A couple of weeks ago I wrote about the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the vast repository of data it's collected. Among that data are statistics regarding injuries and deaths associated with the use, or lack thereof, of helmets while operating a motorcycle. For example, NHTSA recently published one of its Traffic Safety Reports titled Motorcycle helmets saved 1,829 motorcyclists’ lives in 2008. The available data clearly supports what our common sense also tells us: wearing a helmet significantly improves your chance of surviving a motorcycle accident. NHTSA argues that "motorcycle crash statistics show that helmets are about 29 percent effective in preventing crash fatalities. That is, on average, riders wearing a helmet have a 29 percent better chance of surviving a crash than riders without a helmet." [1] However, the issue of mandatory use of a helmet is a more complex matter than simply weighing the probability of sustaining a fatal injury.
When a reasonably aware person chooses to ride a motorcycle, he or she recognizes that there is some level of danger associated with that activity, beyond the level associated with other common, related activities such as driving a car. Here again, NHTSA data make clear that riding a motorcycle is more dangerous than driving a car, a "cage" in biker parlance. The point is, riding a motorcycle brings with it a heightened danger that no reasonable person would dispute. We choose to ride in spite of this danger because after we weigh the benefits we derive from riding against the risks associated with it, we determine that the risks are worth taking.
I wrote a few months ago about the All-The-Gear_All-The-Time (ATGATT) minority of bikers. I'm not one of them. ATGATT riders argue that all riders should wear the maximum amount of protection whenever they ride. For example, they are adamant that not only should you always wear a helmet, but it should always be a full-face helmet. I'm more of "Some-Gear-All-The-Time" rider. I always wear over-the-ankle boots and heavy-weight pants, such as denim, for example. I wear my leathers when the temperatures are in the 70s or lower. I'm not going to wear protective clothing that makes me uncomfortable or endangers my well-being in other ways, such as inducing heat exhaustion; what's the point of riding then?
So with helmets, I am of the mind of the many riders who choose to wear a helmet 99% of the time but want the option to go without one occasionally, especially when the temperature gets beyond the mid 90s. In its June 2012 issue, Motorcycle Consumer News published a letter by subscriber Randall Beecham of Bellville, Ohio. Mr. Beecham made a great argument regarding the use of helmets and I quote a small portion of his letter to make the point:
I am a Charter Life Member of the AMA. I have been riding for almost 45 years. There has been a time or two that wearing a helmet has saved me from injury (possible serious). Yet still, on occasion, I prefer to ride without a helmet. Why? Just because I darn well want to! That's freedom. I know that I would be safer wearing one, but I really don't care. I'd be safer yet if I never rode a motorcycle at all. The main reason I ride is for the joy of it. Sometimes it is more joyful to ride bare-headed.
Thank you Mr. Beecham for communicating your sentiments so clearly; they reflect my feelings on the matter as well.
Keep the shiny side up!
[1] NHTSA Traffic Tech. "Do Motorcycle Helmets Interfere with the Vision and Hearing of Riders?" Technology Transfer Series. No. 127 June 1996