Ride CT & Ride New England Serving New England, NYC and The Hudson Valley!
By Bud Wilkinson of RIDE-CT.com
“The Hour” newspaper in Norwalk yesterday heaped some editorial praise on the new Connecticut law that requires all new riders to take motorcycle safety course before obtaining an “M” endorsement on a driver’s license, and then took up the issue of the lack of a helmet law for all riders in the state, noting:
“Perennially, the legislature has folded in the wake of protests from motorcyclists opposing a complete helmet law. At times, they have massed in front of the Capitol, revving the motors of their bikes to ‘impress’ the lawmakers with their position. Head injuries have sparked inquiries into the protection provided by football helmets. Why should motorcycle helmets not be required when the most serious injuries in motorcycle accidents involve the unprotected head? … We think the classroom program is a laudable one, one that could be augmented by passing helmet requirements for both the driver and the rider. It only makes common sense.”
This is what’s known as stirring the pot.
I am a long time rider, and I wear a full helmet. I’ve come to the realization when riding with others that wear no helmet, if they have so little regard for their own safety, how much regard will they have for mine.
I normally have a live and let live attitude, but cringe when I see passengers without really any protective gear. We’ve all seen the woman on back in shorts, flip flops, and tank top. They can’t imagine crashing, or the consequence. The guy riding around with a helmet dangling off the hook or under a net on the seat is another.
I think that if they can make a law requiring seatbelts for the driver of a car, they can and maybe should make a helmet law. The only downside to me is that the typical rider that doesn’t normally wear one will get a half helmet or novelty. Seeing that graphic showing the impact area percentages, the half helmet is pretty ineffective.
As far as the DMV abdicating their responsibility for license testing, that’s a sham. The MSF classes teach the operation of a small bike. They have some classroom lectures on strategies for the street, but the operational portion is low speed turning through cones laid out in a parking lot. I’m am aware that they usually tell the graduates that they are now competent to ride a motorcycle in a PARKING LOT. Not that the old ALT-MOST test given by the DMV was much better. When you go for a car license, the DMV tests you on the public roads. Is riding a motorcycle so much SAFER, to only need to see an applicant make a few low speed turns in a parking lot?
In other jurisdictions, they have no problem equiping the test taker and examiner with headsets, and giving a real road test. Why can’t we do that here?
Finally, at $200, limited locations, rain or cold, will requiring the MSF (conrep) classes effect motorcycle sales of motorcycles in this tough economy?