Motorcycle helmet laws are a hot topic for debate. On one side, proponents say that all motorcycle riders should be required to wear helmets for safety reasons. On the other side, opponents argue that wearing a helmet should be a personal choice. So, which is it? Should all motorcycle riders be required to wear helmets, or should it be a personal choice? Let us take a closer look at both sides of the argument.
History
The history of motorcycle helmet laws in the United States began with the passage of the National Highway Safety Act in 1966. This Act granted states federal funds to develop programs to improve traffic safety, such as vehicle registration, accident record systems, and traffic control. The significance of this legislation stems from the fact that it included a provision that allowed only states that had ratified the 1966 NHSA to participate in federal highway safety programs. Every state except California had enacted legislation requiring motorcyclists to wear helmets by 1975.
Opponents of the helmet laws asserted that they infringed on their constitutional rights and deprived them of the ability to watch their safety without government intervention. The American Motorcycle Association and other motorcyclist rights organizations began to gain traction in court, arguing that mandating motorcycle helmets represented constitutional infringement.
Present Scenario
Currently, 19 states and the District of Columbia have helmet laws, while 28 states only apply them to specific riders, such as those under 18. The remaining three states have no helmet laws at all. Proponents of mandatory helmet laws argue that they help reduce the number of injuries and fatalities among motorcycle riders. According to the CDC, helmets are estimated to be 37% efficient in preventing motorcycle fatalities and 67% successful in reducing brain injuries.
Effectiveness
The effectiveness of motorcycle helmet laws is typically determined by changes in various motorcycle-related fatality statistics, such as the total number of motorcyclist deaths, fatalities per billion miles traveled, or deaths per 10,000 registered motorcycles. The number of deaths is also recorded in cases where people have died, usually due to injury or sickness. Medical measures such as the degree of injury damage, brain trauma, hospitalizations, and medical expenditures (including hospital care and treatment costs) are occasionally reported.
Penalty for Violation
The penalty for violating a state’s helmet law can vary depending on the state. In California, a violation is punishable by a fine in an amount as determined by a court. In Florida, if you are at least 21 years old and have medical coverage for injuries resulting from a motorbike accident totaling $10,000 or more, you are not required by law to wear a helmet. A violation of the law is only a noncriminal traffic infraction, not punishable as a moving violation for which you can be ordered to pay fine plus court costs and administration fees. In New York, the penalty for violating the helmet law is a fine of up to $100, 30 days in jail, or a fine and jail confinement.
Never-Ending Debate
Helmets are essential for younger riders, who are more likely to be involved in accidents. Opponents of mandatory helmet laws argue that they infringe on personal freedom and do not improve safety. They point out that many riders take precautions to avoid riding during peak traffic hours or bad weather. Overall, there is no clear consensus on the benefits of motorcycle helmet laws. However, they can play an essential role in keeping riders safe.
Motorcycle helmet laws are a hot topic for debate. This blog post explores the different arguments for and against motorcycle helmet laws. Ultimately, it is up to each state to decide whether or not they want to have mandatory motorcycle helmet laws.
What do you think?
Should motorcycle helmet laws be universal?
