What About Motorcycle Helmets? Is This a Law We Really Need?

by J. Thomas McGrath

Attorney and Founder, Virginia Coalition of Motorcyclists
This article originally appeared in the Richmond Times-Dispatch on February 2, 2001.

We’re out on the streets on our various motorcycles. Some people think we’re crazy; others want to join us because it looks like fun (and it is).

And most people think we should wear a helmet.

While it is an almost universal belief that a motorcyclist is safer wearing a helmet, accident statistics tell a different story. The fact is mandatory helmet laws are not the guardian angels for the motorcyclist.

Around the country, mandatory helmet use is being argued in several legislative bodies including Virginia’s General Assembly. This is a positive trend for several reasons not known to most people. In brief, helmet laws are ineffectual and undesirable because: (1) the helmet manufacturing industry has no watchdog for safety; (2) helmets are not effective in preventing injury; (3) insurance rates for motorists have not been contained, and (4) the laws are used to harass motorcyclists.

Most folks believe that helmets must meet safety standards. However, manufacturers self certify the helmets and only occasionally does the U.S. Department of Transportation test for safety performance. If DOT find that a helmet does not meet its standard, the department’s only action is a letter to the manufacturer reporting that the helmet failed. No action is taken to stop the manufacture and sale of the helmet. That’s all the enforcement there is! Between 1974 and 1990, 52% of the helmets tested by DOT failed.

A more sobering fact is that most helmets are not effective above 15 mph. In fact, until recently, all helmets sold had to carry a warning label to that effect.

But if mandatory helmets are the law, it must be a good law for a good reason. Right? Not necessarily.

The Federal government has waffled on the issue of mandatory helmet use almost from the beginning. In Virginia, in 1970, the legislature adopted the helmet law because it was required to receive Federal highway funds. By 1975, all but three states had enacted a helmet law. However, in 1976, Congress amended the Highway Safety Act, revoking helmet law compliance. The law was dead until 1991 when Congress revived it. In 1995, the law was repealed when President Clinton signed the National Highway System Designation Act (NHS). Today, 33 states allow the rider to choose whether to wear a helmet or not.

Why has this happened? The answer lies in the research conducted since the first compulsory helmet law was enacted.

The most important fact in evaluating the effectiveness of any safety equipment is the ratio of the fatalities to accidents. If a helmet truly provided a significant safety advantage, then the number of fatalities per 100 accidents would be significantly lower in states with compulsory helmet laws. In comparing fatality rates from 1992 (the most recent statistics), the fatality rate for states with mandatory helmet laws was 2.97, while the rate for the states without a mandatory law was 2.79 – a difference so marginal as to be insignificant.

If you’re not a motorcyclists, your real interest in this issue is the insurance rate myths around helmet laws. Using scare tactics, the insurance industry has told the public that without mandatory helmet laws everyone’s rates would increase significantly, and with mandatory laws rates would go down. In fact, neither has happened, but the insurance industry keeps bringing this boogey man back out. It’s worth noting that several years after Maryland passed its helmet law, State Farm Insurance advised a rider that the number of motorcyclists was so small compared to those involving automobile drivers that they weren’t considered in setting rates. Helmets weren’t a factor!

Virginia motorcyclists in general are responsible people who care about safety. The Virginia Motorcycle Rider Training Program, fully funded by motorcyclists and run by the Department of Motor Vehicles, benefits all Virginians by teaching citizens how to ride safely. Motorcyclists pay 100% of the costs of the program because we know education is critical to safer riding. Since the program’s inception in 1985, accidents and fatalities involving motorcyclists have steadily declined. No other group of vehicle drivers or riders has a decreasing accident and fatality record.

Another product of the helmet law is biker profiling. In a year, I usually represent 30 to 40 riders who have received citations for an “unapproved helmet.” Almost all involve one brand of motorcycle, Harley Davidson, and the motorcyclist has some brand or association indicia visible on his or her person or garments. It is a deplorable abuse of our legal system when an officer of the law may use the helmet law to stop motorcyclists because of their dress in hopes they may have contraband, or just to harass them because they look like a Hollywood stereotype.

Finally, if helmets really offered the protection they were originally thought to, undoubtedly all drivers and passengers in vehicles would be wearing them. But there is no public support for a mandatory helmet law for vehicles despite the fact that traffic crash analyses show that up to 40% of all car crashes result in head injuries.

As a motorist, I do not want my government to mandate wearing helmets in my vehicle. Likewise, as a motorcyclist, I should have the right to decide whether to wear a helmet. In the final analysis, the decision to wear a helmet should be my free choice.

Back to Articles