Traffic laws that would keep motorcyclists (and others) safer are ignored by cops, such as following too closely, speeding, etc. Ya see, it's the poor driving skills of the car drivers that cause damage to motorcycle riders. It's the easy way out to blame the rider. There's no helmeted riders that get hurt? Yeah, sure.

If wearing helmets made it safer for us, then the number of deaths per 1000 accidents would not have increased when California began making helmet usage mandatory.

What our helmet law has done in California is allowed police to violate motorcyclists 4th and 14th Amendment Rights, and made it seem "logical" for the police to violate a state traffic law so they can fine motorcycle riders. Yeah, in America.

How 'bout you lawyers admit that most in your profession will do anything for money and do not care about what is right. Get off your high horse, and stop telling me to get in line, brown shirt. If you can't see through the skewed NHTSA and IIHS statistics, Lombardi, how can you understand law?

There is no difference statistically between the deaths per accident in states with helmet laws vs states without helmet laws. The main impact of helmet laws is to reduce the numbers of motorcyclists on the road.

Since insurance companies do not want to pay for the injuries and deaths caused by their bad drivers, they have an interest in getting motorcyclists off the road. Thus their campaigns in favor of mandatory helmet laws.

When states repeal their helmet laws, numbers of motorcyclists rise, as do accidents, but the deaths and injuries per accident remain constant. Motorcyclists make up a tiny fraction of motorists on the road.

Head injuries sustained in automobile accidents are far more numerous than the handful in motorcycle accidents. When you start advocating mandating helmet use in cars you can talk to me about helmet laws for motorcyclists.

It is obvious that the author is has NOT thoroughly researched the data. (NHTSA on fatalities helmeted vs non, etc)
He contends that anyone not in agreement with HIS position, is "not being realistic...". Great arguement, agree with me or be dismissed as unintelligent.

In a previous article by Mr. Lombardi (advocating MANDATORY helmet use), he sights instances of riders killed while WEARING helmets- Jerry Alan Andresen.

Perhaps Mr. Lombardi truely believes that due to risk, no one should ride a motorcycle at all.

For the sake of his clients, I hope that Mr. Lombardi's litigious skills can overcome his willingness to ignore data that doesn't agree with his contentions & his inflated value of his own opinion.

Steve,
Warren Woodward explains this better than I can. Read his article at More ...
It's more complicated that this tiny comment field allows.

your research is not complete the is more head trauma caused by car accidents26%,pedestrian13%,bicycle7%,motorcycle6%,and other12% so i guess what you are saying everybody should where a helmet walking riding a bike riding in a car what ever activity we do is that what you want. Last time i checked it was a free country freedom of choice it should be the persons choice not your's just my opinion.

I'd like to see those 62 % head traumas from vehicle accidents be reduced by requiring everyone to wear helmets while in a vehicle. Lets see if Steve Lombardi thinks this would also be short sighted pandering to a few vehicle drivers. I can promise this would be a HUGE "frivoulous legislative effort", as Steve puts it about motorcyclists and helmets, by our legislator to pass that one. Steve, you and everyone you allow inside your car, truck, etc wear a helmet each and every time your in that 4 wheel vehicle--and I'll wear one when I ride my motorcycle. Deal? After all--you guys are driving up my insurance cost, hospital costs, and are a huge public burden to us motorcycle riders.

Steve, I do have excellent health, medical and full coverage vehicle insurance and my coverage is most likely as good, if not better than yours, and there is no proof that shows motorcycle riders are less insured than automobile drivers.In fact most of us own bikes worth well over 20,000 dollars and also new to almost new automobiles on the side and our coverage is most likely far better than the average Joe who only owns an automobile. So why keep pushing the public burden syndrome upon motorcycle riders especially when you and other automobile riders are more to blame for severe head injuries and the expensive aftermath of it all than we are. You also have yet to respond back to Kit's link on head injuries. Now,, will you agree to wear a helmet each and every time your in a vehicle or not? It is foolish (as you say) to allow automobile drivers to do so without a helmet. Thanks,I look forward to a direct response (of sorts)!

More ...

Steve, did you ever read the Warren Woodward article?

More ...

Kit Maira

Steve,
I don't know how you can say there are no references or citations in the Woodward study. Every table is gleaned from government statistics and the sources are all listed. Did you actually read the study?
As for your points if inquiry:
1. False sense of security? This may be an interesting topic for discussion, but irrelevant to the point of the article. You ask for verifiable data, but then ask how helmets effect a person's state of mind?
2. Declines of motorcycle registrations before and after helmet laws are thoroughly addressed on page 3.
3. Under reporting of motorcycle accidents? See Addendum 2, page 9: Vehicle Miles Traveled.
4. TBIs not mentioned? See Addendum 3, page 10: Transportation-related traumatic brain injuries.

Would it really matter? Would you post a retraction to your story if you had the actual links to the DOT statistics?