advantage and disadvantage of helmets (conclusion)
Answers
Explanation:
Advantages and Disadvantages of Motorcyclist Helmet Laws
Motorcyclists are certainly at a greater risk of suffering serious injury or death in an accident. According to some estimates, a motorcycle rider is up to 30 times more likely to be significantly hurt or killed in a collision than a motorist in a passenger vehicle. This risk is generally attributed to the fact that motorcycles cannot offer the protection of a passenger vehicle, the number of motorcyclists who lack a motorcycle endorsement to ride, and riders who do not wear a helmet.
19 states currently have laws requiring all motorcyclists to wear a helmet while 28 states have laws requiring some motorcycle riders to wear a helmet. While motorcycle helmet laws may seem like common sense, the truth is there is a great deal of debate over whether the laws should exist at all and if they truly protect motorcyclists.
Pros of Motorcycle Helmet Laws
Proponents of universal helmet laws cite many reasons for mandatory helmet use for motorcyclists. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, motorcycle helmet laws save lives by reducing head injuries. Death rates from head injuries are twice as high among motorcycle riders in states without helmet laws. Helmets are 37% effective at preventing rider deaths and 67% effective in preventing brain injuries. Studies have found that helmet use is nearly 100% in states with universal helmet laws , while age-specific helmet laws have been found very difficult to enforce.
Research also finds that riders without helmets have higher health care costs due to their injuries. Requiring helmets can be equated to requiring drivers to carry liability insurance; helmets promote fiscal responsibility and reduce the financial burden of treating motorcycle accident victims. In one case, Maryland estimated that repealing its universal helmet law would increase Medicaid expenditures in 2005 by about $1.2 million just during the first year.
Helmet laws are overwhelmingly supported by the public and alternatives to helmets are ineffective and expensive, according to the Traffic Injury Research Foundation and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Downsides of Helmet Laws
Despite the advantages of universal motorcycle helmet laws, there is fierce debate from opponents. Critics of helmet laws often argue that regulating helmet use is paternalistic and the decision should be left to states, not the federal government. If the federal government enacts a mandatory helmet law, opponents argue the regulation would impair states’ rights.
Many critics also argue that wearing a helmet is insufficient to guard against injury and riders should instead educate themselves on avoiding danger and safe riding practices.
In response to the claim that motorcyclists place a financial burden on taxpayers in terms of the cost of injuries to riders, critics of helmet laws argue that the amount of money paid on behalf of motorcycle accident victims is not significant in context of large-scale health expenditures. A study by Harborview Medical Center found the percentage of motorcyclists relying on public funding for medical treatment was 63.4%, slightly lower than the general population of 67%. A study by the University of North Carolina’s Highway Safety Research Center also found that more than 49% of motorcyclists had insurance to pay for medical treatment, a percentage that is almost the same as other traffic accident victims.