Not in favor of motor cycle helmet law

The seat belt law is a good one and I buckle up each time I get in an automobile. What changed my mind? It was explained to me that if I were involved in an accident that the seat belt would hold me in the drivers seat so that I would have a chance to regain control of the vehicle. This means that wearing a seat belt would protect the lives and property of someone else. Our laws are in place to protect the right, the lives and the property of someone else. This makes sense therefore I agree. The motorcycle Helmet law has no similar advantage.



On the contrary it works just the opposite. I have ridden motorcycles for a better part of 30 years. When riding with a helmet my vision is impaired (peripheral vision), also my hearing is not as keen as without a helmet (even ear plugs allow better hearing than a helmet). With out these two essential senses working at their optimum efficiency there is a possibility I might not see the child darting into the street to retrieve a ball, or I may not hear the 18 wheeler that thinks it is cute to creep up behind someone on a motorcycle and blow his horn.



There is the argument that more riders are injured when not wearing a helmet than those who are. This is slighted because when an accident is reported and the rider is not wearing a helmet it is front page news. When the rider is wearing a helmet no one wishes to mention that fact. If facts are going to be stated then lets state all the facts.



We have the issue that when someone is injured and left disabled when riding with out a helmet and the state is left holding the support. I would like all the facts brought to light on this issue. It is a FACT that the helmet is extra weight on the head and many times neck injuries occur that wouldn’t have occurred if the rider had not been wearing a helmet. How many riders are disabled that WERE wearing a helmet? I don’t have this data but I can promise you that if you took the time to gather this data the argument that riders with out helmets do not constitute for more than riders with helmets.



The bottom line is this. Should an adult over the age of 21 have the right to decide whether they should wear a helmet or not? I believe it is the riders right to make that decision. Wearing a helmet does not in any way protect the rights, the property, or the life of anyone except the individual making this decision.



I ask you respectfully to reevaluate your states laws in regards to helmets and motorcycles. The revenue generated by riders from all over the country that would like to visit your state is waiting your decision.



Thank you very must for your time. Bob Ellsworth, KS.



Editors Note: I attend a weekly prayer meeting with a man whose son was involved in a motor cycle accident just last weekend.I personally held the helmet involved and would feel very safe in saying if the damage that had been done to that helmet had been done to his head he would not still be alive.Praise God he did have a helmet on and he is alive and well.

This entry was posted in Letters to the Editor. Bookmark the permalink.