Pittsburgh Steelers QB is in critical condition following an accident on his motorcycle. He has always opposed wearing a helmet.

Should the state of Oklahoma require those riding a motorcycle to wear a helmet?

If you are required to wear a seatbelt while driving, you should be required to have a brain bucket on while driving any two wheeled motorized vehicle.

Nope. If those riding a motorcycle are too stupid to protect their melons, then we can chalk it up to "natural selection" and start handing out Darwin Awards.

I agree with seatbelts being law becuase they are useful in preventing a person from becoming a human projectile and potentially hurting an innocent passerby.

Ooh, and sorry to go off topic for a minute, but are helmets required if you're riding a bike in a residential area or on a trail (like Hefner Lake)?

Why do I care if a millionaire wants to take such a huge gamble with his career and his health? Stupidity shouldn't be illegal.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Helmets are not required when riding a bicycle in a residential area or on a trail. Many times, though, helmets are required when you participate in a sanctioned bike ride or a race.

There is a sanctioned bike ride in Newcastle, Okla. that I usually ride in every year. Helmets are required in order to participate.

im not sure we should have either law. im still debating it with myself though. for the obvious reasons i say yes, but on the other hand its the government saying you are to stupid to use common sense and they should be the ones taking care of you.

Unfortunately, sometimes the government has to make a law, because too many people do not use common sense, and they let stupidity take control.

In general I think everyone that drives and rides should be retested every five years.

If I had it my way we would run the driver and motorcycle licensing system something like this.

If you have a clean driving record you could retest or take a class at a driving school.

If you have 1-5 points you would need to report to DPS for road test.

If you have 5+ you would need to take both the written and driven test.

If one of the following things occurred you would be required to do a complete retest and undergo a physical exam.

• Conviction of DUI/DWI
• Damaged a Structure (IE: OOPS I thought it was in Reverse)
• Experienced a Health problem or injury that impaired your motor skills
• Hit a Pedestrian and were at fault
• Hit a parked vehicle
• Committed an act that was a clear and present danger to other drivers. (IE: This would cover the elderly, people who drag race and people who have health conditions that impair their ability to drive.)

Doing this would drop our insurance rates to half the amount we are paying now maybe even less.

Thanks for the info, Keith. I really don't like wearing a helmet when I ride on a trail, but have donned one around my neighborhood b/c I didn't know what the laws were.

I may have to get some info from you on the Newcastle ride...may be kinda fun to go to!

Okay...sorry all for getting off topic for a bit!

I believe that an adult can decide for themselves whether or not they feel they need to wear a helmet or not. If they are on designated trails, in a safe area, then I don't see where a helmet should be required.

If they are riding on a city street, then I would highly suggest wearing a helmet. For children, I feel that they should always wear a helmet no matter where they ride, especially since they are inexperienced at riding bikes and not as alert as adults are.

I agree 100% with children wearing helmets on bikes.

And I also agree with motorcyclists wearing helmets as well.

One of the reasons we finally sold our Harley was because we had two young children that we didn't want to leave parentless. Nothing like traveling at 70 miles an hour watching the asphalt beneath and imagine your head hitting and bouncing and splitting and oozing ... okay so I read Stephen King and have a vivid imagination! But, seriously, it is dangerous.

Even if you don't care about leaving your family behind, the effect is felt on innocent people as well. The cost of the state to keep a fallen rider alive (even in a vegetative state) is astronomical .. think about those who ride who don't have insurance. Our rates are high I'm sure because of a quite a few of these accidents. Accidents that might have been less severe with helmet use.. a brain injury is nothing to make light of.

When you really think about it, a car at least provides a barrier against the pavement and other cars .. a motorcyclist is so vulnerable because of no protection and the lack of visibility ..

But still, I do love motorcycles and we rode for years and I loved it but it was always a risk and I never, ever would ride without a helmet.

Even when we moved here my hubby wore a helmet and I did too .. he hated it but he's still alive.. some people we know have died from lack of helmet use.

I know it's a hard call that the state has to make people do things - like wear seatbelts and helmets, but I can't imagine why someone would take the chance of getting killed - they just think they are invincible .. so maybe the state has to step in and enforce rules to protect those too naive and stubborn to do it themselves.

__________________
" You've Been Thunder Struck ! "

This was tried years back and they had a big rally with a bunch of bikers showed up at the capital. Why should I be forced to where a helmet to ride my motorcycle because some famous football billinare stud that is in another state doesn't and gets in a wreck? Why should I have to pay for somebody elses stupidity ot lack of thinking, I wear one anyway just because I know the dangers following not wearing one. If those choose not to wear one and get hurt thats there problem not mine, at least I know when I get in a wreck I have my helmet on and know that my chances are surviving are greater with it on that not wearing it at all. I never leave without wearing mine, unless I am just going around the corner to the 7 11 to get something, other than that my helmet is on. If people don't wear one let them not wear it thats there choice.

If you wear all the safety gear, chances are you will survive a motorcycle wreck. Most times without a helmet, you hear the word "fatality". Smashing your head into something at 30mph tends to do that.

Don't be fooled into thinking that bicycling is truly safe on the trails. In fact, in 7 years of bicyling, I've had more close calls than I had my entire childhood riding helmetless through the streets.

Cars cross the Hefner Trail in several places, and people make very goofy mistakes, like suddenly turning in front of you. If you're clipped into the pedals, you fall in a very nasty way and you only have a split second to unclip.

But, as my friend says, he likes it when young, strong men don't wear helmets, because they make the best organ donors.

LOL! That's just too funny. Sad, but funny.

You make some good points about the Hefner trails...probably best to keep the helmet on, regardless of how much I hate it.

This is an issue where 1Adam12 and I disagree. I think wearing helmets is similar to wearing seatbelts. If it saves lives, I think we should require it.

okcpd, there are a lot of things which could save lives which aren't required. At some point, we must draw the line between personal freedom and mandatory safety regulations. I agree with you that it seems odd to have seatbelt laws and no helmet laws, but I'd actually err to allowing anyone 18 and over to not wear a seatbelt at their discretion.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

In a perfect world, we would not need safety laws and regulations.

Common sense would be the rule of thumb. We would never need mandatory seatbelt laws and a need for helmet laws.

What I do not understand is that the majority will scream the message "Do not take away are right to make our own decisions." While at the same time, they sue everyone with deep pockets because of their inability to make logical decisions. (IE: I ate McDonald’s everyday for the last ten years. It is their fault I am fat not mine.)

You cannot have it both ways the government needs to step up and write a personal responsibility law. If something happened to you because of your lack of control/good judgment then you are stuck no compensation for you.

He who is stupid enough to walk out in to oncoming traffic deserves the results of his actions. The drivers on the road should not have to pay him a dime. If anything, he should pay for the damage to the vehicles his body hit.

Nice straw man there OklaCity.

The "majority" do probably bear the sentiment that we should have the right to make our own decisions regarding our own personal safety and health.

I do not think that this fictitious majority would sue McDonalds for making them fat. I think that's a bad argument. Nor do I think the fictitious majority can't accept personal responsibility for their actions.

It seems you're referring to a handful (four or five) torts cases that have been held out to exemplify what is wrong with our torts system.

The example you provided, however, is piss poor. The case was thrown out in 2003 for failing to even make a primae facie case that the reasonable consumer would not be aware of the open and obvious effects of eating McDonalds on such a frequent basis while not exercising.

As to not wearing a helmet increasing the liability of the negligent driver, we live in a comparative negligence state. I would think that an attorney worth his salt (or an insurance adjustor) would impute the comparative negligence of the motorcycle rider in not wearing a helmet. I can easily see how that could be accounted for, thus decreasing the potential liability of a motorist who negligently strikes an un-helmeted motorcyclist.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Yeah, the Hefner Trails are like any other place for bicycling, there is always an element of danger. A friend of mine broke her collar bone on the dam when she went into the curb while being passed by a car. I also wrecked when my foot caught one of those red poles they stick in the middle of the trail. If I weren't wearing a helmet, I would have been left with a nasty concussion at the least.

As for requiring helmets for motorcyclists, it ultimately comes down to their right to take their own life into their hands. If they choose to ride on a fast moving open vehicle inches from the ground without a helmet, then that's their decision. It's a stupid decision, but people make stupid decisions everyday. Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for someone else's lack of common sense?

YES

One of the lectures they gave at the citizens Police Academy convinced me helemts should be required. I knew it anyway, however, that clinched it.

They showed some pictures of a traffic collision involving a motorcylce. The man riding the motorcycle had to be going around 100 miles per hour. He hit a car and his crushed head was in the lap of the car driver. Those pictures should be shown to every motorcyclist. They would never take the helmet off riding.

I have a strong stomach, however, that one turned it.

No, I don't think helmets should be required for adults. However, children should be required to wear them. Once you are an adult, you can make your own decisions (stupid or otherwise).

__________________
My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind
Albert Einstein

So if he had been wearing a helmet, his head would have been removed, but otherwise, it wouldn't have been damaged?

Bad example.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Sounds like it's a deterrent against speeding (going around 100 mph!) on a motorcycle more than anything.