I've ridden a motorcycle since 1953. Started without helmets, went to helmets when they became available. The club I raced with charged you $1 every time you got on a bike without one. Started wearing seatbelts when they covered my chest, with our 1988 Camray. They save lives.
And, BTW, in a car, I'm the one with the kinetic energy advantage. That's why I quit riding on the street years ago. San Diego has one M/C killed per week, because they did something stupid.
Now that we all agree that they serve a safety purpose, let's look at their regulation, the laws that require you to wear them. As soon as one leaves the house/apt/tent you're using public space, i.e. the street and you're going to a public store/park/etc. You follow traffic laws, because they keep traffic safe. Think what would happen without them. Now we know that accidents happen, through no fault of yours, right? That's especially true with motorcycles vs Volvos. So, what if you, without a helmet, get head trauma? On the public highway? Once you're brain dead, the public suffers: the person who hit you, the cops who respond to the accident, the guy who sweeps you off the street and (we hope) your relatives. So you're not the only one involved. Don't forget the lawyers.
And that's why we have traffic laws, which include helmets and seat belts. And also driving too fast, not stopping for stop signs and a bunch of other things. And I admit we have traffic accidents in spite of all the laws; but think of all the accidents that would happen without those laws.
Just presenting the logic for helmets and seatbelts; not questioning your right to freedom.
Boris
