The Case against Hemet Laws
Even though there are mandatory laws in most countries of the world that require those who ride motorcycles, pedal bikes and ATV's to wear helmets, those who engage in these activities are opposed to the laws. They readily admit that the use of helmets is a safe practice, so why do they object so strenuously to the laws?
The statistics regarding bike accidents show that such occurrences are accidental and often unavoidable with the majority of injuries being head injuries. Avid bike riders, however, state that in their experience they have had fewer accidents than the statistics indicate and that none of their injuries have resulted in visits to the doctor or the emergency room.
One of the arguments against the mandatory helmet laws is that the majority of bicycle accidents is a result of not knowing or not obeying the traffic laws. Riding at night, without the use of lights on the bike is another reason that these people quote. They say that riding a bicycle is no more dangerous than walking along the road, riding in a vehicle or taking a flight on an airplane. Since people are not required to wear helmets in these forms of transportation, why should they be forced to do so when riding a bike?
Opponents of the helmet laws do admit that cyclists who engage in dangerous activities, such as speed racing or downhill bicycling, should definitely wear helmets. Cyclists who are not properly trained in how to ride a bike or so not have good balancing skills are also highly advised to wear a helmet. They do argue that because there is a higher than normal risk in these situations, there is no reason to force every cyclist to follow the same example of wearing a helmet.
Based on the accident statistics and the helmet laws that have been enacted, these opponents claim that there has not been any substantial body of evidence made available to prove that wearing a helmet does prevent injury. It certainly does not prevent accidents. In Australia, for example, proponents of the helmet laws did point out a distinct drop in the number of cycling accidents and injuries after the laws had been put in place. Opponents say that one has to look at the total accident statistics to see that there was also a decided drop in the number of pedestrian and traffic accidents in the same period of time.
Studies of those who wear helmets and those who sustain injuries are based on the numbers of cyclists who seek medical treatment and those accidents that have been reported. This is a smaller number than the total number of cyclists in any country and should not be used as the basis on which a country enacts and enforces helmet laws.
Many motorcyclists also feel that their vision and ability to hear is severely hindered by wearing a helmet. Therefore they choose not to obey the laws and instead ride without wearing a helmet.
