proof .........of darwin's theory

[bicilindricov60]

MOTORCYCLE SAFETY



PROBLEM OVERVIEW

Since the repeal of the mandatory helmet law in 1997, the number of motorcycle fatalities in Texas has increased 107.6 percent, according to NHTSA’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System. Texas had 243 motorcycle fatalities in calendar year 2001, a 7.0 percent increase over 2000 (National Center for Statistics and Analysis). In the 2002 TTI survey of motorcycle helmet use, 49.2 percent of riders were wearing appropriate headgear.



Wonder how this affects insurance rates?

[commandodave]

MOTORCYCLE SAFETY



PROBLEM OVERVIEW

Since the repeal of the mandatory helmet law in 1997, the number of motorcycle fatalities in Texas has increased 107.6 percent, according to NHTSA’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System. Texas had 243 motorcycle fatalities in calendar year 2001, a 7.0 percent increase over 2000 (National Center for Statistics and Analysis). In the 2002 TTI survey of motorcycle helmet use, 49.2 percent of riders were wearing appropriate headgear.



Wonder how this affects insurance rates?


The above statistics are meaningless. They must be put in the proper context. Have motorcycle registrations risen in proportion to the accidents? Even more important is the vehicle usage. If the average miles per year per motorcycle have risen by 200%, then the statistics you quoted actually show a decrease in the accident rate by nearly 50%. The real question is "What is the number of fatalities per million vehicle miles before and after the repeal of the helmet law?"

Dave

[ckruzel]

slice is and dice it anyway you want, more deaths are more deaths

[fnfalman]

If you can't handle the insurance rate then go drive a car. I'm sure that with the mandatory seatbelt law, casualties from car accidents are zero to nil nowadays.:rolleyes: :blah:

[kalvinosaurus]

Don't forget, there has been a huge upsurge in the number of 30+ people buying cruisers. And of course, it's uncool to ride your cruiser with a helmet.

[flyinlow]

As the above posters pointed out, those numbers don't tell the whole story. Unfortunately, all the insurance company needs is the fact they are insuring more people on bikes and they are having more accidents and deaths, which results in higher premiums.

[commandodave]

As the above posters pointed out, those numbers don't tell the whole story. Unfortunately, all the insurance company needs is the fact they are insuring more people on bikes and they are having more accidents and deaths, which results in higher premiums.
Not to mention that nowhere does it list how many of the fatalities are due to head injuries to helmetless riders.

[Gorf]

If you can't handle the insurance rate then go drive a car. I'm sure that with the mandatory seatbelt law, casualties from car accidents are zero to nil nowadays.:rolleyes: :blah:

My insurance rates for my car are several times what I pay for 5 bikes combined with the same levels of insurance coverage each.

[duganc]

Commando has it right about the straight statistic. Actuarial science or any statisitcs based discipline gathers as many variables as they possibly get their hands on to analyze. That's why our rates are as low as they are. National Geographic published something about causes of death and I know motorcycles were mentioned, but I forget how high up the list they were.

At any rate, dumbass helmetless motherfuckers get what is waiting for them

[go_modem_go]

Glad we have 97% seat belt wearing, and a 99.9% helmet waring rate (enforced by fines and frequent checks)...

Insurances should not pay damages if someone isn't wearing proper gear - and over here, they don't (at least if you do not wear a mandatory helmet / seat belt).

I am all for the very strict European licencing system as well - a car licence is only available at 18 (17 in some places), with 2-3 years probation, a points system, and costs about $2k-3k in mandatory driving lessons by professionals, plus several months of evening classes.

A bike licence? Forget riding anything above 34hp until you are past 21 with at least 2 years practice. At 16, 125cc and 15hp is maximum allowed, and this licence takes at least a month and $1500 to pass (in Germany - other countries are a bit laxer, but still very strict compared to the US). However, the problem with older re-entry riders on powerful new machines remains (especially the elderly cruiser crowd....)

Freedom is only good if it's not at the expense of others. The US system of total freedom to ride / drive on useless licences for $40 without any practice, no helmet / seat belts etc. is putting a great strain on the entire community - both in terms of cost and death toll (very high traffic death toll despite much lower traffic density and very slow speeds).

[commandodave]

What's wrong with this picture?

Some health insurance policies will not pay for injuries occured from riding a motorcycle. This is a lawful activity. Yet the same policy will pay if you injure yourself while driving drunk - highly illegal.

As for mandatory seal belt usage - I am all for it. A seat belt lets me go 10 mph faster on curvy roads. Same thing for motorcycle helmets - I feel that I am invulnerable to crashes when I wear my helmet. Therefore I go faster on the bike, too.

Beware of what you wish for - you just might get it.

Now the seat belt and helmet points were said mostly in jest. I wear both 100% of the time when on the appropriate vehicle. But the seat belt point is the only fact I remember from high school drivers ed. One day they had a local stock car racer in and he talked about the importance of wearing one. The instructor just about shit himself when the driver revealed the real reason of why the racers invented them. And I do know people who take more risks when wearing safety gear. They feel that they won't get hurt in an accident.

How does that factor into the equation? Yes, he was wearing the helmet when he crashed, but if he were not wearing it he never would have put himself in the position to crash.

Dave

[venturaII]

What's wrong with this picture?

Some health insurance policies will not pay for injuries occured from riding a motorcycle. This is a lawful activity. Yet the same policy will pay if you injure yourself while driving drunk - highly illegal.



Whether or not it's morally right or wrong, insurance companies have the legal right to exclude whatever activities they deem hazardous from coverage.

And many insurance companies are now starting to refuse coverage if you're caught DUI, not wearing seatbelt, etc.

[JeffS]

Wonder how this affects insurance rates?



Personally, I'm fed-up with insurance rates being the justification for law after law in this country.

Motorvehicle accidents aren't the cause of the high insurance rates in this country. Motorcycles particularly are just an easy target that won't offend the mainstream sheep. I would bet my life that McDonalds singlehandedly causes more healthcare expense than motorcycles.

Heaven forbid we tell all the fat-ass, couch-potatos that we're going to deny their coverage though. Or what about the pill-popping suburbanites running up psych bills and living off anti-depresants to feed their low self-esteem?

Yes, I am most definitely taking it personally. I have no prescriptions, I eat healthy, go to the gym at least once a day and I have a serious problem with the idea that you're going to deny coverage if I get injured in an "extreme" activity - just so you can afford to buy blood pressure medicine for the fat-ass next door.

Some of you need to think about what you're doing when you support the insurance companies crusades. Yea, the smokers are an easy target, then the drinkers, then the people without seatbelt, or helmets, but they're not going to stop until one day your coverage will be denied because you've done anything other than sit on the couch watching tv and spending money.

[coleman1]

and costs about $2k-3k in mandatory driving lessons by professionals, plus several months of evening classes.

I lived in Sweden for a couple of years back in the 90's, it's pretty similar to this. The problem I had was: the instructors would prolong the students lessons by saying they weren't ready yet. Then the student had to pay more money for more instruction.

Sweden does have an awesome transportation system,great walk-ways and bicycle paths.....socialized medicine sucks though....