Helmets drastically reduce the tremendous number of deaths caused by head injuries as well as reducing the severity of any nonfatal injuries to the head. In 2010 there were about 3700 people who were killed in motorcycle accidents (Naumann). With the helmet law in effect, close to 100 percent of motorcyclists wear a helmet. Without the law, only 50 percent of motorcyclists wear helmets. Also, death rates are twice as high in states without the law (Watson).
Motorcyclists are at a higher risk for injury due to the absence of safety features. Universal helmet laws will have the greatest impact for the increased use of helmets and decrease in motorcycle crash injuries and death. The audience for this paper would be motorcyclists, anyone interested in health care costs, and motorists interested in road safety. Motorcyclists safety enthusiasts understand the risks and advocate the use of helmets for all riders. Having the support from motorcyclists would not only encourage helmet use, but also encourage the need for universal helmet laws.
In miles driven, the motorcyclist are at a high risk of crash than an automobile driver and a study conducted by the university of California showed that wearing of helmet reduces the risk by 29 percent. So should all states require motorcyclists and passengers to wear helmets? (Motorcycle helmets, n.d) A motorcyclist without a helmet involved in an accident is more likely to suffer a brain injury as a motorcyclist wearing a helmet. Large number of motorcyclists’ are a victim of death each year debarring people from living a fulfilled life. Mostly because of head injuries sustained in accidents.
According to the article, “Paternalism & Its Discontents”, written for the American Journal of Public Health: in 1966, only three states, New York, Massachusetts, and Michigan had passed motorcycle helmet laws, but between 1967 and 1975, almost all states passed helmet laws to avoid penalties under the National Highway Safety Act which included withholding federal funding for highway programs. California was the only state to not have passed a mandatory motorcycle helmet law, which resulted in that state having the highest number of registered motorcycles and the highest number of fatal motorcycle crashes (Jones, Marion 210). As soon as states began to pass helmet laws, opponents began to constitutionally challenge these laws which focused primarily on two arguments. The first argument was that helmet laws violated the equal protection laws of the Fourteenth Amendment by discriminating against motorcycle riders as a class, and the second was that motorcycle helmet laws were an infringement on the riders’ liberty. Finally, in 1976, the Senate
The Fallacy of Gun Control in America COM/215 The Fallacy of Gun Control in America Proposed gun control laws that ban gun ownership are a violation of every American’s Constitutional right to keep and bear arms and should be rejected. The debate concerning gun control has recently become a major point of contention in America. Any federal law that affects the nation must be made using rational and logical analysis. These analyses should be based on individual rights and perhaps even a little common sense. Although these ideals seem simple to many people, they are lost on the majority of the Democratic Party in America.
Teenagers are reckless and we must do everything reasonable to prevent deaths. Raising the driving age will cut the number of accidents on the roads. Teenage drivers are much more likely to have accidents than older drivers. In the USA there were over 30 000 deaths in crashes involving 15-17 year old drivers between 1995 and 2004 (Rocky Mountain Insurance Information Association, RMIIA). Raising the driving age by a year or two will greatly reduce these accidents and deaths.
Using Fear Appeal to Create, An Effective Bike Helmet Campaign Only Tomato Heads let their kid’s bike without a helmet. Annually, nearly 47 percent of 280,000 children treated in an emergency room incur traumatic brain injuries. Properly fitted helmets could reduce the risk of bike related brain injuries by 88 percent. A bike helmet is thus an essential, not discretionary, bike safety tool. These types of facts, if circulated more broadly, could shift bike- riding families from being arbitrary helmet users to self-mandates because to do otherwise would be socially and perhaps financially punitive.
The Supreme Court ruled on June 28th 2013, that individual Americans have a constitutional right to own guns- to all cities and states for the first time. New gun control laws will only farther erode our rights. One of the strongest arguments in favor of people who want to carry firearms is that nine of the states that have the lowest violent crime rate in the country are those that allow its people the right to carry guns. Gun-control laws have never, and can never, reduce violent crime. That's because anti-gun laws don't affect criminals, who ignore the laws.
Just a few of the laws that Dianne is proposing is: Ban on certain more dangerous firearms, ban on importation of assault weapons and large capacity magazines, and no magazines more than ten rounds. this laws are intended to stop unnecessary use of firearms. although these laws may be able to stop the majority of criminals from getting weapons, its impossible to rid all weapons from the hands of criminals. These laws may represent the wrong balance, and could hurt America rather than helping it. Other
Gun control ENG/102 8/11/10 Brian Kevin Gun control 1 Introduction: Gun control advocates have cried foul, because of the Supreme Court 2010 ruling they believe will damage the chances gun control laws to reduce crime. While many people consider gun control to be too restrictive, advocates are of the mind that we should remove all the guns, at all cost. The Supreme Court ruling has mandated that state and city governments have no choice but to respect the Second Amendment of their citizens. While the ruling does not completely abolish current gun restrictions, it does weaken the ability of the local government to