View Single Post
Old 11-20-2010, 06:44 PM   #55 (permalink)
roflwaffle
Master EcoModder
 
roflwaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,490

Camryaro - '92 Toyota Camry LE V6
90 day: 31.12 mpg (US)

Red - '00 Honda Insight

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius

3 - '18 Tesla Model 3
90 day: 152.47 mpg (US)
Thanks: 349
Thanked 122 Times in 80 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb View Post
"On average, helmet use led to average hospital costs that were about 20 percent, or $6,000, less than costs for those who didn't wear helmets. "

so someone has to draw a line though, you would arguably be safer in your car with a helmet, and a bulletproof vest, and a condom on. Why not make you wear them by law?
Probably because those are different situations with different issues/numbers. Condoms would be a civil rights issue, nearly impossible to enforce, and it's not like you can behave in a way that makes other people pay excessively either. If you have an STD and willfully infect someone else you can be prosecuted.

With bulletproof vests you can run into problem with local LEOs who don't want criminals to have easier access to them, so they are banned in some states, and regulation would probably involve a states rights versus fed regulations issue that would get tied up for decades. These figures also indicate that a reduction in the cost of accidental gunshot wounds from bullet proof vests would be significantly less than the reduction in the cost of accidents of riders w/o helmets. I think gun ownership is also higher than motorcycle ownership per capita, so the costs of helmetless MC injuries are also higher in that context.

Essentially, you get better bang for your buck via legislating that everyone wear helmets, it probably won't get tied up in the courts for decades, and it's enforceable. The other two aren't similar due to the mentioned differences.
  Reply With Quote