HELMET LAWS: MYTH V. FACT
A.B.A.T.E. of West Virginia and The West Virginia Confederation Of Clubs both support these measures.
Here are a couple of the benefits West Virginia could get with a revised helmet law:
Increased Tax revenue- It has been estimated the state of Florida put TWO BILLION Dollars into their economy the first five years after they returned choice to their citizens (over 145 million to the state treasury in taxes) Using the same growth percentage, West Virginia would realize increased tax revenue of Five and a half million dollars in the first year and 36 million in the first five years. This does not take into consideration the boost to the econmy in general.
Increased Tourism- A survey by ABATE of WV found that 85% of riders that travel avoid states that restrict choice. The first year choice was restored to Florida attendance at the two Bike Weeks went up 38%. Applying the same percentage growth to Mountainfest would result in 20,000 additional visitors to Morgantown in the first year. According to the WV Department of Tourism, each of these visitors has an economic impact of $328 for every day they stay in WV. That is Nineteen Million dollars at Mountainfest alone. When multiplied by the many bike events in the state this number goes up exponentially over the years.
Pertaining to his position supporting Pennsylvania 's Helmet Law Modification
On July 6, 2003, Pennsylvania became the 31st state in the nation to allow adults the freedom to choose whether to wear a helmet or not while riding their motorcycle. The legislation that was passed in Pennsylvania is similar to language in HB4325 and SB321 i.e., the bill allows motorcyclists 21 or older and who have had a motorcycle operator's license for at least 2 years, or who have completed an approved motorcycle rider safety course, to decide for themselves whether to use a helmet while riding. The following is a column that was written by Senator John N. Wozniak from Pennsylvania that addresses this issue.
HELMET LAWS: MYTH V. FACT
Since becoming an advocate for a modified helmet law in Pennsylvania, I have received a lot of criticism. Much of that criticism stems from assumptions and not fact. Before deciding to become an advocate, I thought long and hard about it. I did not, and still do not, take this issue lightly. My decision was objective--not emotional?and was based upon facts. If helmet law critics took a similar approach, their conclusions would be very different. For instance, there are those who compare the seatbelt law to the new helmet law. There is no real comparison. It is a secondary offense if you are caught not wearing your seatbelt. You must be found guilty of a traffic violation before you can be fined for not wearing a seatbelt. Wearing a helmet was made mandatory, not a secondary offense.
Also, more people are injured in car accidents everyday than motorcycle accidents. More importantly, after passing a mandatory helmet law, New York ?s Department of Transportation did a study that showed while there was a significant decrease in head injuries there was a corresponding increase in broken necks that caused the user’s death. In fact, a four-pound helmet becomes a 200-pound weight attached to the neck during sudden stops at 50 mph.
It is also important to realize that the strategy for motor vehicle safety is different from motorcycle safety. The traffic safety community concentrates on injury prevention, not accident prevention. It is prudent for motorcyclists to concentrate on accident prevention, rather than injury prevention. The best way for a motorcyclist to accomplish this is through strong rider education, motorcycle awareness and licensing programs.
I also frequently hear that everyone’s health insurance premiums will increase to pay for the consequences of the new law. And there are people who tell me that the vast majority of motorcyclists are uninsured. And that motorcycle fatalities automatically increase in states that rescind their helmet requirements. Each of these assertions is just that, an assumption not based on the facts. Reality tells a very different story, as I will illustrate as I use the facts to debunk the following common myths about helmet laws.
Claim: Injured motorcyclists are uninsured and disproportionately rely upon the public to pay for their injuries.
Fact: Motorcyclists are just as likely to be privately insured as any other road user. A study done by the University of North Carolina ?s Highway Safety Research Center reported that49.5 percent of injured motorcyclists had their medical costs covered by insurance, while 50.4 percent of the other road trauma victims were similarly insured. The study also showed that motorcyclists were responsible for about $2 million a year in public cost for the entire United States as compared to $32 million a year for motor vehicle operators.
Claim: In the five states ( Kentucky , Texas , Florida , Arkansas , Louisiana ) that have weakened their helmet laws, motorcycle fatalities have increased.
Fact: In the states where helmet laws have been modified to allow adult choice, rider ship has increased as much as 75 percent in the past five years. This significant increase in riders may account for the increase in fatalities. It should not be assumed that the increase in fatalities is a result of the modified law. For example, after Florida ?s helmet law was modified, the promoters of Daytona Bike Week reported an increase in attendance while local officials reported a decrease in accidents and fatalities over the prior year.
Claim: Weakening the helmet law will cause an increase in everyone’s insurance rates and taxes.
Fact: There is absolutely no truth to this statement and no actual figures have been reported by any of the 30 states that allow adult motorcyclists the option to use a helmet to substantiate the claim that the modification of the existing Pennsylvania law will cost the Commonwealth millions of dollars. In fact, the costs associated with the treatment of motorcyclists? injuries account for less than 1/10th of one percent of total U.S. health care costs. ( National Center for Health Statistics) In fact, one of the primary arguments put forth in California for enacting a mandatory helmet law was that it would cause insurance rates to go down. This did not happen, however the revenue garnered by the state for motorcycle registers did go down.
Claim: Riders who do not wear helmets are at a much greater risk of being injured, maimed or killed. Fact: According to ?The American Spectator? an individual is more at risk of injury or death in an American hospital than he is if he rides a motorcycle without a helmet. One out of every 100 patients admitted to a hospital is either hurt or dies from medical mistakes. In addition, in 2002, 3,276 motorcyclists lost their lives due to accidents. In that same year: smoking caused an estimated 434,000 deaths; alcohol, 105,000 deaths; AIDS, 31,000 deaths; Fires, 4,000 deaths; and cocaine, crack, heroin and morphine, 6,000 deaths.
Claim: Motorcycle Safety Courses are not effective in decreasing fatalities.
Fact: According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, motorcycle safety courses are the number one reason for the decline in motorcycle fatalities and injuries. Also, Pennsylvania has been recognized as having one of the best motorcycle safety programs in the United States .
Claim: Most motorcyclists are irresponsible.
Fact: The demographics of the modern day motorcyclist may surprise you. They are as follows: 92 percent are male, age-35, 2/3 are married, most have a high school and some college education, an income range at about $40,000, 95 percent work in professional, management and labor careers, and 91 percent are registered to vote.
People must know the facts regarding motorcycle safety. Don’t adhere to the rhetoric surrounding this issue. Know the facts. The best way for a motorcyclist to avoid injury is to prevent accidents from happening at all. Helmets and helmet laws do not prevent accidents. Motorcyclists do. The fact remains that the best way to avoid an accident is through sound rider education safety and motorcycle awareness programs.
Senator John Wozniak, PA