Re: Forced Safety Gear Issue

[cyclechris]

You all had a good conversation just a bit back about riding with/without gear and how the law might be changed or better enforced. As usual some people want everyone to do what's best from a common sense/safety standpoint. Others want things such that if people want to be stupid, fine just don't charge it to everyone else's account.

How about underage kids? I've seen young kids on the back of Dad, Brother, whoever's motorcycle with no gear at all, or maybe just a helmet. After crashing with gear and knowing what can happen, I think I'd like kids gear to be mandatory under the law.

I think one has a right to be a dumb_ss, but not with their kid's life. Because the kids look up to them, think they're the coolest thing on two legs and just KNOW that they're safe with them. So if one puts them on the bike without helmet, pants, jacket, and at least some decent boots? Then I think the law should be very harsh on them.

I'm not trying to tweak anyone's nose, that's my opinion. What do you think?

[Anonymous]

Tough one....
First not everyone's idea of what is proper riding gear is the same. I wear helmet, gloves, boots, but I wear levi's. Other's wouldn't be caught without leather (my jackets are mesh BTW...). Now I won't argue leather is better, but at this time I have none.

On top of all of this, There is the question of whether or not bringing down motorcycle fatalities will bring down insurance cost...

So....I sit on the fence. I tell everyone I know to wear at least SOME gear... Am I really ready to have it enforced???? California had a no-helmet law once, and once I thought I liked that...

[The CyberPoet]

I'm used to riding in Germany, where there is a legal standard on required protection gear, and it doesn't bother me at all. It makes just as much sense for a passenger, and esp. for an under-age passenger, IMHO...

But the US is all about the "Freedom to choose," right?
Not the "Freedom to choose right".

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[JohnE1000]

It is a very touchy subject. One will hear many opinions from different age groups. Personnaly I don't believe wearing gears should be enforced for adults over 18 years. It is personal pereference and everyone has different risk telorance.

I have a simple solution to lower the insurance for riders who wear gears. In the insurance policy the rider should indicate whether he wear gears or not. Riding gears will be generally defind as for example a DOT helmet, over the ankle boots...etc. If someone indicates in his insurance policy that he wears gears, and get into a wrack and wasn't wearing gears, the insurnace company should not have to pay. Wearing gears should be part of the contract, and the insurance company should not pay if you break the contract.
This way will lead to lower insurance cost for riders who wear gears, and increase it for those who don't. Slowly slowly more riders will volunteerly wear gears to lower the cost.

[Mojoe]

anyone on here who knows me, knows my opinion on the subject....so I won't get into again. but I will say that it should be mandatory for ANYONE on the back of a bike to wear a helmet, regardless of age. even if I am riding in a place that allows me to remove my helmet...and I do so, the passenger keeps theirs. I trust my riding, but shit can happen....and I would not want to be responsible for anyone caving their head in.

[cyclechris]

You all have good points. Yeah I'm all for freedom of choice, even dumb choice, but I guess I draw my line when someone is depending on you, i.e. a kid. Then maybe there should not be freedon to maim a kid. Not that gear would 100% do that but at least the chances of a full recovery would be aa lot better.

that's a very interesting idea regarding fulfilling or breaking a contract with the inurance company, and then having that dictate how they pay out. I can see them finding loopholes to not pay even if you think you are wearing the right gear, but then again they still do that now anyway. I think that really holds some merit.

I suspect that even if adults had forced gear standards as in Germany, we'd get over it and people who loved to ride, would ride. I'm not sure I'm for that or not, but I still feel pretty strongly that there should be some standards regarding kids as passengers, what they have to wear, etc.

MoJoe, I suspect I lean towards your feeling on the subject, the passenger more often is simply trusting the rider and often does not know the risk they are taking. Whereas the rider should, and should take responsibility for the passenger, i.e. make them wear a helmet. Personally I would go a step further with kids and say full gear, TBD by the regulation, but again that's just my own opinion.

I'm just curious because so many people have so many different opinions that really run the gamut. ALso, I see kids with little to no gear on the back of bikes often enough to think "what the heck is that person thinking?!?", so I'm curious about people's thoughts on it.

[Kat-A-Tonic]

Freedom of choice is fine but it must be done within the confines of rational judgment. I don't think that there is a reasonable argument that can be made for not mandating that underage passengers are minimally protected against unforeseen accidents.

[woobie]

Here's my lil guy


He had JR Ballistic pants but he's outgrown them and I need to get him a new pair .

The kids have wanted to go on the bike with me since i got it and the wife has 2 rules.

1) They wear the gear

2) no highways

So far they both have loved going for a ride, even if it involves getting dressed up in gear to do it. Last year the little guy was even getting a ride to and from school which he absolutely loved.

It's a judgement call, they don't get on the bike without a minimum of gloves, jacket and helmet with Jeans.

[Mojoe]

MoJoe, I suspect I lean towards your feeling on the subject, the passenger more often is simply trusting the rider and often does not know the risk they are taking. Whereas the rider should, and should take responsibility for the passenger, i.e. make them wear a helmet. Personally I would go a step further with kids and say full gear, TBD by the regulation, but again that's just my own opinion.

I am the same way in the car. It's buckle up or walk. It all boils down to what you mentioned....the trust the passenger has in me as a the driver, and how much trust I have in myself to protect them. I have taken passengers on rides well in excess of 100mph. Actually, 260kph was the fastest I went with a passenger on the back. That is about 150mph. It was my ex, and she rode many miles with me. Why would I be able to go that fast with a passenger, yet not let them take the helmet off at a 25mph ride? Cuz when I did that speed, I felt that I had about as much control of the situation as possible, which made me much more trusting in myself. It was a very long stretch of open hwy with zero traffic and unlimited visibility. There was nothing to pose as a threat except my own, and my bikes limitations. However, more often than not, riders remove their helmets on urban streets or secondary roads....just out joyriding. And 99.9% of the time when you are joyriding....so are other people. And regardless of my 25+ years of experience...and regardless of the insane amount of miles I have logged.....I do not have the ability to be confident enough in my ability to avoid idiots I have to share the road with. And that is what makes it impossible for me to say "ok" if my passenger wishes to remove his/her helmet or unlatch that seatbelt.

He had JR Ballistic pants but he's outgrown them and I need to get him a new pair .

think those pants would fit an 11 yr old girl? care to sell them?

[Yellow2002Kat]

Lookin' good Woobie, but the boy needs some cool boots

Yeah, I don't really like seeing kids w/o gear. Mainly because it's not them making the choice because they don't know any better and the rider should. I would never put my kids in the car w/o carseats, so I would never ride them w/o gear. Unfortunately, they're both still too young to go for a ride, but I let my son sit on the bike. Can't wait to ride with 'em though, but I know my wife can

At least down here if you're under 21 you have to wear a helmet, so hopefully most kids are somewhat protected. However, it's not unusual for me to see young looking kids with shorts, t-shirt and no helmets on the backs of motorcycles. That gives me the impression that the law isn't strictly enforced.

Funny thing is I almost never see a kid on a bicycle w/o a helmet. Go figure

[WildKat]

I would be a hypocrite if I wore my gear and then allowed my son or daughter to ride on the back without the same protection that I wear and support.

Law or no law... my kids and wife dont ride without a helmet, jacket and gloves minimum.

[Zman7928]

kind of like you all I started riding my own bike about the age of 8,my dad wouldn,t let me near it with out helmet boots and gloves. I feel the same about my own son now

[Black_peter]

but I will say that it should be mandatory for ANYONE on the back of a bike to wear a helmet, regardless of age..

+1

I'd give up my helmet to a passenger..
My boy wears leather jacket, gloves, boots or high tops
and a better helmet than me..
I think any one under 18 should be forced to wear gear..
Like Jr licenses, no after dark driving/riding etc.