Not the point he wanted to make for sure.
http://news.yahoo.com/motorcyclist-crashes-helmet-law-protest-dies-120444840.html
http://news.yahoo.com/motorcyclist-crashes-helmet-law-protest-dies-120444840.html


Quote from Magna:
I saw this story when it first came out with the typical tagline that the media always tacks onto these kind of things..."Troopers say Contos likely would have survived if he'd been wearing a helmet." I'm sorry for the fellow who died, but he knew the risks and with an '83 Harley I'm sure he got to ride quite a bit. As to the ever-present tagline I've got this to say:
1) many helmets greatly restrict peripheral vision (you never hear the press say that wearing a helmet probably caused the accident...)
2) over the years I've seen much documentation that while helmets help protect the head many also contribute to the neck snapping on impact
3) so what if he "likely would have survived"? There's about 50,000 automobile deaths per year and we'd all likely survive if we only drove Hummers. Bottom line, they are not saying that out of grief for the dead, only to justify their restrictive laws
Anyway, I am fortunate to live in a location that doesn't have the nanny-state mentality of New York and is more concerned with not restricting liberty than protecting me from myself. I've been riding for years without a helmet and, frankly, there's nothing quite like it.![]()