Tod B.

Orlando Sentinel
Orlando, Florida

Dear Editor:

I read your newspaper article "Keep those Helmets On" and found it to be a
one sided view backed up by one side of the facts which would lead people to
believe motorcycle riders are unsafe and lacked enough common sense to decide
what is in our best interest. The NHTSA also provided facts, which show
helmets are not the protection devices everyone has been led to believe.

For the record.

72% of U.S. motorcyclists already wear a helmet, either by choice or by
existing law, while auto drivers use seatbelts only 47% of the time. Even
when seatbelt laws were only in effect in 36 states covering over 80% of the
population, more than half of all auto related fatalities involved head
injuries. (Usage data complied by B.A.M. and the University of North
Carolina.) Most states currently have seatbelt laws, yet the seatbelt
compliance levels remains dim and auto accident statistics continue to worsen
for the automobile population.
 
Many times mandatory helmet laws are backed by concerns for public safety. If
public safety were really the issue, then let's look more closely at current
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) statistics that
clearly indicate that motorcycles are involved in less than 1% of traffic
accidents. Let's also look at the incomparable and exponentially higher
incidence of head injury in automobile accidents. Reviews of these statistics
show that motorcycle accident statistics have improved while auto accident
statistics have worsened.

Let's have a closer look at what happened in Florida in 1994. According to
NHTSA, approximately 172 motorcyclists were killed. According to the State of
Florida, Office of Health Promotion and Wellness "1994 Mortality Facts",
there were 130 bicyclists killed, 531 pedestrians killed, and approximately
1,962 killed in other traffic accidents. MANY of these deaths resulted from
head injury. According to the same report, there were 650 people killed from
falling down (not in traffic accidents) in Florida in 1994. If heads with
helmets on them are actually safer, and if public safety is really the issue,
why aren't automobile drivers forced to wear helmets? Passenger children? Or
pedestrians? What about those 650 people who died from falls unrelated to
auto accidents? Would not all these heads be safer with helmets? The
non-fatal injury rate in these same populations is absolutely staggering when
compared to motorcyclists.

Do you know that even though there are 25 states that allow adults to choose
whether or not to wear a helmet, that more helmeted riders were killed than
non-helmeted riders? NHTSA 1994 Traffic Safety Facts (page 122), states that
nationwide, there were 1,222 riders with helmets killed and 994 without
helmets killed. The current Florida Department of Transportation Report also
confirms a continuation of this statistic.  If helmets absolutely improved
the safety of a motorcyclist, how could this be? Statistics can be useful,
but could anyone in their right mind think that because of those statistics
that a motorcyclist's level of safety can be improved by not wearing a
helmet? That is ridiculous, and so are mandatory laws in the name of public
safety.  Whoever decided that helmets were to motorcycles what seatbelts are
to cars is simply wrong. Why does the state mandate usage of so- called
protective headgear, particularly if these protective devices have labels
inside flatly tell you that the helmet will not protect you at speeds in
excess of 5 to 13 miles per hour? Would these not be more suitable for
pedestrians or people who fall down?

NHTSA statistics for the past several years show that motorcycles have the
most improved safety record of all categories of transportation and cause
exponentially the least public burden than any other segment of the motoring
public. In 1994, NHTSA reports that (nationwide) motorcycles were only
involved in 0.6% of all vehicle crashes (page 63). If wearing helmets reduces
head injury and the State of Florida or the U.S. Government is really
concerned about public burden, WHY aren't auto drivers required to wear them?

The motorcycling population is the least deserving of such a mandate,
regardless of whether one cites the issue of public safety or public burden.
It is not the State of Florida's role to dole out such a discriminatory
policy against the segment of the motoring public that is involved in the
very least amount of accidents and exponentially the least amount of public
burden. The State of Florida can better protect motorcyclists by requiring
that only safe, properly trained and educated, sober and licensed drivers
operate safe vehicles on Florida roads and highways. Do you realize that
Driver's Education has entirely disappeared from some Florida high schools,
and the State should not allow that to happen! Why does it?

Here are other facts to be consider from governmental agencies:

(United States) In the ten years 1978 to 1988, motorcycle fatalities per
10,000 motorcycles registered declined 15%. Based on the vehicle miles
traveled, the rate declined an astonishing 37% from 1980 through 1986.
Motorcycling, while having a disproportionate fatality rate compared to other
road users, now has a rate declining more rapidly than any other group.
(Motorcycle Safety Foundation (MSF) 1990) This trend continues through today;
check any of the federal National Highway Transportation Safety
Administration (NHTSA) or Florida statistics.

Here in Florida, in 1986, 244 motorcyclists were fatally injured. In 1995,
there were only 190 motorcyclists fatally injured. In 1985, there were 2,874
people killed in traffic accidents, and in 1995 there were 4,385 killed in
total vehicle crashes across the state. Motorcyclist accident and death rates
in Florida have decreased, as have motorcycle accidents and fatalities on the
national level. In comparison automobile accident and fatality rates in
Florida have continued to rise, as on the national level. (*Page 16), (**page
6) 1995 Florida Traffic Crash Facts, Department of Highway Safety & Motor
Vehicles

On the national level, in 1985 there were 4,564 motorcyclists killed, but
only 2,221 in 1995. Compare that to other highway vehicles with 39,261
fatalities in 1985 and 39,577 fatalities in 1995 (despite seat belt laws, air
bags, anti-lock brakes, etc.) Page 105, 1997 National Transportation
Statistics, U.S. Department of Transportation and Bureau of Transportation
Statistics

Of the top 12 states with the best motorcycle safety records (fatalities per
10,000 registrations), only one has a helmet law. On the other hand, half of
the dozen states with the worst safety records are helmet law states. MSF and
Motorcycle industry Council (MIC)

The Motorcycle Safety Foundation reported in 1996, "In 1994, reported
motorcycle accidents in the U.S. declined by 6.16% followed in 1995 by a
decrease of 5.33%.... motorcycle accidents have been declining over the past
ten years." There were 76,321 reported motorcycle accidents in 1994 that
number dropped to 72,252 in 1995.

Combining the already low number of fatalities (which is at its lowest point
in twenty years) with the fact that motorcycling's safety record is improving
faster than any other vehicle group. It is ironic that motorcyclists are
being singled out as a legislative priority. Why are motorcyclists being
targeted when they are the smallest group of traffic users, have the lowest
rate of accident involvement, are the lowest category for fatalities and have
the most improved safety record of all vehicles?

Remember when people used to say that you shouldn't be afraid to fly in an
airplane because you were more likely to die in an automobile accident than a
plane crash?  Applying this logic, more people should be ditching their cars
in favor of the relative safety of a motorcycle.  Your chances of having an
accident in an automobile are 110 times more than on a motorcycle, and you
are 10 times more likely to die of a head injury in an automobile. Better
trade in those boats, too, because nearly twice as many people drowned last
year as died in motorcycle crashes.  And forget about walking because well
over two times as many pedestrians were killed in accidents as motorcyclists.
Besides, if you're on your feet, you are also more than four times as likely
to trip and die in a fall.

As a taxpaying citizen and a viable member of my community, I have grown
extremely weary of the government unjustly imposing mandates on me period,
but this helmet issue is flagrantly discriminatory. While the Courts may not
consider the choice of wearing a helmet a lost of personal freedom just pass
a law that requires automobile operators put on a helmet and the perspective
people have of personal freedom will change quite quickly.  There are times
and places that you couldn't pay me not to wear a helmet, but the
government's role should not be to try and protect me from a mode of
transportation I have chosen. The government's role should be to protect me
from others who would do me harm or injustice and things of that nature.

In closing to insinuate that the only reason motorcyclist are seeking passage
of this law is to feel the wind in our hair at the expenses of our safety or
to become a threat to public safety only goes to prove a lack of
understanding and the stereotyping of motorcyclist which we have been trying
to overcome for several years. Our movement to change the helmet law is not
being done with PAC money or government support is comes from a grass root
movement of riders who want to enjoy the same personal freedoms to choose
what they drive and how they ride. The same freedoms that other motor vehicle
operators currently enjoy.