Video Transcription:

Alright, so I’m going to talk about a heated debate that I had with one of our members about the ever-controversial helmet issue, and his point that he reached out to me on was he thought that Georgia ought to go to the Texas model, maybe modified a little bit.

So, first let me tell you what the Texas model is, and then I’ll tell you what my response to that was and I want to hear from you all on your opinion about what we should do about our helmet law.

So, Texas helmet law says if you’re under 21, you’ve got to wear a helmet. If you’re over 21, you don’t have to wear a helmet, and therefore it’s not against the law to not wear one if you do one of two things: you take a safety course or you have medical insurance of at least $10,000.

And, so that was his response, “hey, we ought to make it free will and require riders to have a certain amount of coverage and then they can make the choice”, and I understand that. Being probably more of a libertarian politically, I don’t want the government telling me what to do, so I get that angle.

But, for me in the cases that I get year in and year out and just hearing in general out there about all of these wrecks that are happening because the general public is not looking out for motorcycle riders, I think you’ve got to put free will and personal decisions aside and the law is good the way it is. You’ve got to wear a helmet, guys. You’ve got to be safe. You never know when you may be the one that gets hit by somebody.

And so, if you all know me at this point by watching some of these videos, you know that I love empirical data. So, I threw back at him some of the empirical data as my response and said “Look I get it, but here’s what the empirical data shows in states where they repealed helmet laws, similar to Texas or even much lenient than Texas.”

The study showed that afterward traumatic brain injuries increased by 60 some odd percent, or more. Deaths increased by 30% or more, and this is in the motorcycle riders themselves. One study showed – and I think this is back 2015 – that had helmets been worn in fatal accidents, 700 and some odd individuals in America would not be dead, and that kind of struck me.

That’s 700 lives, just because they didn’t want to wear a helmet, and to me at the end of the day I look at that and I say, “Come on. I get it you want to have your own choice. I understand that, but we’ve got to also recognize that this is a dangerous hobby riding a bike. Not because of us. Not because of us riders out there, but because of other people, and we can’t be sure that we’re not going to be the next one that is knocked off our bike, and you’ve got to have that helmet to protect yourself.”

So that was my take at the end, looking at the data suggests that you know, these helmet laws are there to ultimately protect the rider and the empirical data backs that up; and it’s just absolutely necessary that we wear the correct helmet, not just any helmet but the correct helmet.

So, that was my response but I want to hear from you guys. What do you think? Do you think we ought to go to the Texas model and put the onus on the biker that you’re going to have to get enough insurance to cover injuries that you sustain, even if it’s by a third-party because you’re not wearing a helmet? Or should we keep the law where we are, or maybe some variation of that?

Love to from hear from you. Comment to this video in the group or otherwise shoot me an e-mail, would love to hear from you on it. I just want to have an open, an open battle if you will over it and hear what peoples’ opinions are. Thanks for watching the video.