scheme of motorcycle safety. However to many of their automobile driving consumers annually kill and maim bikers and the insurance companies are loathe to pay those claims. So they perpetuate lies upon the american public with the intention of turning the will of the public against bikers. If every biker in this country agreed to wear a DOT approved motorcycle helmet every time they got on a motorcycle, we in ABATE would still be outraged that anyone believes it is enough. Abate is made up of long term motorcyclists with millions upon millions of miles of motorcycle travel on Michigan roads and thousands upon thousands of years of combined experience. We know what comprises motorcyle safety far better than these pharisees and pariahs, these money changers. The have Governor Granholm bought and paid for, having been major contributors to her campaighn. She knows nothing of riding motorcycles and therefore is quick to pay back her dues to her benefactor. Gas prices will have even more motorcycles on the road. We want to be safe. Helmets are nothing more than a piece of crash related safety equipment. There needs to be a comprehensive program put into place that addresses a cell phone ban (proven to be as dangerous as drunk driving), creates comprehensive training of automobile drivers on sharing the road with motorcycles, and enacts severe penalties for right of way violations causing death or injury to a motorcylist.
No state that has has repealed their helmet law has raised their insurance rate because of repeal, just as no state has reduced their rates because of enacting a mandatory helmet law. Also if Michigan truly was concerned about motorcycle safety it would have a basic motorcycle awareness program in place for new drivers as many states already have. Currently Michigan does nothing in this area.
Waiting Breathlessly, YOU GET REAL! To suggest that people cannot see a 750 pound vehicle with at least one bright headlight on, legally traveling at the speed limit towards them is rediculous. Its an excuse and a damn poor one that has taken the life or limbs of to many of my freinds. Tell me they do not see Semi Trucks either, because the same right of way offenses is also reportedly the biggest complaint of truckers. Although the consequences are dramatically different.
As far as the SQUIDS (squished kids) are concerned, the average crotch rocket rider is under 21 years of age, and in almost every incidence I have seen is wearing a full faced expensive helmet. And I have seen a few in my line of work as a law enforcement officer. I firmly stand for programs that address this issue! Including wearing a helmet. Of the conciencious Sport Biker Riders out there with the maturity and sense to ride within the law, I would venture that every one of them would continue to wear a high quality helmet as well as other high speed race quality safety equipment when they ride. Its a different style of riding and much more prone to crashes, and as responsible adults they know this and make good decisions on their own without government (Insurance Company) intervention.
I cannot deny that I am Arrogant. However this has nothing to do with the big Insurance Companies lies, nor the ineffectiveness of MANDATORY helmets as a cure all for motorcyle safety.
I also will not deny I have a chip on my shoulder. I am insulted that the State of Michigan, ( that I was born and raised in, and from where I voluntarily served over 10 years in the military, (Including being deployed over a year since 9-11 as a reservist, missing my wife, and my daughters entire 9th year of life, and having worked in the service of Michiganders as a law enforcement Officer for over 11 years),
would allow Governor Granholm to continue to perpetuate AAA\’s lie to our citizens about helmets, and how they are a panacea for all motorcylist safety issues.
Another dose of reality for you is that these are NOT ACCIDENTS. These are CRASHES. This is what they are termed as by Michigan State Police Traffic Services Division. This is what they are termed as by the NHTSA. Take you argument up with them. \”Accident\” implys lack of fault. Thats B.S. and if you \”got real\” you would agree that is simply not the case.
The majority of bikers in Michigan are adult, employed, well paid, and well insured. The wisest seeking additional Uninsured and Underinsured coverage because of the POORLY INSURED AUTOMOBILE DRIVERS. We love to ride as a means of recreation, economical transportation, and a way to blow off the workaday stress, if not just because its our lifestyle. The majority of us in ABATE are long term riders with a combined resource of millions of miles on the road, and thousands of years of experience riding motorcycles. Anyone waiting breathlessly to expound upon their imaginations as a non rider about the ramifications or issues which face motorcyclists is at best, smoking crack. (This would mean more to you if you ever dealt with a crackhead)
If Michgan wants to GET REAL;
The argument here ITS NOT ABOUT THE UTILITY OF HELMETS, ITS ABOUT THE FUTILITY OF HELMET LAWS!
Concentrate on the mile of road BEFORE the crash.
Was the rider properly trained and endorsed?
Was the rider on a bike that was appropriate for his/her abilities and experience?
Was the rider sober and straight?
Was the Automobile driver on a cell phone, DVD player, eating, changing CD\’s, yelling at kids, or doing anything but paying attention
while driving?
Was the Automobile driver trained and well versed on driving on roadways with motorcycles, and aware of the importance of
watching for them?
Were there severe enough penalties for Right of Way violations causing death or injury in place to make even the worst driver fear the
consequences of not looking for motorcycles before entering an intersection or turning left?
Was the Automobile Driver sober and straight?
This is what ABATE is all about. Education, including education on the merits of helmets as a meaningful part of a much bigger and more
complex picture. Not Helmet laws as the myopic minded CURE for Motorcycle Safety. Most of us will continue to wear a helmet at those
times we feel it is useful and prudent. We are not stupid, suicidal, or interested in living on the edge. We are experienced long term riders,
and are quite certain that we can decide for ourselves what kind of safety devices will best benefit our riding situation.
We do not need the government under the false pretense as pushed by Insurance Companies that they know what is best for us, to FORCE a helmet to be worn on our head. It is unconstitutional and unamerican.
If all the questions listed above could be answered \”yes\” there would be a more dramatic effect on the frequency of head injury related deaths and injuries in Michigan than helmets ever will have. Not only that, it would dramatically reduce limb loss, paralysis, blunt force trauma, and other severe injuries that helmets do nothing to prevent, and which encompass the majority of cases where longterm or lifelong medical care is necessary from motorcycle crashes.
If your truly interested in the truth about helmets and the real causes of crashes and what needs to be done about them do your homework. Here are a couple of places to get started.
http://www.motorcyclists-against-dumb-drivers.com/cell-phones-independent-variable.html
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/
My helmet saved my life. The person across the room from me in the hospital after my accident didn\’t have a helmet on and had permanent brain damage. The accident was the fault of a driver who didn\’t look and backed out in front of me. So wbat? Helmets save lives. Quote any numbers you want to refute that. I don\’t care. I will always oppose your viewpoint on this subject.
Auntie, glad you had your helmet on, a good choice if riding in an environment where dumb drivers are plentiful. I suspect you would CHOOSE to continue to wear one if were YOUR choice.
I do not believe I suggested no one wear a helmet.
Nor, did I argue about the effectiveness of a helmet to prevent TBI in conditions as set forth by Motorcycle Manufacturers.
In fact, what I did state was that helmets should be part of a much larger and more comprehensive motorcycle safety program. One that if were in place may have prevented yours and the vegetable across the room for you a crash in the first place.
I\’m not sure if I would necessarily consider making motorcycle riders wear helmets a violation of the 14th amendment since it\’s not similarly required on automobile operators (if you consider helmets and seatbelts \”similar\” safety equipment). Granted, seatbelts in cars are probably more effective than helmets are on motorcycles, but the reverse argument (manditory seatbelts on motorcycles) would be a terrible idea. If you have to lay it down, being strapped to a sliding 600 lb chunk of metal just sounds like a bad idea. I\’m just not sure if this argument violates the true spirit of the 14th amendment. I guess I can see the argument of the 14th amendment violation, but would like to see the courts duke that one out.
As far as the money end of things (which will truly dictate what happens as far as proper training and education), it\’s a dang-tough situation. I\’m actually roommates with a state rep here in michigan (not going to specify democrat/republican, and that I\’m an independant, have voted both both sides of the isle the last 3 elections). He has been on the house appropriations committee the last two terms, and all I can say is that I in no way envy the work they go through to decide how to divide up the state budget (and more often than not lately, cutting). I just don\’t think when it comes to deciding where they\’re going to spend money, additional driver education is going to lose to medicare and school funding. And if the government thinks it can reduce hospital expenses by making people wear helmets on motorcycles, to reduce the severity of injuries when accidents occur, and it\’s not going to cost that much for them to do so, they\’re going to go that route. If there isn\’t a do-not-recessitate order on the person, the hospital has to do whatever it takes to keep that person alive, no matter the expense. When that exceeds what insurance is covering, the bill is going to get passed on to the government.
I know the argument concerning the monitary effect on safety is a colder/harsher one, but at the end of the day I think that\’s where many decisions end up being made. Of course, if you consider that lower hospital expenses results from less severe injuries, that arguement becomes stronger.
I can\’t remember who brought up the issue of the insurance industry backing manditory helmet laws, but people always seem to scream about insurance companies trying to reduce what they have to pay in claims. In motorcycle crashes the two expenses that are going to occur mainly are damage to the bike and the medical expenses of the rider. When compared, the medical expenses will far exceed those of the damage to the bike (especially when just a trip to the ER can cost a couple thousand dollars). The insurance company will pay the medical expenses. If it can somehow use loss prevention methods to reduce the possibility and severity of losses, they will pursue those. I know somebody might think, \”Yep, just another insurance company trying to hang onto their money\”. People forget that if the insurance company doesn\’t have to pay as much in medical expenses, that\’s probably because the claimant didn\’t get hurt as badly.
Okay, I know this a very heated subject, and I by no means claim to know everything (or much some days). I\’m not trying to get anybody riled up with this stuff, just partly giving my opinion and playing devils advocate. I guess take this (and all the other comments) into consideration for the sake of arguement.
I\’m not sure that I totlally understand the $20,000. I believe that is a minimum and that most of us have much more insurance through work or retirement. Don\’t be thinking everyone will just have $20,000 in insurance.
Let those that ride decide, not everyone else. Safetey is a matter of training and education of both bikers and cagers.
I suppose you don\’t know the whole story, if a motorcycle rider runs off the road hits a tree and disabled, they are not covered by MCCA. You have to hit a car, truck or bus to collect from MCCA after insurance has paid $350,000 in costs.
Someone said Michigan has goofy insurance laws, this is one of the goofiest parts. We all pay into MCCA, in fact at our house we pay 6 times, 2 bikes, 2 cars and a truck. Fortunately for me, I\’ve never collected on cent, hope I don\’t have to, but I\’ve paid a small fortune into that damn fund.
No question, additional training is needed. It would not have prevented my accident. They backed accoss a road and left me nowhere to go. A ditch and pole on one side and a concrete bridge on the other. Training could not have done a thing. My opinion is that helmets are necessary. I am stating that as a part of the same freedom that allows everyone else to state their opinion. Don\’t like the laws, change them, if you can. Don\’t blame insurance companies. Blame people like me who don\’t buy into the arguments.