Tuesday, September 18, 2007

No longer flying under the radar.

I made a statement a long time ago that if motorcyclists don't police themselves then Big Brother was going to do it for us. I believe that time is coming. Governmental and Insurance Group agencies are starting to take serious aim at us. Rider fatalities are climbing. Loud pipes are instigating quickly increasing numbers of bans and restrictions. Insurance company losses are mounting. Motorcyclists are under closer scrutiny than ever before.

As a motorcycle safety professional, I'm closely watching things related to this front. A couple of interesting reports have come out in the last week and a half. Findings and recommendations that are sure to be deeply controversial and dividing. Here's the report that came out of the last NTSB ( National Transportation Safety Board ) meeting. Notice the thrust of their recommendations.

The following is taken from the press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 11 , 2007 SB-07-44 NTSB RECOMMENDS LEGLISLATION TO MANDATE ALL MOTORCYCLISTS USE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FMVSS 218-COMPLIANT HELMETS --------------------------------------------------------------------Washington, DC-

The National Transportation Safety Board today issued recommendations to states to require all motorcyclists and their passengers to wear Department of Transportation Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 218-compliant helmets.

Currently, only 20 states, the District of Columbia, and 4 territories have universal helmet laws requiring all riders to wear a helmet. Twenty-seven states and 1 territory have partial laws that require minors and/or passengers to wear such helmets. Three states have no helmet laws.

"The facts are very clear- head injuries are a leading cause of deaths in motorcycle crashes," said NTSB Chairman Mark V. Rosenker. "The most important step riders can take in terms of protecting themselves and staying alive is to wear a DOT- compliant helmet every time they ride."

FMVSS 218-compliant helmets are designed with a hard outer shell, an impact-attenuating liner, and a retention system to protect the head, especially the brain, in a variety of impact scenarios.

"Universal helmet laws have proven effective in the mitigation of injuries and the prevention of fatalities. Implementing these recommendations will take strong leadership in the States," Rosenker said. "I hope that the Governors and legislative leaders in the States will act promptly and decisively to implement the universal helmet laws recommended today by the Board."

Since 1997, motorcycle fatalities have increased 127 percent. Last year, 4,810 motorcyclists died in crashes, and accounted for more than 10 percent of all motor vehicle crash fatalities.

Last September, the Safety Board held a public forum and gathered information on ongoing motorcycle research and initiatives, as well as countermeasures that may reduce the likelihood of motorcycle accidents and fatalities. The meeting included participants representing government, motorcycle manufacturers, motorcyclist associations, state motorcycle rights organizations, researchers, trauma physicians, law enforcement, and insurance companies.

As a result of today's meeting, the National Transportation Safety Board issued the following recommendations:

To the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

Reprioritize the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety recommendations based on objective criteria, including known safety outcomes.

Following completion of the reprioritization of the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety, implement an action plan for states and others, such as federal agencies, manufacturers, insurance organizations, and advocacy groups, to carry out those recommendations that are determined to be of high priority.

To the Federal Highway Administration:

Following the 2007 Motorcycle Travel Symposium, develop guidelines for the states to use to gather accurate motorcycle registrations and motorcycle vehicle miles traveled data. The guidelines should include information on the various methods to collect registrations and vehicle miles traveled data and how these methods can be put into practice.

To the three states with no motorcycle helmet laws:

Require that all persons shall wear a Department of Transportation Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 218-compliant motorcycle helmet while riding (operating), or as a passenger on any motorcycle.

To the 27 states and 1 territory with partial motorcycle helmet laws:

Amend current laws to require that all persons shall wear a Department of Transportation Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 218-compliant motorcycle helmet while riding (operating), or as a passenger on any motorcycle.

To the 8 states, the District of Columbia, and the 4 territories with universal motorcycle helmet laws/regulations not specifically requiring FMVSS 218- compliant helmets:

Amend current laws to specify that all persons shall wear a Department of Transportation Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 218-compliant motorcycle helmet while riding (operating), or as a passenger on any motorcycle.

To all states:

Provide information to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) on the effectiveness of your motorcycle safety efforts to assist NHTSA with its effort to reprioritize the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety recommendations.

Full copies of the recommendation letters will be available in a few days on the NTSB website, www.ntsb.gov.

NTSB Media Contact: Terry N. Williams (202) 314-6100 mailto:williat%40ntsb.gov

End of release.

This is aimed squarely at the helmet law issue. Maybe you think the type of bike you ride and the amount of training you've had should make a difference. In the next post I'll share the report from the IIHS ( Insurance Institute for Highway Safety ). You might be surprised to see what they have to say.

Miles and smiles,



Anonymous said...

I caught a tiny bit of this on the news the other night, along with the requisite idiot in a suit saying that his organization opposes the law because "sometimes the motorcycling experience is enhanced by the wind in your hair". Ptooey!

Personally, I'm against any mandatory self-protection laws aimed at adults, though I think choices should come with consequences. It'll never happen, but...:

Wear your helmet / seatbelt / lifejacket, you're eligible for public aid if you get hurt. Don't wear appropriate safety gear (for whatever activity), and you've chosen in advance to pay for your own care.

Insurance companies could also be allowed to refuse or restrict payments. (Not based on activities, as they do now, but on whether or not appropriate, proven safety gear was in use.)

One obvious problem, of course, is where to draw the nonpayment line. If you wear a helmet but not a jacket is that OK for full coverage? Or would head injuries be covered, but skin grafts on your body not be?

Or what about smoking or having a high BMI? Would illnesses relating to those have to be paid by the person rather than their insurance?

I take care of myself as best I can because:
A) I love my son
B) I more or less like how my brain & body are and want them to stay this way (or get better).
Ditto for not using various legal & illegal substances, nor eating certain foods frequently.
Government edicts never come into the decision.

The main problem with people who choose not to protect themselves is that too often they end up after an accident (or a lifetime of poor food & drug choices) with serious and permanent injuries, which are expensive, but they can't pay for their own care.

It seems the government prefers to attempt to reduce injuries rather than increase personal responsibility. Wish there were a way to do both.

Anonymous said...

All this to-do about helmets. Most of the deaths are caused by SPEED and most of the drivers act like it is a crime to do the speed limit. I have had many experiences where my life has been endangered because some-one has been angry because I was doing the speed limit. How about enforcing the laws that we have then we won't need new ones.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous: "Most of the deaths are caused by SPEED".

You got numbers? The (now infamous) Hurt Report suggests otherwise (http://www.ct.gov/dot/LIB/dot/Documents/dhighwaysafety/CTDOT_Hurt.pdf). Some choice quotes from the study: "Deliberate hostile action by a motorist against a motorcycle rider is a rare accident cause." "The median pre-crash speed was 29.8 mph, and the median crash speed was 21.5 mph, and the one-in-a-thousand crash speed is approximately 86 mph."

Bryce Lee said...

Interesting comment from a US federal government agency. Note this was a
recommendation, not a requirement.

As seen from a foreign country, the United States has always been a country of "personal" choice. And
if individuals wish to speed (or ingest speed), or wear helmets or not or carry a firearm or not so be it.

Here in Canada we tend to take a somewhat opposite view. The government tells us what we may or may not do, we have universal publicly funded health care and generally speaking we look with
askance not only at so called reports with distain, we also
realize that's that way it is
in the USA. Here we wear helmets,
no choice in that matter however many of said helmets also carry a DOT sticker which means diddly squat
in this country. Then too numerous
Harley riders and others who think
it is just fine wear a beanie helmet
which probably won't protect anybody in an accident, be it with
a stationary object or something moving, including flying insects.

I look on the report as another form of political grand-standing, regardless of its
assumed intent.

Is this not the group once headed
up by one Joan Claybrook???

irondad said...

You all bring up solid points. This will be a group reply.

I believe in rider responsibility. Every rider should wear a quality full face helmet and appropriate riding gear.

I believe in less government. Government seems to have nothing to do but make more government.

There's no doubt that a very significant number of multi-vehicle collisions are caused by drivers / riders who have poorly developed skills. They are in a blazing hurry, and God knows why. They make very poor decisions.

Blaming car drivers for the largest number of rider fatalities is fraught with peril.

In the post coming on later today, I will share the IIHS report. One thing they say is that mandatory helmet laws are more effective than rider training.

In answer to that, I offer the following:

Here in Oregon fatalities to riders that happen from multi-vehicle accidents were only deemed to be the fault of the car driver 13 percent of the time.

And yet, rider training isn't considered effective?

Putting all their eggs in the "Helmet Law" basket is not the answer the NTSB really needed to find.

Take care,


Balisada said...

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are,

'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.‘

- Ronald Reagan

irondad said...

Also the biggest lie!


Anonymous said...

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Arnold [mailto:Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 12:45 PM
To: J. Richard Capka (rick.capka@fhwa.dot.gov)
Cc: George W. Bush (president@whitehouse.gov); Nancy Pelosi (americanvoices@mail.house.gov); Mary Peters (mary.peters@dot.gov); Nicole Nason (NHTSA.custservice@dot.gov); Mark Rosenker (mark.rosenker@ntsb.gov); David Winter (david.winter@fhwa.dot.gov)
Subject: Open Letter to FHWA Administrator J. Richard Capka

5 October 2007

J. Richard Capka (rick.capka@fhwa.dot.gov)
Federal Highway Administration
Bldg. SFC Room E87-314
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-0650 (tel)
202-366-3244 (fax)

Re: Motorcycle Travel Symposium, NTSB Conference Facility - L'Enfant Plaza, 10-12 October 2007

Mr. Capka:

The tentative agenda for next week's Motorcycle Travel Symposium clearly states that "better estimates of motorcycle travel are needed"...


...and for that concession by its sponsors, I applaud the Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA") and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA"). And unless and until we have more reliable reporting of statistics such as motorcycle registrations, motorcycle vehicle miles traveled ("VMT"), injuries and fatalities from motorcycle crashes and the actual causes thereof, I ask you and your symposium participants to join me in demanding that NHTSA and its lobbying ally, the National Transportation Safety Board ("NTSB"), cease and desist from spinning statistics that they know are flawed in support of misguided, Haddonistic safety agendas:


For evidence of same, Mr. Capka, we need look no further than your 30 January 2007 joint memorandum with NHTSA Administrator Nicole Nason...


...wherein you state "Since fatality rates based on VMT are the best measure of exposure risk for motor vehicle crashes, it is critical that FHWA receive accurate, complete, and timely VMT data to determine accurate crash rates and to monitor trends..." only to follow up a few lines later with the blatant admission that "...the reporting of motorcycle VMT data in HPMS is optional and consequently, many States choose not to report it." Despite that knowledge, in their meeting of 11 September 2007--nine months later--the NTSB used VMT-based measures to support their "band-aid on a bullet wound" motorcycle safety recommendations...


...specifically quoting NHTSA statistics suggesting that in 2006 motorcycles accounted for over 10% of all traffic fatalities but less than [0.4%|0.34%|0.034% ... they couldn't seem to decide] of total vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Obviously, any computation based on a meaningless statistic is itself a meaningless statistic. The NTSB knew this ... their Dr. Sweeney even warned them about it ... but Chairman Mark Rosenker ignored her comments.

In that same session, the NTSB quoted NHTSA statistics claiming that in 2006 motorcycles represented only 2% of all registered vehicles but over 10% of all fatalities. And again, they knew or should have known that statement may be false. As Dr. Sweeney acknowledged, the registered motorcycle statistics upon which that comparison is based may be seriously understated. In other words, for all we know at this point, the number of motorcyclist fatalities as a percentage of the number of motorcycles on the road may have actually DECREASED over the past ten years!

DESPITE THAT KNOWLEDGE, and as part of what I suspect may be collusion between the NTSB and NHTSA to circumvent the state lobbying restrictions imposed on the latter by TEA-21 (the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century)...


...on 3 October 2007 the NTSB included the following paragraph in a series of lobbying letters released to our state governments:

"The Safety Board is concerned about motorcycle safety and the growing number of riders who have been killed or injured in motorcycle crashes. Since 1997, the number of motorcycle fatalities has increased 127 percent, an increase that far exceeds that of any other form of transportation. In addition, the number of motorcycle fatalities in any recent year has been more than double the number of deaths that same year from accidents in aviation, rail, marine, and pipeline combined. In 2006, for example, 4,810 motorcyclists died in crashes, and motorcycle fatalities accounted for more than 10 percent of all motor vehicle crash fatalities.[1] The following figure clearly shows the rising numbers. Although rising motorcycle use may partly explain this trend, increases in fatalities have outpaced increases in activity measures such as motorcycle registrations and vehicle miles traveled."


THIS PARAGRAPH IS A MASTERPIECE OF POLITICAL SPIN. They say the best lies are half truth, Mr. Capka, and that certainly applies here:

1. Yes, motorcycle fatalities may have increased 127 percent since their historic low of 2,116 in 1997...


...but why not compare them to their historic high of 5,144 in 1980? That is an equally rational comparison which reflects a DECREASE in motorcycle fatalities.

2. So what if "...the number of motorcycle fatalities in any recent year has been more than double the number of deaths that same year from accidents in aviation, rail, marine, and pipeline combined"? According to HospitalInfection.org, "Every year in this country, two million patients contract infections in hospitals, and an estimated 103,000 die as a result, as many deaths as from AIDS, breast cancer, and auto accidents combined."


In other words, last year 21.4 times as many people died from going to the hospital as died from riding a motorcycle. And how relevant is that? At least as relevant as the NTSB planes, trains and pipelines comparison. Even more relevant is this comparison:

"...as NTSB Chairman, you either knew or should have known that (a) we have 236 million cellphone subscribers on our roadways, (b) 73% of them are talking while they are driving, (c) cellphone conversations impair their driving skills as much if they were intoxicated with alcohol, consequently (d) they are four times more likely to cause or be involved in an accident than motorists who responsibly shut up and steer, and resultantly (e) assuming reports of the Oklahoma Highway Safety Office are a reliable measure, roughly ONE IN FOUR ACCIDENTS in 2006 occurred when a driver was talking on the phone. So barring evidence to the contrary, as NTSB Chairman you either knew or should have known that it would be reasonable to assume that cellphone conversation-impaired motorists could have been responsible for 25 percent (or more) of the 2,575,000 traffic injuries and 42,642 traffic fatalities reported by NHTSA for 2006.... And rather than using the taxpayer-provided resources of your bureaucratic office to pursue restrictions on the use of cell phones while driving, which might have saved 10,660 lives (25% of 42,642 fatalities) last year, you chose instead to go on what the press calls a mandatory helmet law "crusade", which in comparison might have saved at best only [747] lives. Had you made the responsible choice, Mr. Rosenker, our nation could be saving almost 15 TIMES AS MANY LIVES by restricting the use of cellphones by drivers rather than requiring helmets for riders."


3. Yes, last year there may have been 4,810 motorcycle fatalities that accounted for more than ten percent of all traffic deaths, but that in no way supports the NHTSA/NTSB lobbying assertion that helmet laws will solve the problem. By NHTSA's own numbers...


...of the 4,810 motorcycle fatalities in 2006, 2,792 (58%) were helmeted, and 2,018 (42%) were not helmeted. 58% (2,792) were wearing helmets and DIED ANYWAY. For the remaining 2,018, apply the 37% factor supplied by the NTSB here...


...and the actual number of lives that might have been saved if ALL riders had been helmeted in ALL 50 states ALL year is only 747. This is not to say that 747 deaths--16% of the total--are not important. Rather it is to emphasize that the NHTSA/NTSB helmet law lobby does nothing at all to address 84% of motorcycle fatalities!

4. Their paragraph concludes with "...increases in fatalities have outpaced increases in activity measures such as motorcycle registrations and vehicle miles traveled." And as I explained above, that is a specious claim.

AND THE SPIN DOESN'T STOP THERE, MR. CAPKA. Let's take a look at this recent NHTSA report:

DOT HS 810 834 September 2007 (Fatal Two-Vehicle Motorcycle Crashes)

One of the more obvious findings of this report was that "the role of the motorcycle was recorded as the striking vehicle" in most cases. Of course! That is what happens when a negligent, care-less, distracted or cellphone conversation-impaired motorist turns left or pulls out in front of a motorcyclist. And of course, "more than 90 percent of the two-vehicle motorcycle crashes involving passenger vehicles occurred on non-interstate roadways". Roads without median barriers make it easier for irresponsible drivers to violate a motorcyclist's right-of-way!

What wasn't so obvious was the implication of this conclusion: "For the passenger vehicle drivers involved in [fatal] two-vehicle motorcycle crashes, 35 percent of the driver-related factor was failure to yield right-of-way compared to only 4 percent for motorcycle operators."

One might easily interpret that to mean that the automobile driver was at fault in these accidents only 35 percent of the time, which would conversely mean that "it was the biker's fault" 65 percent of the time. But that is not the truth.

The truth can be found, well obfuscated, in Table 22. The obfuscation begins with the selection of a data presentation format in which the "...sums of the numbers and percents are greater than the total drivers as each driver may be coded with more than one factor." The obfuscation is perfected by using a doubletalk category breakdown in which driver offenses like making improper turns, failure to keep in proper lane, failure to obey traffic signs or signals, and even driving on the wrong side of road are reported separately and thereby partially or entirely EXCLUDED FROM THE 35 PERCENT RIGHT-OF-WAY VIOLATION STATISTIC. The truth can be found by applying this formula: "1 - ((711 + 26) / 1792) = 0.588727679". Logic precludes any double counting in the "None reported" or "Unknown" categories, and for all other categories, the automobile driver either caused or contributed to the death of the motorcyclist. So, the sad but undeniable truth is this:


Sadder still is what can be gleaned by combining this discovery with the not-so-obvious revelation from Table 21 that although motorists were at fault almost 60% of the time, over 70% of the time they walked away with no punishment, no penalty, no fine, and not even so much as a traffic ticket. And saddest of all is the extent to which NHTSA went to effectively bury these smoking guns in the framework of this presentation.

MY POINT HERE, MR. CAPKA, is essentially the same point I tried to convey to NTSB Member Deborah Hersman over a year ago, in my position paper of 2 September 2006:


My point here is to try to get you, the FHWA, NHTSA, the NTSB, your symposium participants, the media, all motorcyclists and the public to realize that the issue here is that helmets are not the issue here. As does the American Motorcyclist Association ("AMA"), I support the voluntary use of helmets:


Legally requiring their use by motorcyclists only, however, is both absolutely discriminatory and relatively ineffective. Focusing on crash survival instead of crash prevention punishes victims for the crime, and makes no more sense than trying to reduce the murder rate by mandating Kevlar vests for the innocent rather than prison or worse for the guilty. As I wrote last year, "Helmets and other defensive measures CANNOT prevent or lower the probability of motorcycle accidents. Proactive abatement of negligent, distracted, impaired and inattentive motorists CAN."

THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT HELMETS ARE NOT THE ISSUE HERE, MR. CAPKA. And if NHTSA and the NTSB do not stop using bad numbers to promote bad public policy through illegal lobbying efforts, be on notice that there are many concerned and dedicated American motorcyclists who will not rest until the heads of those agencies are dethroned, and the taxpayer funding for those agencies is diminished.

Speaking strictly for myself and no other individuals or organizations,

Bruce Arnold

Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray's Biker Forum
Premier Member, Iron Butt Association
Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation
2007 Chairman's Circle, American Motorcyclist Association