| Subject: |
|
Is The Pennsylvania Press In Cahoots With Frankel? |
| Name: |
|
Bruce Arnold |
| Date Posted: |
|
Apr 17, 07 - 8:18 AM |
| Email: |
|
bruce@ldrlongdistancerider.com |
| Website: |
|
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1176762308196030.xml&coll=1 |
| Message: |
|
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Arnold [mailto:Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 8:18 AM
To: Charles Umbenhauer
Cc: Lynn Wesley ; Joseph Heh ; Ed Birch; abate@abateofaz.org
Subject: Is The Pennsylvania Press In Cahoots With Frankel?
Hey Charles,
Is the Pennsylvania press incompetent, or are they in cahoots with Frankel?
In today's PennLive.com article/editorial...
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1176762308196030.xml&coll=1
...reprinted below, they claim:
"More telling are figures from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration showing that motorcyclists not wearing helmets are 32 times more likely to die in an accident or suffer serious injuries, particularly those involving head trauma."
THIS IS A LIE!
In this document...
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/motorcycle/motorcyclehelmet2005.pdf
...NHTSA does say that "Per mile traveled in 2003, a motorcyclist is approximately 32 times more likely to die in a
crash than someone riding in an automobile." But (a) that has NOTHING to do with comparing lidded versus lidless riders, and (b) the "32 times" statistic is based on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) numbers that are so erroneous as to be meaningless.
These clowns are in your backyard, so I'll leave it to you to deal with them. Let me know if I can help.
Bruce
***
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1176762308196030.xml&coll=1
Higher injuries point to need to resurrect law setting mandatory use of protective head gear
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Like the roar of a Harley, the issue of mandatory motor cycle helmet use is again revving up in Pennsylvania.
Just four years after advocates for motorcycle riders prevailed in a decades-long battle to make helmets optional, state Rep. Dan Frankel, D-Allegheny, has introduced legislation to require their use.
Frankel points to increased motorcycle fatalities and serious accidents nationally and statewide -- and their resultant costs to society -- as the need to revisit this contentious issue.
A statistical analysis in the state is difficult. While it's true Pennsylvania has seen a rise in motorcyle accidents and fatalities, it's also true that the number of people riding motorcycles continues to increase significantly -- up 50,000 since the mandatory helmet law was repealed in 2003.
More telling are figures from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration showing that motorcyclists not wearing helmets are 32 times more likely to die in an accident or suffer serious injuries, particularly those involving head trauma.
Advocates for optional laws -- the Alliance of Bikers Aimed Toward Education is the most prominent in Pennsylvania -- contend it's an individual freedom or personal choice issue.
ABATE, which doesn't oppose helmet use and does admirable work in promoting motorcycle helmets, raises a valid point in that it's the individual making a conscious decision to take this enormous risk.
But the group's argument breaks down along the same lines as smokers who fight public smoking bans. Just as smoking has proven medical implications for nonsmokers, helmetless riders pose a host of secondhand issues for others.
Injuries and fatalities eventually result in higher medical and insurance costs for everyone, as well as the potential for increased personal liability for a motorist involved in an accident with a helmetless rider.
Motorcyclists can go ahead and throw caution to the wind if they like when riding on private property or other private venues, but they have responsibility and accountability to others when they take to public roads and right of ways.
The state enforces seat-belt laws and other personal traffic-safety measures. Frankel is correct that motorcycle helmets should again be among them. |
|
Replies:
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
Home
bravenet.com