Helmet Laws

I would like to strongly encourage all bikers to wear their helmets every time they ride. The studies I have read leave little doubt in my mind that helmets prevent serious, and often fatal, head injuries, and don't cause enough of a distraction to significantly increase the occurrence of accidents. A good example is the Hurst Report. While I haven't ridden in a few years, I'm thinking of buying a bike in the near future. I'll probably get the helmet first.

That doesn't mean, however, that I am for laws requiring motorcycle riders to wear helmets. I always cringe when our government enacts laws designed to protect us from ourselves. Such laws against "victimless crimes" eat away at our personal liberties. Self-endangerment is not a valid excuse for government intrusion into the life of a competent adult. Only when an individual's behavior adversely affects others is official action warranted.

The same is true for seat belt laws. I don't feel the state is justified in requiring people to wear their seat belts. Yet, in a way, I like it that the law makes it easier for me to wear my seat belt as a passenger without offending the driver. In the same way, helmet laws make helmet use more accepted among bikers. But that's not enough to justify them.

Florida's helmet law requires helmet use on any motorcycle or moped powered by a motor with a displacement above 50 cubic centimeters. On December 8, 1995, in the case of Florida vs. Raynal, Pinellas County Court Judge Blackwood found the law to be too vague to be constitutional. This finding was upheld in two subsequent cases, Florida vs. Landry and Florida vs. Cleator, both also in Pinellas County.

One strong argument for helmet laws holds that uninsured helmetless motorcycle accident victims drive up insurance costs for the rest of us. Studies have failed to back up this assertion though, as they generally find bikers to be as well as or better insured than the general population. Traffic fatality statistics show that many more people die from head injuries in accidents involving cars than motorcycles, but no one is proposing that automobile drivers be required to wear helmets. Requiring helmet use is too strong a cure for this issue anyway, as it can be adequately addressed by requiring riders who wish to ride without headgear to carry sufficient personal injury insurance coverage.

Just such an amendment is before Florida legislators right now. Senate Bill 126 and House Bill 117 propose the following addition to Florida Statute 316.211: …a person over 21 years of age may operate or ride upon a motorcycle without wearing protective headgear securely fastened upon his or her head if such person is covered by an insurance policy providing for at least $10,000 in medical benefits for injuries incurred as a result of a crash while operating or riding on a motorcycle.

This just makes sense. While I personally consider it foolhardy to ride a motorcycle without protective headgear, it's not up to me or to anyone else to make this decision for you.

If you'd like to get involved in supporting the proposed bills, check out the ABATE of Florida Web site. On their Legislative Page you can find up to date information on the status of the proposed legislation, links to government sites, and facts and statistics concerning helmet use and traffic safety. A good place to find out about national biker issues is the Motorcycle Riders Foundation Web site.

(Note: The proposed legislation was passed after this column was published.)