Motorcycle helmet law repeal heard
Motorcyclists who are at least 21 years old would not be required to wear a helmet under a bill heard by the Transportation and Telecommunications Committee Feb. 14.
LB52, introduced by Omaha Sen. Bob Krist, also would provide an exemption for younger riders. Motorcyclists aged 16 up to 21 who pass a motorcycle safety course and carry proof of course completion would not be required to wear a helmet.
Class M operator’s licenses would indicate whether the license holder was required to wear a helmet.
Violations of the helmet law would be a secondary offense under the bill.
Finally, the bill would require motorcyclists and their passengers to wear eye protection.
Krist said the current state helmet law does not treat motorists equally.
“Singling out citizens who choose to ride motorcycles and imposing mandatory helmet laws … is unconstitutional in that, by mandating helmets for motorcycles, as opposed to all motorists, we violate the equal protection guarantee of the 14th Amendment,” Krist said.
Krist said wearing a helmet is a good decision, but not one that the government should mandate.
Todd Miller, representing American Bikers Aimed Toward Education of Nebraska, testified in support of LB52, saying the current helmet law infringes on liberties without providing protection for other citizens.
“[LB52] does not prohibit anyone from wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle; it merely gives us the right to choose,” Miller said.
Kevin Signor of Norfolk also testified in support of the bill. He said it is difficult to attract out-of-state motorcyclists to attend Nebraska biker events due to the state’s helmet law.
Robert Ailor of York testified in support, saying 30 of the 50 states do not require helmets for all motorcyclists. While most of the country permits riding without a helmet, he said, helmeted riders account for more fatalities with 59 percent of motorcyclist deaths in 2009. He also said helmets can prevent head injuries but cause spinal cord injuries instead.
The biggest factors contributing to motorcycle injuries are speed and driving while impaired, Ailor said.
“Helmets aren’t the magic bullet to cure fatalities with motorcycle riders,” Ailor said.
Dr. Joseph Stothert, director of trauma and surgical/critical care at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, testified in opposition to LB52. He said 258 motorcyclists were treated at the medical center from 2001 to 2010. Severe head injuries were found in 19 percent of patients who wore helmets, he said, compared to 26 percent of those who did not. Neck fractures were sustained by 22 percent of riders with helmets and 35 percent without helmets, he said, and 3 percent of helmeted riders died, as opposed to 8 percent of riders who did not wear helmets.
The costs associated with motorcycle accidents are substantial, Stothert said. Total charges for the 258 motorcyclists were $13 million, he said, and 29 percent of them were self-pay or Medicaid.
“It is clear from the data presented — both at my trauma center and across the state — that not wearing a helmet increases the risk of dying by over 50 percent and increases the chances of significant disability for those people who do survive,” Stothert said.
Representing the National Transportation Safety Board, Christopher Hart also testified in opposition to LB52. He said states that repealed or weakened their helmet laws have seen damaging effects. Louisiana’s motorcyclist fatality rate increased 25 percent, Arkansas saw twice as many unhelmeted crash fatalities and Texas saw almost 10 times more traumatic brain injuries in unhelmeted riders over four years, Hart said.
Duane Schroeder of Wayne opposed the bill, saying it should at least require unhelmeted riders to carry extra health insurance. This would help pay for medical costs resulting from their decision not to wear a helmet, he said.
“If I’m going to be the rugged individualist … I’d better be able to pay for everything that follows,” Schroeder said.
The committee took no immediate action on the bill.
