ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > The perfect line and other riding myths
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-29-2013, 08:11 AM   #196
Lion BR
I'd rather be riding
 
Lion BR's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon
Oddometer: 3,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAKEZ View Post
No he can't. At least not a valid one. Due to higher death rates of lidless riders and the fact that helmeted riders can sustain serious injury (even traumatic brain injuries) the IS NO INCREASE TO THE COST TO THE PUBLIC.

.
How did you calculate the "no increase to the cost to the public"?

From National Safety Council:

The calculable costs of motor-vehicle crashes are wage and productivity losses, medical expenses, administrative expenses, motor vehicle damage, and employers’ uninsured costs. The costs of all these items for each death (not each fatal crash), injury (not each injury crash), and property damage crash were:



Average Economic Cost per Death, Injury, or Crash, 2010
  • Death $1,410,000
  • Nonfatal Disabling Injury $70,200
  • Property Damage Crash (including nondisabling injuries) $8,900


Based on what you stated, "Due to higher death rates of lidless riders" and applying the numbers above, one would conclude that it is more expensive for everyone when riders are riding without a helmet.
__________________
Whenever we are riding, we are an ambassador to our sport

I'd rather be riding!


Lion BR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 08:25 AM   #197
Lion BR
I'd rather be riding
 
Lion BR's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon
Oddometer: 3,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAKEZ View Post
Did youn have to quote him?
Good point Dakez. I should had not done it. On the other hand, now everyone can see his statement twice, for its great value and contribution to the conversation.
__________________
Whenever we are riding, we are an ambassador to our sport

I'd rather be riding!


Lion BR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 09:04 AM   #198
IHWillys
Gnarly Adventurer
 
IHWillys's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: FC CO
Oddometer: 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion BR View Post
How did you calculate the "no increase to the cost to the public"?

From National Safety Council:

The calculable costs of motor-vehicle crashes are wage and productivity losses, medical expenses, administrative expenses, motor vehicle damage, and employers’ uninsured costs. The costs of all these items for each death (not each fatal crash), injury (not each injury crash), and property damage crash were:



Average Economic Cost per Death, Injury, or Crash, 2010
  • Death $1,410,000
  • Nonfatal Disabling Injury $70,200
  • Property Damage Crash (including nondisabling injuries) $8,900


Based on what you stated, "Due to higher death rates of lidless riders" and applying the numbers above, one would conclude that it is more expensive for everyone when riders are riding without a helmet.

"...one would conclude that it is more expensive for everyone when riders are riding without a helmet."

If one concluded this, one could very well be incorrect.

There are likely more incidents with only property damage than those with property damage and injury. There are likely more incidents with property damage and injury than those with property damage, injury and/or death. Thus the average figures by themselves are useless in determining an overall cost, ie "more expensive for everyone".

To illustrate, I'll use some simple numbers that retain the average figures reported above.

There were 1000 incidents involving only property damage. $8,900,000 was the total cost.

There were 100 incidents involving disabling injury. $7,020,000 was the total cost.

There were 2 fatal incidents. $2,820,000 was the total cost.


Ken
IHWillys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 09:18 AM   #199
Lion BR
I'd rather be riding
 
Lion BR's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon
Oddometer: 3,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHWillys View Post
"...one would conclude that it is more expensive for everyone when riders are riding without a helmet."

If one concluded this, one could very well be incorrect.

There are likely more incidents with only property damage than those with property damage and injury. There are likely more incidents with property damage and injury than those with property damage, injury and/or death. Thus the average figures by themselves are useless in determining an overall cost, ie "more expensive for everyone".

To illustrate, I'll use some simple numbers that retain the average figures reported above.

There were 1000 incidents involving only property damage. $8,900,000 was the total cost.

There were 100 incidents involving disabling injury. $7,020,000 was the total cost.

There were 2 fatal incidents. $2,820,000 was the total cost.


Ken

Good point, however, what we are discussing here is the comparison helmet and no-helmet. If the two deaths you cite above are attributable to a no-helmet scenario, it is a 2,820,000 increase in cost.
__________________
Whenever we are riding, we are an ambassador to our sport

I'd rather be riding!


Lion BR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 09:30 AM   #200
IHWillys
Gnarly Adventurer
 
IHWillys's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: FC CO
Oddometer: 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion BR View Post
Good point, however, what we are discussing here is the comparison helmet and no-helmet. If the two deaths you cite above are attributable to a no-helmet scenario, it is a 2,820,000 increase in cost.
Correct. I should know better than to wade into such muddy waters...

Returning to lurk mode. Carry on.

Ken
IHWillys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 09:51 AM   #201
slartidbartfast
Love those blue pipes
 
slartidbartfast's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Southern Louisiana or Southern England or ...
Oddometer: 4,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAKEZ View Post
Bobby is an elitist prick that feels it is his duty to tell others what they should and should not be doing and if need be... FORCE his narrow minded and free-will squashing view upon you by rule of law. a.k.a. A libtard
...
Surely if he was elitist he would want to wear a helmet himself but prevent anyone else from doing so (or vice-versa)
__________________
MSF Ridercoach IBA: 35353 95 R1100GSA, 93 GTS1000, 85 R80RT, 93 DR350/435, 99 RX125, 78 DT100
January 2010 New Zealand South Island ride
Summer 2009 UK to Alps ride
Summer 2008 UK End-to-End ride
slartidbartfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 10:30 AM   #202
Lion BR
I'd rather be riding
 
Lion BR's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon
Oddometer: 3,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHWillys View Post
Correct. I should know better than to wade into such muddy waters...

Returning to lurk mode. Carry on.

Ken
Hi Ken,
This is a complex subject, with no clear answer. We just think we know the answers...
Lion
__________________
Whenever we are riding, we are an ambassador to our sport

I'd rather be riding!


Lion BR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 11:19 AM   #203
farmerstu
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Location: Minnesota west central
Oddometer: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion BR View Post
How did you calculate the "no increase to the cost to the public"?

From National Safety Council:

The calculable costs of motor-vehicle crashes are wage and productivity losses, medical expenses, administrative expenses, motor vehicle damage, and employers’ uninsured costs. The costs of all these items for each death (not each fatal crash), injury (not each injury crash), and property damage crash were:



Average Economic Cost per Death, Injury, or Crash, 2010
  • Death $1,410,000
  • Nonfatal Disabling Injury $70,200
  • Property Damage Crash (including nondisabling injuries) $8,900


Based on what you stated, "Due to higher death rates of lidless riders" and applying the numbers above, one would conclude that it is more expensive for everyone when riders are riding without a helmet.
exept the cost attributed to the death are for the dead persons wages that won't be made because he's dead, or perhaps their are payout on liability claim for causing the death of another.
we do not know because the stats provided don't tell us .
in short this meaningless stat has no bearing whatsoever on the subject at hand.
you can't be so naive that you believe a helmetless riders death somehow cost the insurance co. or the public 1,410,000.
farmerstu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 11:43 AM   #204
Lion BR
I'd rather be riding
 
Lion BR's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon
Oddometer: 3,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by farmerstu View Post
exept the cost attributed to the death are for the dead persons wages that won't be made because he's dead, or perhaps their are payout on liability claim for causing the death of another.
we do not know because the stats provided don't tell us .
in short this meaningless stat has no bearing whatsoever on the subject at hand.
you can't be so naive that you believe a helmetless riders death somehow cost the insurance co. or the public 1,410,000.
Yes, that is an average assessment, it could be wrong for an individual case, it certainly depends on your economic activity, your income, the point in your career, your age or your dependents.

Check your insurance policy and see how much you agreed for death benefits (benefits payable if you are involved in a fatal accident). Or your life insurance policy, check the accidental death clause, if you have one. That may be a better assessment on the value of your own life. And some insurance companies will use that as an argument when assessing someone's death benefits.

I was making the point that death is not less expensive than long term injuries necessarily.
__________________
Whenever we are riding, we are an ambassador to our sport

I'd rather be riding!


Lion BR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 12:11 PM   #205
Offcamber
Beastly Adventurer
 
Offcamber's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: New Hampshire
Oddometer: 1,548
To me its irrelevant if it costs the insurance company more...if the insurance company wants to charge an individual more or less due to the fact they were a helmet or not is fine with me. You tell them you wear one and get into an accident without one on expect them not to pay....Very simple...Before 49 states instituted (blackmailed into passing) the seat belt law insurance companies did just that...they gave you a discount for wearing it (at least mine did).

So the money issue is whether it costs the States more money and that has been shown to be insignificant.

We can argue back and forth until hell freezes over but lets be honest nobodies mind is going to be changed. There will be no moment of clarity on either side....

Folks who live outside the US should really just stay the hell out of it...your decisions have been made for you and frankly it obvious they don't understand what it is to be a US citizen and choices we still have available to us. I'm not bashing other countries nor do I mean any offense when I say, unless you were raised here you just don't seem to get it.
__________________
"Beer cans explode with a nice loud pop when they are hit by a Heidenau K60 at 40 miles an hour. Now my bike smells like last call..." Me
Offcamber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 01:12 PM   #206
Dream Rider
Servant
 
Dream Rider's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Anywhere in the Northwest
Oddometer: 192
hypothetical

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiseblood View Post
You need MUCH more practice! A more artful bit of sarcasm might have been:
"Thank you! I'm so glad someone started a thread about helmet laws. It's about time."
At very least:
"Oh, goody! A thread about helmet laws!"
Keep at it. You'll get the swing of it, eventually.




Oh, goody! Someone has alerted us to the dangers of the "slippery slope!" I'm so glad you brought that up. It's about time.

It's SOO realistic an argument against helmet laws. I mean... helmet laws actually save lives. And, even though nobody in the US has ever gotten anywhere, ever with an ACTUAL law to ban motorcycles, we shouldn't take a chance because in hypothetical-world it COULD happen.

hypothetical my ass. Mr. Obama and North east buddies are working hard to eliminate the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 22nd amendments. Washington state already has two bills that will affect the 2nd & 4th.
Dream Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 03:33 PM   #207
fallingoff
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Location: syd oz
Oddometer: 3,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion BR View Post
I guess I'm not too smart. I have no clue what you are talking about.
never questioned ur brains

just ur ignorance
fallingoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 03:36 PM   #208
fallingoff
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Location: syd oz
Oddometer: 3,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAKEZ View Post
Did you have to quote him?
yep
daky man

u still

don't like it when I agree or disagree

open your horizens

take a look at how things are done in politics

in the us and out
fallingoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 03:46 PM   #209
bones_708
Studly Adventurer
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Houston, Tx
Oddometer: 573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dream Rider View Post
hypothetical my ass. Mr. Obama and North east buddies are working hard to eliminate the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 22nd amendments. Washington state already has two bills that will affect the 2nd & 4th.
They are also taking a major dump on the 10th
bones_708 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 06:31 PM   #210
fallingoff
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Location: syd oz
Oddometer: 3,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Offcamber View Post
To me its irrelevant if it costs the insurance company more...if the insurance company wants to charge an individual more or less due to the fact they were a helmet or not is fine with me. You tell them you wear one and get into an accident without one on expect them not to pay....Very simple...Before 49 states instituted (blackmailed into passing) the seat belt law insurance companies did just that...they gave you a discount for wearing it (at least mine did).

So the money issue is whether it costs the States more money and that has been shown to be insignificant.

We can argue back and forth until hell freezes over but lets be honest nobodies mind is going to be changed. There will be no moment of clarity on either side....

Folks who live outside the US should really just stay the hell out of it...your decisions have been made for you and frankly it obvious they don't understand what it is to be a US citizen and choices we still have available to us. I'm not bashing other countries nor do I mean any offense when I say, unless you were raised here you just don't seem to get it.
tongue in cheek

why then does the us stick its nose in all the other countries of the world

hypocrite/ lol

free to say what you like

just not about the us

most of things I have to say

I normally run past a us citizen first

cheers
fallingoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 11:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014