Motorcycle Helmet laws Essay

Over the past 30 categorys, mevery decl ares grow ordered obligatory helmet legalitys for bi regular recurrence drivers. There work been umpteen provinces that have rescinded these laws for reasons that may non be cognize by those most raise the motorbike rider him/herself. Currently, less than half of all(prenominal) U. S. fixs require helmets for bi bout operators. integrity who is interested in this topic may oddment how those that are in positions to give the thumbs up or thumbs down regarding these laws nettle their closing unrivaled mood or the other(a). Do they have items, data and certify to bear out their verdicts?Or, are they charmd by stories of horrific motorbike fatalities recited to them by friends, family, neighbors, coworkers, church members, or acquaintances at the grocery store, garden center and/or the local pub? Could there be a possibility that they ability twisting a mandatory helmet law imputable to a knee-jerk reaction to a peculiarly heinous accident that recently occurred and been c all over by television, radio, newspaper and the internet? What are the chances that unmatchable of those decision nominaters was an avid rider who escaped serious reproach callable to donning a helmet piece of music go?Those questions might also lead to others, for example, about how lots bewitch lobbyists have when it comes down to the utmost moments prior(prenominal) to the portraying or forbid of a particular bill. Does a lobbyist that is pro-mandatory helmets have more clout, or would, for example, a convention of bicycle drivers have any influence? The regular motorcycle rider and/or the general public most in all opportunity has no idea what factors are explored prior to the determination of those who have license to make the decision as to how wholeness should discerp if they are heading out on a motorcycle.Despite empirical evidence that supports the lend hotshotself of helmets, avid motorc yclists argue that helmet laws shock the Ninth Amendment, which states, no law shall be enacted that regulates the individuals bicycle Helmet Laws 3 exemption to choose his individualal actions and path of dress so long as it does not in any way affect others. Trends over the past several(prenominal)(prenominal) years have been to review and disperse accident and other reports written by police and highway patrol officers, hospital workers, witnesses to the scene and road construction workers who may have been at the site at the time of the accident.Figures and findings payoffing from the discipline Highway sentry duty Act have been accessed. Compilations from states motor vehicle divisions and departments of transportation have also been apply extensively to determine if enactment of mandatory helmet laws simplifications injuries and finiss from motorcycle crashes. These reports and statistics, however, have not include details regarding factors such(prenominal) as ripen and/or sex of the driver, style and sizing of motorcycle, geographical demographics, or the upshot of months one rides or the time of day that the accident occurred.Published research studies regarding statistics from several states were examine for this assignment. Some studies include all states of America, piece of music many others focus on a particular state or collection of states. Other types of research reviewed included name interviews with motorcyclists, articles by motorcycle conventions pertaining to published findings and observations of riders, documenting whether or not they were habiliment helmets. This school-age child has a particular interest in this mental object as she rides a motorcycle.In the state where she resides (Minnesota) there is no mandatory helmet single-valued function law. Unfortunately, she is not aware of the particular reasons that her state has made the decision not to enact this law. Nevertheless, if she were extremely astute, she would have reviewed any statistics regarding her kinsfolk state. The author is interested in discovering the reason that the powers that be chose to allow her to have the freedom motorbike Helmet Laws 4 to decide whether or not she will don a helmet prior to embarking on a journey.Her hypotheses as to the reasons are probably so removed off base that she would be indecisive to admit them to another. Ultimately, her quest is to evaluate the constitutions and strain to discover if mandatory helmet laws do, indeed, cliff injuries and expirys as a result of a motorcycle crash. There are a variety of reasons a motorcycle driver makes the decision as to whether to wear a helmet patch riding vs. not wearing one. Some of the factors that influence this decision start to be age, demographics (urban vs.rural living), and style and surface of motorcycle. Other factors involved are where the person is riding (highway, city, side streets, rural areas, and so forth ) Weather con ditions and time of day (former(a) morning, mission hour, nighttime) also should be taken into consideration. Maneuvering with hundreds of vehicles on the road and the rising or brandting sun in ones eyes have a bearing on how well a driver can see. The incidence of accidents that result in wound and fatality has fluctuated with the enactment and rescinding of mandatory helmet give.The United States federal giving medication has had a vacillating approach to the practice session of motorcycle helmets since 1967, when the National Highway refuge Act (NHSA) was first passed, which required states to utilize helmet laws or be ineligible for authorized funding programs at the state level. By 1976, Congress responded to pressures from individual states and motorcyclist interest assemblys by revoking the federal authority to assess penalties for non-compliance. deep down 4 years by and by the NHSA was revised, 28 states repealed their mandatory helmet laws.Congress later enac ted the Intermodal bulge Transportation Efficiency Act in 1991, which created incentives for states to enact helmet use yet by the fall of 1995, Congress lifted sanctions against states deficient helmet law enforcement. This final repeal set the stage for state legislatures to repeal helmet laws integrally. alone Motorcycle Helmet Laws 5 20 states shortly require the use of a restrictive helmet for all motorcycle riders, trine states do not require a helmet for any riders, and 27 states require helmet use but under specific conditions.Several studies signal that injuries and deaths from motorcycle crashes significantly decline after the passing of mandatory helmet laws in a variety of states. Consequently, the impression one perceives is that helmet use is the panacea to obliterating any injuries and deaths from serious motorcycle mishaps. The statistics that are embodied in these studies are Death to disaster Ratios, which compare the number of deaths to the number of rela ted accidents.Limitations of these studies are that many fail to take into scotch the fact that motorcycle registrations declined upon resolution of the mandatory helmet use. One such study was en title of respectd Motorcyclist Deaths strengthen as Helmet Laws Loosen. When one glances at the title of this report, it appears alarming and gives the impression that once a compulsory act is rescinded, anyone that hops on a motorcycle in a state that does not have the helmet law will surely perish. The finer home run indicates that southern states are among those with the highest motorcycle death rates.The crushedest print, even smaller than the print in the body of the findings (approximately a size 6 font), disclosed that states with a year-round riding season are those that report high death rates during the year. It takes the findings from a small number of states and proceeds to construe these crossways the entire country. Consequently, how can this study be proof that motorc ycle helmet use decreases detriment and death from riding? In the state of Minnesota, for example, in an exemplary year weather-wise, cycle riders have the opportunity to ride for half a dozen months out of twelve.In a year where there is an unseasonably long winter, a short spring season and an early beginning for autumn, Minnesotans may have an entire riding season of only ternion months. Limitations to the majority of studies looked at the findings and drew conclusions Motorcycle Helmet Laws 6 based on the death to accident ratios alone. Very few seek to delineate the number of months one would be riding, seasonal road conditions or other factors. The use of a causative manikin distinguished the research methodology of one particular study from other studies.This methodology appealed to this writer, as many factors can influence not only the occurrence of a motorcycle crash, but the resulting predominance or deficiency of injury and/or death. The causal model considered c rash speed, helmet use, alcohol use and other pertinent variables in an attempt to isolate the separate contribution of all(prenominal) determinant of the dreadedness of injury or probability of death. The advantage of this approach was in the ability to estimate the separate make of several simultaneous and interrelated causes of motorcycle fatalities and injury severities.Previous studies simply divide accident victims into a equipped group and non- equipped group. As a result, all differences in fatality rates, injury rates and injury severities mingled with groups were attributed to helmet use. These comparisons failed to consider other differences amidst helmet users and non-users which influence the probability of death and the severity of injuries. The writers hypothesis was that helmeted riders were more risk-averse and and then (1) had lower pre-crash and thus crash speeds and (2) were less likely to admit alcohol consumption and driving (Goldstein, 1986).This de tective surmised that the behaviors of riders might make the difference between the probability of fatality and severity of an injury vs. the wearing of a helmet being the deciding factor. A study conducted by the University health check place at Brackenridge in Austin, Texas aimed to get a line risk factors leading to riding and crashing a motorcycle without a helmet and to compare outcomes of helmeted vs. unhelmeted motorcyclists involved in a motorcycle crash. This retrospective study took place over a 13-year period and employmented the epitome of the trauma registry at the medical checkup center.Data was collected regarding pre-injury characteristics such as the use of protective helmet, age, Motorcycle Helmet Laws 7 gender, ethnicity, redress status, blood alcohol case and whether the patient was the driver or the passenger. once more, the research conducted (above) delves into the data related to cycle crashes after the fact. And, as the majority of studies that reli ed on numbers and formulas concluded, unhelmeted riding was associated with more severe injuries, longer hospitalizations, increased mortality and higher(prenominal) hospital charges.The conclusions of this particular report pointed to three basic factors which were a departure from typical research findings. These analysts determined that independent predictors of riding without a helmet included alcohol intoxication, lack of health insurance and riding as a passenger (Brown, 2011). Some of these conclusions make sense and might seem to be obvious. One can easily encounter how alcohol consumption would be a risk factor in collisions on motorcycles, as it decreases reaction time and lends itself to disinhibition on many levels.The subject of health insurance led to questions by the author of this paper. How does not having health insurance influence my decision regarding wearing a helmet? Final notations of the writing declare that education and prevention strategies should be targ eted at these high-risk populations. It would be matter to to determine how to locate this particular group to target for education and prevention. What ultimate remainder did these researchers have in conducting this study? This student ponders that question and questions the validity of their closing statements.interpreted together, the results indicate that mandatory helmet use laws do increase the number of motorcyclists who wear helmets while riding, thus showing a decrease in serious injury and/or fatality. The threat of being ticketed along with the probability of receiving a fine appear to be the determining Motorcycle Helmet Laws 8 factors as to whether or not a rider wears a helmet. The great majority of studies conducted were quantifiable in nature and focused in the first place on reviewing summaries of statistics from state reports written by various law enforcement officials.The writer of this schoolbook deemed that there may have been limitations in these particu lar summaries. There were several studies that appeared to employ a more qualitative methodology, however, close to findings appeared to indicate the possibility of the researcher having some type of stake in the results of the evaluation, such as the project being funded by an entity that drafts insurance rates for motor vehicles. The general impression of the qualitative results was that those that chose to delve into this print came to the realization that many factors contribute to the incidence of injury and death caused by motorcycle collisions.It is important to understand that the ultimate decision as to wearing a helmet while riding vs. not wearing one is the burden of the rider and not of the government. distributively rider must take into account those mitigating factors that might influence the success or failure of each ride on his or her motorcycle. Motorcycle Helmet Laws 9 References Auman, Kimberly M Kufera, Joseph A Ballesteros, Michael F Smialek, John E Disching er, Patricia (2002). Autopsy study of motorcyclist fatalities The Effect of the 1992 physician Helmet Use Law.American ledger of customary wellness 92. 8, August 2002 1352-5. Brown, Carlos V. R. , MD, FACS Hijl, Kelli, MSC Bui, Eric, MD Tips, Gaylen, RN, MSN Coopwood, Ben, MD, FACS (2010). adventure Factors for Riding and Crashing a Motorcycle Unhelmeted. Department of Surgery, Trauma Services, University Medical Center at Brackenridge, Austin, Texas. Cotton, Paul (1992). Highway line Threat Is No Easy torment For Motorcycle Law Opponents. The Journal of the American Medical Association 268. 3, July 15, 1992, p. 311. Derrick, Allison J Faucher, lee D.(2009).Motorcycle Helmets and Rider Safety A Legislative Crisis. Journal of humankind Health Policy30. 2 226-42. Eustace, Deogratias, P. E. , M. ASCE Krishna Indupuru, Vamsi, Hovey, Peter (2011). Identification of Risk Facors Associated with Motorcycle-Related Fatalities in Ohio. Journal of Transportation engineering science/Ju ly 2011, 120-125. Goldstein, Jonathan P, PhD (2011). The Effect of Motorcycle Helmet Use on the Probability of Fatality and the Severity of dot and Neck Injuries Highlights of Helmet Effectiveness Study.The Journal of tweak Medicine, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 441-446. Copyright 2011 Elsevier Inc. Motorcycle Helmet Laws 9 Houston, David J. , PhD Richardson, Lilliard E, Jr. , PhD (November 2007). Motorcycle Safety and the remove of Universal Helmet Laws, American Journal of Public Health, 97. 11, 2063-9. Kraus, Jeff F. , MPH, PhD Peek, Corinne, MPH McArthur, David L. , PhD, MPH Williams, Allan, PhD (1995). The Effect of the 1992 calcium Motorcycle Helmet Use Law on Motorcycle Crash Fatalities and Injuries.American Journal of Public Health, January 1995, Vol. 85, No. 1, pp. 96 100. McCartt, Ann T. Blanar, Laura Teoh, Eric R. Strouse, Laura M. (1994). Overview of cycle in the United States A National Telephone Survey, Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 42, pp. 177-184. ONeill, James MD Scott, Charry, RRT Kissoon, Niranjan, MD Wludyka, Peter, PHD Wears, Robert, MD Luten, Robert, MD (2007). Characteristics of Motorcycle-Related Hospitalizations Comparing States with Different Helmet Laws. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 39, Issue 1, 190-196.