New Motorcycle Safety Rules

As an avid motorcyclist myself, and as the Secretary of the agency charged with road safety, I’m deeply concerned that the pastime I love has such a troubling safety record. Yearly increases in motorcycle fatalities and injuries have plagued the nation for nearly a decade. Yet we’ve seen a rise in the use of so-called “novelty” helmets, which aren’t safety-test or certified, and which do little to protect riders during an accident.

I’m a rider and I’ve been in a crash where I laid down my bike on the blacktop and my helmet took the impact of the crash.  The safety-tested and certified helmet I was wearing, which is battered and bruised and will never be used again, sits in my office as a reminder that it could have been my head that suffered those blows.

The simple lesson is this:  If you’re a rider like me, you’ve got to take responsibility for wearing the right gear, including a DOT certified helmet, so you don’t end up as a brain injury patient.

That’s why today, we’re proposing new safety rules to make it harder for vendors to sell unsafe novelty helmets or for riders to get away with wearing them. Our ultimate goal is to make it easier for riders to know in advance whether the helmet they buy will keep them safe.

We are proposing to do that by requiring manufacturers to place a larger, tamper-proof DOT label on the back of certified helmets that have been through a range of safety tests.  That’s because we’ve seen many cases of people putting fake DOT stickers on novelty helmets that don’t pass muster on safety.  Trust me, I’ve seen the cross section of one of these novelty helmets and you don’t want to be relying on one to protect you in an accident. 

Importantly, our proposal would also strengthen the tests helmets must go through to receive DOT certification, including updated tests on how the helmets hold up during impact, whether objects can penetrate the helmet and how well the helmet stays in place during a crash.

There’s a good reason for the safety changes we’re proposing today.    In fact, fatalities have more than doubled since 1997--increasing by 144 percent.  Motorcycles account for about 3 percent of the vehicles on the road, but they represent 13 percent of all crashes. Yet new data indicate that nearly one in five motorcycle riders in states with helmet laws wear a non-compliant helmet.

Ultimately, safety begins with the riders themselves.  Riders must do more to protect themselves by taking personal responsibility for their own safety, including wearing a DOT certified helmet.

You know, the good news is that more Americans than ever are experiencing the freedom of the open road through motorcycling.  It’s a great feeling to gear up for what might be a quick commute or a longer pleasure ride, to feel the wind in your face and see the blacktop stretching into the distance before you. That’s why I love it and that’s why I ride.  So to all those riders who love it as much as I do, I say gear up and ride safe. 

-Secretary Peters

Comments

[Jim Kalin]

Motorcycle riders always lose when involved in any accident. If a rider hits a truck, a car, a tree, a fence or a patch of sand, they always lose. Does not matter who is at fault, they lose. So why would they be so ignorant of safety rules re: helmet design and testing? Many motorcycle riders have a "devil may care" attitude when riding. Many also are "road bullies", taking shortcuts thru traffic without regard for anyone's safety. My observations from over 25 years of bus driving and volunteer service with Fire/EMS.

[Skip Outcalt]

Rather than putting "tamper-proof labels" on the helmets, why not just publish a list of all helmets that pass the certification tests. Let the rider be responsible for knowing whither the helmet will provide the protection needed.
I believe some riders wear helmets to make a statement rather than for protection. In Colorado helmets are optional. I see a lot of riders on the interstate with no helmet or any other kind of protection.
I don't ride anymore - too scary. But when I did, I always wore a helmet.

[Honey]

Motorcycles are just dangerous, period. What percentage of people killed in motorcycle accidents would have been spared by helmets? I think you are fooling yourself if you believe that putting a DOT helmet on means that you are 'riding safely'.

[Ajlouny]

I agree with the comment above. It's a losing battle, especially when your not well protected. I have seen people ride in their flip flops...good way to lose some toes.

[WiserIan]

This is a great resource, thanks for making this information so easily accessible. I am a long time cyclist, and sometimes it is hard to figure out all of the rules!

There is a great online community related to low emissions (like bikes) and alternative fuel vehicles on WiserEarth that I think would be meaningful to Fastlane readers. Take a look at the area of focus:

http://www.wiserearth.org/aof/149

This can connect you to groups, people and organizations working towards creating more sustainable transit options. It would be great to see the input of the DOT on our community, as the experience and expertise of our transportation government workers is invaluable.

[reena]

Hi,
This topic is very helpful to young people, because they neglected some safty things.
When we are going to drive a new motor cycle we have to follow some safty precautions, those are you must wear helment.
==================================
reena
http://www.savvybusiness.com.au

[Lynn Bankockor]

"Motorcycle riders always lose when involved in any accident. If a rider hits a truck, a car, a tree, a fence or a patch of sand, they always lose. Does not matter who is at fault, they lose. So why would they be so ignorant of safety rules re: helmet design and testing? Many motorcycle riders have a "devil may care" attitude when riding. Many also are "road bullies", taking shortcuts thru traffic without regard for anyone's safety. My observations from over 25 years of bus driving and volunteer service with Fire/EMS."

I agree, you would think they would be a little safer considering that as you said, when they get in an accident they always lose.

[Myron Smith]

On a related subject, I would like to get a response on the issue of dual sport motorcylces. These motorcyles are arguably the safest motorcycles on the road. They are lite, maneuverable and can handle almost any terrain or obstacle. However, states like Kansas will not allow many of the dual sport motorcycles on the road, because the original MSO was for off-road. If a person can put a lighting kit on the bike and meet all the federal requirements, why can't these bikes be put on the road? The head of the Kansas DMV does not allow them because he is afraid of losing his federal highway dollars. Yet all the states around Kansas allow these motorcyles and benefit from the revenue, but not one of them has ever lost their federal dollars because they put them on the road. This also has been going on the better part of 30 years. Could a memo be put out from your office that allows these motorcylces on the road (with some kind of guidance)even though they do not have the federal safety tag (put out through the national highway transportation administration?) One way to get these bikes on the road, according to the head of the Kansas DMV, is to take the bike to a "federally certified modifier", of which non exist to my knowledge. This modifier is supposedly someone who can perform the mods and generate a federal plate/tag for the bike. How does one become one of these federally certified modifiers? Dualsporting is gaining a huge following in the past few years. It gives individuals a chance to see the US through the "back roads" and trails. Yet in a quest for more safety in handling some of the more technical trails the riders are searching for bikes that weigh as little as possible. Those that are made currently like the KLR 650 and DRZ 400 are heavy and cummbersome. So riders are putting lighting kits on bikes like the KTM 400exc and WR450's and trying to get them taged for the road. We have found ways to allow a model A or model T on the road and call it safe, but somehow these bikes are labeled as "not safe" just because they did not originally go through the process of getting the federal safety tag put on. Surely there is something that can be done. Think of the fuel saved. Think of the reduced emissions due to more and more of these bikes being put on the road.

[Jim Grapes]

This seems like the right action to take, changing the rules to make compliance harder to avoid. My observations with those riders who detest helmets tell me that they aren't really the compliant inside the box type people more likely to follow them because they are more stringent, more likely they risk wearing no helmet at all.

[Paul Armitage]

Why are there not tougher laws regarding the manufacturing of motorcycles that can go upward of 200 mph? My stepson and his friend were recently killed while they were both riding "over 100 mph, according to the police", when a semi-truck pulled out in front of them. He was a good kid, but had a fixation on going fast. He was 21 years of age and we all tried to steer him away from these type of motorcycles, but as he considered "an adult", in the end, we had no say in his decision. Why are these motorcycles allowed to be sold as "street-legal" when I beleive the highest speed limit in the nation is maybe 80 mph? I know some states have adopted laws that riders exceeding 50 mph over the speed limit are fined over $1000 and perhaps could lose their licence, so why not step it up a notch and pass national laws regarding this issue and perhaps only allow the sale of these fast motorcycles for racetrack use only? These type motorcycles are also known for being able to "outrun" a police car, so I'm sure any laws that prevented this practice would be well received by the law enforcement agancies. If laws like this were enacted, perhaps we could save the lives of 1000's of young kids like my stepson.

[Gershon]

I just found this site and hopefully, you really get to see these comments.

I wear a full face helmet all the time as well as other protective gear. Helmets are a no-brainer, either pass a law or forget about it.

One subject I NEVER see mentioned in any official material is countersteering. This is a subject a very large percentage of riders are not aware of.

Since 1994, the number of single vehicle fatal motorcycle crashes has been between about 42 and 44% every single year. Reading reports, about half of these are due to a lack of knowledge about countersteering.

Every rider that has a single vehicle crash should be asked by the investigating officer about the subject. Simply have them put their hands out in front of them and show what they do to make a left hand curve at 45 mph. Their knowledge will be obvious.

If they don't push on the left hand grip, they don't know how to control their bike.

The same question should be asked of every rider stopped for a traffic violation.

These two things could be done for free.

If you wanted to spend a little money, create some material that can be passed out by volunteers at every bike show. Or make a printable pamphlet to put online so riders can pass the word.

Gershon

[Charles Weber, Hendersonville, NC]

A wide gauge express railroad, say thirty or forty feet, would be much more efficient for moving freight, especially piggy back freight, than existing systems. This would be marvelous for moving cars across country inexpensively, fuel efficiently, and safely. You may see this discussed in detail in http://charles_w.tripod.com/widerr.html

Sincerely, Charles Weber

[thecomputerguy]

I appreciate Secretary Peter's efforts to improve rider safety, and this blog to encourage discussion.

I see two issues here: First is (as I understand) that the DOT label does not mean that any actual testing has taken place, only that the manufacturer certifies that the helmet would pass certain tests IF it were tested. I believe the testing standard itself is 27 years old. Second is that by having the DOT standard, it is essentially the government endorsing the helmet as "safe".

Personally, I seek out and wear the best quality riding gear available. However, I see lots of riders wearing the bare minimum
(half shell, DOT approved), and not wearing any other riding gear. At some point, the Government doesn't feel that it's their responsibility to tell riders that they must wear good gear via a law (except for helmets). I think that efforts to improve safety would be better spent on education of riders, instead of trying to improve or enforce helmet standards. Safety in riding is a whole suite of skills and behaviors that goes far beyond just putting on a $49.99 DOT approved half helmet.

I can certainly appreciate the Secretary improving the DOT program - as an inadequate program would actually make safety worse (by encouraging people to meet an inadequate "bare minimum" standard), but I think that road safety in general would improve more through improving the quality of rider training programs, rather than just enforcing a helmet law. God forbid there is ever a law that dictates that riders should wear full face helmets, or gloves, riding jackets, and over the ankle footwear, yet I think that most riders who have attended good rider training do. There are lots of dangerous things riders can do on motorcycles - in the big picture, whether or not they wear a DOT approved helmet seems like a rather trivial one. At a certain point, if you trust me on one of those "infernal machines", you have to trust my ability to choose whether or not to wear a helmet.

[Rick Abell]

Not wearing helmets sometimes starts with PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS letting kids ride bicycles, then 4 wheelers(ATVs) with no protection of any kind. In many cases they grow up thinking it is not cool to wear helmets.

[Carl Clauder]

I really love all the comments from the people that don't have a clue of what the motorcycling sport is all about. How about I decide the rules and laws for the things in life that they enjoy. "Let those who ride decide". Look at most auto wrecks and you'll see the broken glass head imprint in the windshields, don't see auto drivers being forced to wear DOT head protection. Whats fair should be fair. People are suppost to control the "Government", not the "Government" controlling the people. "Legalize Freedom" Please don't not post this, just because I have a different point of view!
A Rider from Oregon, Slim

[Citizen Kane]

I'd like to know who appointed these "Control Freaks" over the rest of us? Why do some people think they should make choices for the rest of us? It's NOT about safety, it's about CONTROL and I'm sick of it.
I agree with Slim from Oregon as I'm in Oregon as well.
"Let those who ride, decide". IT's NONE of your business if I choose to wear a helmet or not.

[Carla]

Riding a motorcycle is a different ball game. I feel most people should be very experienced in driving before even thinking about riding one. You have to anticipate and then act is a safe manner at all times. New safety rules are an excellent idea. Being 13% of the crashes is actually very high. thanks you for the stats. Wearing protective gear can possible save your life, so why not just wear it and take a chance in saving your life one day. Ride Safe!

[Ajlouny]

If I can ride padded from head to toe, even if I don't look that cool to protect myself from a brain injury, spine injury, back injury or losing a limb on a motorcycle, so be it. I would never put my life and limb in wearing a novelty item that hasn't been approved safety gear.