Missouri Senate Repeals Mandatory Motorcycle Helmet Law

[StlouisX50]

Missouri Senate Repeals Mandatory Motorcycle Helmet Law


March 13, 2009

JEFFERSON CITY, MO. (AP) - The Missouri Senate votes to allow people at least 21 years old to ride a motorcycle without wearing a helmet. Missouri has required riders to wear helmets for decades, but some lawmakers have been trying to overturn that law, arguing that it infringes on civil liberties. Even under the repeal, riders would still need to wear a helmet on interstate highways.

Critics of changing the law include a Kansas City senator whose son died in a motorcycle crash 10 years ago. Democratic Sen. Yvonne Wilson says requiring helmets has saved people from serious brain damage or death.

The Senate voted 23-6 yesterday to pass a motorcycle insurance bill that contains the helmet provisions. The measure now moves to the House where it has passed before.

[StlouisX50]

Just take seat belts out of cars too, oh maybe even get rid of doors and a windshield in cars too.

[lugnuts]

so if making someone wear a helmet infringes on their civil liberties wouldn't that mean that making someone wear a seat belt also infringe on their civil liberties?

I always wear my seat belt and always have even before all these silly laws. I think it is stupid not to wear one but the government shouldn't be dictating if we wear one or not.

[Roadghost]

The reality is that the 30-50% drop in motorcycle fatalities predicted by safety zealots has never materialized. Helmets were touted as the be-all and end-all of motorcycle safety, but the helmet law's real effect was almost unseen despite good compliance. Link:

http://ideas.repec.org/a/pio/envirc/...2p193-203.html

What they don't like to say about helmet laws is that when they are enacted, people ride their motorcyles less, or stop riding altogether because they can't stand helmets. Any decline in fatalities is construed in propaganda "studies" to claim the law is a big success. In reality motorcycle license registrations drop, fewer motorcycles are on the road, and accidents and fatalities drop.

[FlyinZX-10R]

so if making someone wear a helmet infringes on their civil liberties wouldn't that mean that making someone wear a seat belt also infringe on their civil liberties?

I always wear my seat belt and always have even before all these silly laws. I think it is stupid not to wear one but the government shouldn't be dictating if we wear one or not.

X2

[9500ier]

I wish they would make them mandatory in FL... it would help with insurance a little I think and save lives. However, it is convenient when you want to move your bike like one block (which I did one time illegally without a helmet, because the cops do not know who can and who cannot). However, I wear my helmet 99.99999999% of the time.

Nonetheless, I am a libertarian at heart, and if the damn idiots want to prove Darwin right, I think they should have that right.

[StlouisX50]

Well if thats the truth then I guess take Football players, Hockey players protection off too. Has there ever been proof helmets do not help?

[Donut Patrol]

Nonetheless, I am a libertarian at heart, and if the damn idiots want to prove Darwin right, I think they should have that right.

+1

[AirMoore]

Nonetheless, I am a libertarian at heart, and if the damn idiots want to prove Darwin right, I think they should have that right.

x2, The same idiots who don't wear their Helmets are the same people who have nothing worth protecting in there anyways... otherwise they would know enough to wear one.


If I lived in a state where it was legal not to... you wouldn't catch me without one on. Heck, sometimes if I am just going to move ANY of our bikes in our driveway I will slap one on (though in the driveway I normally don't strap it on...) -This includes the little 250-



As for seatbelts... few people know this, but one of the original ideas behind seatbelts was not so much the safety of the person riding in the car (though that is what it has been pushed off 100% as), but rather they were made to allow someone to keep control of their vehicle in 'high-g force' conditions (if you will)... extreme conditions may be more like it.

This is why if you have ever tried to buckle your seat-belt really fast and the 'mechanism' stop the seatbelt from releasing it fully: This helps you keep yourself planted in your seat as you are decelerating or moving around at an extremely rapid pace, in hopes you can avoid the accident. It is extremely hard to drive a vehicle when your chest is smashed up against the steering wheel, or when your left side of your face is mashed against the drivers glass. Its also hard to do this with your passngers sitting in your lap after flying into your seat.


Just thought I would let people know that it isn't all about your safety (or it wasn't at one point), but rather your ability to maintain control (and hopefully avoid an accident, rather then save your life in one) was one of the main ideas when developing the design... again though as of recently this has all but fallen completely by the wayside... so very few know it.

[9500ier]

^ I know some people that pull their seatbelt all the way out when they race so that it locks into place and they cannot move at all.

Also, even if you do not believe seatbelts saves lives "during an accident" (which I think is BS)... there is still reason to wear it. It still keeps you in the damn seat in an accident. What if your car catches on fire or you land in water.... but wait, you were not wearing your seat belt and you got knocked the **** out and now you are going to die.