quote:

Originally posted by Foremanman:
i always bring one along just 90% of the time i choose not to wear it

Looks as if there is no problem then. You can ride with the group 10% of the time.

quote:

Foremanman

I think we are getting on the same line of thought here. That easy part that you speak of is where TOM fliped over backwards. I understand what you are saying, we stop often especially on hot days and take a break, pop helmet off and cool the head off and shoot the BULL and do some bench racing. So I think we are thinking along the same line now.

DAM BOY we might just make that ride together after all!

You guys are cracking me up over this helmet thing. Seems like a knee jerk reaction after someone rolled their quad. People are now on a tear about wearing helemets or you can't ride with the group, ...unless you have traveled a great distance to do so?? What's up with that, seems hypocritical to me? I think people should wear a helemt, but if they don't, it doesn't bother me one bit, and it shouldn't you if it's legal in your state to do so.

Their is one guy in our group that doesn't wear a helmet, I don't agree with his choice, but will I refuse to let him ride with us, no.

I guess it is a bit hypocritical. But the trip was planned for a year. Wasn't going to ruin things at this point. Also made a whole bunch of headway. Several who previously did not wear helmets had them one. You can see that as be hypocritical or as being a partial victory. If it works to get more folks to wearing one, then again it is a victory in my book.

Just like Wayne R Kayl says you let me know when your gonna go and that might be the 10% were looking for

quote:

Originally posted by Gomer:
I guess it is a bit hypocritical. But the trip was planned for a year.

Sorry, I don't see "grey." People nowadays seem to always do what is "convenient" for them, and try to justify everything. I say bs.

More people wearing helmets is definitely a good thing, especially kids.

As with HELMETS it was my decision to ride with these fine folks covered or not, they are special friends from waaaay back no GRAY to it, it was a decision that I made. Call it BS or what ever but since it was my choice and mine alone then convenient or not it was what I felt comfortable with. This whole thing involved Myself Gomer and Steve and the FLATLANDERS, ATVER one day, no one else was there if it was BS GRAY or what it affected no one else. This trip was planed for a year they put alot of time and effort and planning into the trip, not to mention the money invested. They rely on me to GUIDE them and GUIDE I did. It wasn't as if they just decided on Friday to show up Saturday and ride.

My decision to ride with them affected no one else, I don't feel as I need to justify any decision I make to anyone. Hey if anyone cares to ride with the group cover up, it's as simple as that. This wasn't the first time we or I have seen a roll over but some where along the line you have to make a call. I was the one sitting behind TOM watching it all unfold before my eyes, I made up my mind then that some thing should be done. If others don't agree well so be it, but for me them are the ground rules. Thats nice part about everyone having their own machine you don't like the rules you are free to ride or do what ever trips your trigger the way you like. The call has been made everyone is fore warned if you feel the rules are to tough to follow then don't plan on riding with the covered group easy as that.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Cob,

I was trying not to respond to this anymore too...but Cabman made me respond again.

I'm with you Cabman, not sure how you can make a statement that says "no helmet, no ride" then ignore it first time it's challenged, then defend it here in the forums as being OK...... after reading the responses to Foneman, sure looks to me like it depends on who you are if you need a helmet or not....

Just fess up that you backed off your original statement and stop busting balls. You were called on it and backed down, which is OK.

I think it's the riders choice. Unless I've never ridden with you before, then you need a helmet to ride with me.....

Wear don’t wear… I’m not going there again

BUTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

After riding street bikes for years and having a MUCH higher probability of a crash and considerably more power than our anemic ATVs…

Anyone that borrows a helmet is asking for disaster!!! A bad fitting helmet has been proven to cause more damage than none at all…… If your going to go with a group that demands helmets for their ride…. Buy one, make sure it fits and use it or tell them you will follow their trail on your own….

Helmets are not like the sport coat or tie they hand you at a restaurant, when required!!!!! If those don’t fit who cares….. You will care if a helmet doesn’t fit!

quote:

after reading the responses to Foneman, sure looks to me like it depends on who you are if you need a helmet or not....

That was a rather cheap shot but that's ok, you know me better than that, I don't know of anyone on here that I have to answer to for any thing I do. I never said it was OK, rather we just made the choice to accept it. The choice had no bearing on who it was or BS or anything GRAY it was made with other things in mind. The folks more than one are now wearing helmets, I know of another one that will cover for sure and hopes for a couple more. Change isn't being made over nite but is slow but sure being done.

Might I remind you of an earlier statement made by you in this topic.

quote:

I'm with you Cob and will back you 100%, I've rode a couple times with a 2up, and no helmets. It's tough enough keeping one safe, let alone 2. Crazy.... an injury ruins the ride for everyone, so it's pretty selfish not to wear one.

Any ride posts should have "helmet required" as part of the post.

Guess we can say just like to wear or not to wear it was my choice. I was comfortable with my choice.

I'm not going to justify my decision again I have said what my thoughts are. No one ever said that LIFE is fair.

No one is forced to ride with me, if busting my balls is what was done so be it. But I made my choice and I will live with it. This all started just over a week before the FLATLANDERS were due to arrive. I felt that would have been selfish of me to give them a set of rules to adhere by a week before they arrived. As with eveyone else they in the past knew what my thoughts were but as with everyone else we didn't really adhere to any set rules.

Since I knew that would be some time before any organized ride would happen at least with me, I feel that warning ppl far enough ahead is fair warning.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Cob,

Hell, We all make compromises

I'm shopping for a new helmet. Helmets save injuries, lives, and expense bigtime (8). I'm looking to replace my old half-helmet. Considerations are safety and comfort. Top US certifications are Snell & DOT.

The safety of helmets is in their Styrofoam linings, The hard plastic shell mainly protects the Styrofoam liner (1)(11). Scientists believe the ideal helmet would contain a six inch thickness of a softer foam. Scientists are still looking for anyone willing to wear that. Motorcycle helmets usually have an inch of Styrofoam (2). ...So we compromise. Bicycle helmets fare better than you'd think because their Styrofoam is typically two to three inches thick. Notice bike helmets extend at the front and back for greater protection. They offer superior comfort, ventilation, vision, and hearing, making them a good choice versus not wearing any helmet.

Overall, bicycle helmets are 65-70% effective in protecting against head and brain injuries (4). That includes impacts with heavy objects such as automobiles [or atvs] (4). Despite having no lower face protection, bicycle helmets reduce the overall risk of serious facial injury by 50% (3). That's nothing to ridicule. No, you won't catch me in one, but a pink Barbie helmet is better than your bare head. Plus, everyone will think you have big onions.

At typical atv speeds, often 10-15mph or less, any helmet is a good choice. As speed increases above 13mph, helmets help avoid head injuries, but increase severe or minor neck and spinal injuries (2)(2a).

The amount of protection decreases exponentially as more of the head is exposed (1). A football helmet with its less obtrusive face guard seems appealing. Similar to a 3/4 style motorcycle helmet, it offers much of the face protection of a full face helmet, along with open ventilation & visibility. Unfortunately, football helmet linings are made with a rubbery foam to withstand repeated impact. Styrofoam in motorcycle helmets works better, but its effectiveness is lost after a single hard impact (1)(5). Wearing a football helmet is way better than none.

That brings us to full face helmets. Studies favor these. One study claimed 35% of all [motorcycle] crashes show major impact on the chin-bar area (7). Open face helmets offer 65% of the protection of a full face. Half or shorty helmets provide 39% of the coverage.

Can you find comfort in a full face? I'm looking for a "motocross" design that has a protruding, open, well ventilated chin-bar area compared to motorcycle designs. You can spot these by their paint jobs. The triangular design of motocross chin bars is best for absorbing impact throughout the helmet, and is effective at deflecting rocks. Some are open faced with no lens to block air flow. Wear glasses or goggles. Also, a large top visor blocks the sun and scoops air into the face opening. Finally, lighter colors absorb less of the sun's heat. Oh, consider the helmet's weight. Higher cost & more weight don't always mean a better helmet. Styrofoam is light, inexpensive and effective.

Sources:
(1) http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:Mdlo-hcdZqgJ:www.p...n&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
(2) http://www.msabate.com/facts.html
(2a) http://www.bikersrights.com/statistics/cooter/cooter.html
(3) http://www.smf.org/articles/report.html#A5
(4) http://www.smf.org/articles/images/fig15.gif
(5) http://www.helmets.org/foam.htm
(6) http://www.smf.org/articles/vietnam.html
(7) http://jeff.dean.home.att.net/swisher.htm
(8) http://www.springerlink.com/content/676t2uk85302xx40/
(9) http://www.smf.org/ [motorcycle helmet Q&A]
(10) http://www.webbikeworld.com/r2/motocross-helmet/shoei-vfx-r-air-helmet.htm
(11) http://www.smf.org/articles/images/fig14.gif
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_helmet
Also, Tech notes, Articles and Research at:
http://www.smf.org/

I don't recommend bad fitting helmets, but cite me where it says they are worse than none.

A bad fit can leave a wearer nearly twice as likely to suffer head injury than cyclists whose helmets fit the best (3). But cyclists who choose not to wear their bad fitting helmets are at even greater risk. More helmet is generally better, but the biggest improvement is any helmet versus no helmet. The safety certifier Snell, says the top element of helmet construction should be comfort and wearability (9). If you are comfortable in a pink Barbie helmet, you won't hear us, ...err, ummm, me object. No, you won't catch me in one, so don't go there. BTW, earlier I wrote "Bedded Your Older Sister," not mine.

Trying to find anyone to wear a six-inch thick helmet illustrates the way things are, is not the same as the way they oughta be. We all make compromises. I no longer agree fully with my earlier post that there isn't much of an argument favoring not wearing protection (2) (2a). I also appreciate the need for compromise by those who ride where the temperature is 99 and so is the humidity. Several articles illustrated to me the decade long challenge (6) of getting moped riders to wear helmets in Malaysia, India, VietNam (& Texas, that is if anyone ever decides to ride a moped in Texas).

quote:

Originally posted by ATVer:
not sure how you can make a statement that says "no helmet, no ride" then ignore it first time it's challenged, then defend it here in the forums as being OK......
Just fess up that you backed off your original statement and stop busting balls.

Exactly, this is what I have a problem with. Rules are rules, if someone is going to spout off and say "this is the rule if you ride with me" then that's fine, I don't have a problem with that, but stick to your convictions and don't back down. More importantly don't come on the forum with a "holier than thou" attitude and then tell us why it was ok for you to do so. Cob, I'm glad you posted that vid of Tom, and brought up this helmet issue. This has been very educational for lots of people, just don't send the wrong message when you were on the right track. I have thought many times that heck, this trail is easy, I don't need a helmet, but the vid helped remind me I always need to wear one.

CABMAN as I explained had this been 6 months ago yes I agree fully. But when it is set a week before a major trip then I think that an exception was called for. I had talked to the folks when we first started to talk about this, they had concerns, but to get helmets in a week is almost as bad as not at all. Since there will be several weeks between rides here and ppl have time to adjust it is more than fair. Ppl have had fair warning not a week as was given to the FLATLANDERS.

Nothing HOLIER than THOU just an exercise in what is a personal choice for myself. I am not pushing my beliefs on anyone else just shareing my thoughts and feelings. You or who ever makes a choice not to cover, I make a choice not to ride with you, can't get any easier or fairer than that.

Once again it was my call I made it and I stand by it.

Call me Satan.... But, I do not wear a helmet on just a general 20 mph trail... maybe I should, but oh well,,, it is my head...
\
Now if I know I am gonna romp on it or be in compromising positions, sure I wear a helmet... but just general putting around the yard or down the road for a short ride , no....

quote:

Voodoo

Belive it or not but is when you are most VULNERABLE. That is when you need it most, my accident I was doing less than 5 miles an hour.

Right message or wrong message, the fact still stands that folks were on the way who were not going to wear a helmet, even though many of them had over time made the choice to buy and wear one. I knew last year that many of them would not wear helmets. I did not like it then and I still don't. But making the statement that if you want to ride with me, then wear a helmet was not going to result in the trip being canceled. If that is hypocritical, then I am one and I'm good with it. That is just the way this worked out and the only way I see that it could have worked out. Was it a sell out to my view of things,,,,,,, well I don't think so. But if you do, then cool, I can live with it and your view of things. Situations are what they are and in this case a compromise was required. I don't see that as a sell out or being hollier than thou.

I understand totally COB... danger is lurking around any corner we turn.. whether it is on a quad, a bicycle, or walking to the fridge.... I guess, IMO, it is a personal choice... To each his own.... And each should know his or her limitations in any given situation... For me a slow trail ride of 20 mph is not really a dangerous trip , but maybe I will change my mind one day.... but for now ...I feel I can control my situation at these slow speeds...
Keep in mind .... we are in the flat lands down here without the mountains and rocks....

quote:

Originally posted by Gomer:
Situations are what they are and in this case a compromise was required.
I don't see that as a sell out or being hollier than thou.

I can maybe understand the first part, but then don't come on the Forum, beat your chest one day, then renig the next. I'll bet if these people come back next year there will be those without helmets, and I'll bet they ride with the group. I personally would never have a rule like that, I couldn't stick to it. I just thought a forum member was being jumped on for all the wrong reasons.

Just a general comment . . .

Before this issue reaches the Supreme Court, maybe there are rules, waivers of rules, and exceptions to rules.

Common sense, sometimes, can play a role.

Here's an example of a rule that was NOT suspended; sometimes, folks have no choice . . .

I was at a commercial airport near Ft. Walton Beach, FL, waiting to board a flight. A fellow-passenger was an Air Force officer in flight suit, on his way to fly a mission from another airfield, with his individual equipment, including a "Mae West," a CO2 cartridge-inflatable flotation device.

The passenger service agent (female person) would not let the pilot board the plane with the flotation device, because pressurized bottles (the CO2 cartridges) are not permitted . . .

Imagine; the guy has flight-certified equipment, safe for several times the altitude of the commercial airliner, and . . . he can't take it aboard.

Senior officers counseled the aviator to leave the Mae West with the airline officials, and check out another one where he was going to fly his mission . . .

So, I don't think the airline folk had any choice; however, common sense would say flight-certified equipment isn't likely to endanger the aircraft or its passengers . . . a waiver may have been appropriate, but apparently no mechanism existed to obtain one before flight time . . .

I think everything has been said about 4 times,,,everyone shake hads, and go for a ride. I'm locking this one.