|
|
Cruiser
Posts: 204
West Knoxville TN | Prime Power - 2010-04-23 8:15 PM
I believe it is coming. I am Active Army and must wear at all riding times: helmet, glasses, gloves, pants and long sleeve. Not just a helmet. Government runs my healthcare, and now will a majority of the public. It is only a matter of time.
Prime Power is right. Before I retired we had a case of a young airman getting pretty banged up as a result of a MC wreck. They were going over the details of not paying for his hospital stay as he had not been wearing a helmet when the wreck occurred. This was in 94. So plan on the Obama Care sliding this in with little delay once the program gets rolling. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 8144
New Bohemia, VA | Riding requirements for the military is a long standing policy. I rode in 1985 and the regulations were then that a helmet was required always regardless of local laws or status. The reasoning behind this is that we need a healthy and complete military force and preceived safety measure will be enforced to maintain that ready force. It is hard to go to war with banged up soldiers, sailor or airmen who of their own recreational activities took risks that injured themselves. It is what it is, and went as far as banning contact football on Fort Bragg for physical training periods because of the injuries incurred by rough and tough soldiers on one another.
As far as a nation-wide mandatory motorcycle law, then we have become a police state of sorts, but insurance companies can govern this is if they deem your zillion $$ medical bill would have been avoided if you had wore a $30.00 helmet and refuse to pay.
Don't compare what is done on military bases or federal employees especially the military, they live by an entirely set of rules. I learned this from serving for over 20 years in the Army, 10 as a paratrooper in a rapid deployment unit. Our greatest national security asset are those who serve and as a leader was responsible to ensure we could do just that. So sad we lose so many good people to recreational activities, something that gets very little media attention.
Edited by varyder 2010-04-30 7:42 AM
|
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1436
| In the 70's, 80's and 90's the ONLY regulations with regards to Motorcycle operation applied ONLY to on base. So if you chose to ride off base lidless and wrecked the service still paid for medical care/treatment. Hell they couldn't even go after you for missing work as a result of hospitalization. I know some folks were "told" the regulations for on-base riding applied to off base as well but the regulations did not.
The regulations have changed in the past couple years due in large part to the high number of MC fatalities for service members. Many of these accidents have been attributed to long periods of not riding due to deployment and excessive speed. They have also determined what I've known for years in that riders are not trained appropriately for avoidance (braking hard is NOT avoidance, it just means it takes a few 100th's of a second longer before impact). New avoidance training based on GP racing are being implimented at bases currently. Very good training I might add. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 8144
New Bohemia, VA | strange |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 256
| I agree the ruling is in part because we need a healthy military but don't think money doesn't play into it. It always does. Making us wear helmets and full body gear lessons the medical costs for sure. Why wouldn't they apply this to government run healthcare? |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1436
| varyder, not really strange. The regulations with regards to safety were pretty much left up to commanders and most err on the side of safety. So what you had was "verbal" policy being stated in safety training but no real enforcement mechanism or rather specific regulation. As a result they were unenforceable. Here are two links to compare. The first is AR 385-10 dating to May 1988, the second the same regulation as adopted in 2007. You'll notice the 1988 regulation was revised in 2000 but also that it does not specifically address MC safety or personal equipment, where as the 2007 regulation does. One of those as the stats reveal a problem the service is forced to adopt a formal stance/regulation that specifically spells out the rule. With it in writing they can now enforce the rule, where as prior to this latest change the most they could do was a verbal reprimand. I specifically addressed the USA but the Navy and AF has adopted similar regulations.
http://www.usanato.army.mil/BDE/DOCUMENTS/AR%20385%2010%20Army%20Sa...
http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r385_10.pdf
|
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 70
Central Victoria, Australia | In oz, we have had compulsary helmets and we were one of the ones to first introduce seat belts it didnt seem to create too many liberty issues, made sense
We also have universal health care which seems the right thing to do, doesnt matter who you are if your sick , you will be looked after.
We do have options with private health cover, if you want to.
I work in the health care industry , i view with interest the opposition to changes to your health system, which has very good points and some really bad points
The australian military has introduced MC rider training for its people, as they were killing more in recreational mc accidents than in combat
|
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 8144
New Bohemia, VA | https://safety.army.mil/povmotorcyclesafety/ a lot of good information found here. |
|
| |
|
Iron Butt
Posts: 1158
Richmond, Virginia | Is this really a big deal? Seems to me that the consensus here is not whether wearing a helmet is good or bad or personal choice, but all the bickering is about the government mandating it, not whether its a smart idea or not. Personally, I dont care. If you are stupid STUPID enough to ride a motorcycle in shorts, tank shirt, tube top, bikini, flipflops, vest, shirtless, two bandaids and a cork, then you pretty much deserve the consequences when you go down and end up having a body that looks like road kill. I choose to wear the gear. Do I like it? Heck no. But i know that its not gonna be me that causes its need but the cellphone using teenager texting idiot, not paying attention, that will make me glad i wore the gear. I just dont wanna hear the whining and crying when you look like you hit a potatoe scraper, when you knew better then to go out wearing next to no protection. blah blah blah no more government, blah blah blah dont take my gun, blah blah blah we've heard it all. Here is the bottom line boys and girls, if PEOPLE were not so stupid and irresponsible, then we wouldnt need other agencies or businesses to enforce common sense rules on us. You dont want more government ? fine, BE SMARTER !! |
|
| |
|
Puddle Jumper
Posts: 27
| The insurance companies will not let it be repealed. They would rather us be dead than have to pay the bills to fix/take care of us. It's that simple. I live in Pa. and with Ohio not having a helmet law for years, many Pa. riders would purposely go to Ohio to ride. It passed here in Pa. with flying colors. I do wear a helmet so it doesn't matter to me. |
|
| |
|
Puddle Jumper
Posts: 27
| The insurance companies will not let it be repealed. They would rather us be dead than have to pay the bills to fix/take care of us. It's that simple. I live in Pa. and with Ohio not having a helmet law for years, many Pa. riders would purposely go to Ohio to ride. It passed here in Pa. with flying colors. I do wear a helmet so it doesn't matter to me. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 3773
Pittsburgh, PA | there was a bill trying to be passed years ago (if anyone remembers) where Health insurance companies wanted to deny coverage to people involved in motorcycle accidents as they considered it "high risk".. does anyone remember that one? it got shot down... thank god! or could you imagine what our motorcycle insurance would cost us if health care Didnt have to pay for your medical bills... i might not be riding right now... |
|
| |
|
Puddle Jumper
Posts: 27
| That would be catastrophic if the insurance carrier wouldn't carry us. Imagine the effect on riders, dealers and all of their employees, etc. It would come down like a house of cards. |
|
| |
|
Tourer
Posts: 353
| donetracey - 2010-04-19 9:24 AM
I did some research (before internet) on all causes of death in BC in the 2 years prior. i discovered that more people died "falling out of bed" than died in "motorcycle crashes".
If the # of people that slept in beds matched the # that rode motorcycles, I'm sure the deaths from motorcycle crashes would far outweigh deaths from bed falls. |
|
| |
|
Iron Butt
Posts: 600
Linwood, MI | VaParadox - 2010-05-02 6:40 PM
...if PEOPLE were not so stupid and irresponsible, then we wouldnt need other agencies or businesses to enforce common sense rules on us. You dont want more government ? fine, BE SMARTER !!
There are a lot of people that apply that very same logic to riding a motorcycle. "Motorcycle riding is dangerous, therefore it shouldn't be allowed." |
|
| |
|
Tourer
Posts: 388
Salisbury, NC | I hope all of you that are bitching about the national helmet law are also in good standing with the AMA that is fighting the lawmakers on this law. I am pro choice and I wear a helmet. ET
Edited by etspastimes 2010-06-18 8:19 AM
|
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 82
Fargo, ND | I have riden for years without a helmet and loved it. That was when I was young and did not have anyone depending on me for their future happiness. Now that I am a Vetran Rider (54) I appreciate to need for a helmet. As my wife and I ride now we wear helmets with a bluetooth intercom set to talk about the beautiful country we are riding through. Im sure she appreciates not getting a shower when we are at 75mph and I turn my head to yell something to her. When we got the 2009 Vision Tour Premium last October we vowed never to ride without a helmet again. Her statement to me was... " Nobody is going to take you from my life and happiness... not even you!" I concur with her deduction!
Ride safe my Visionary Brothers.
Stretch |
|
| |
National Mandatory Motorcycle Helmet Law?
