CA - Nice article out today on the Shoe Drive

OFF THE WIRE
JOSE QUINTERO

JOSE QUINTERO

Benson hopes to crank up shoe drive efforts

BARSTOW — Nick Benson Sr. is in the midst of serious competition with the San Diego area.

    Benson and the rest of the High Desert were challenged by his buddies, who sponsor the San Diego Harley-Davidson dealership and Pro Train Dog Trainers, to see who would collect more pairs of old shoes to be donated to a Florida-based nonprofit organization.

    Benson said he has collected approximately 1,500 shoes and the last day to donate old shoes is Nov. 9.

    “San Diego is a larger area, and I really feel if the High Desert really goes to town, we could exceed last year’s amount of total shoes collected,” Benson said. “So far we have roughly 1,500 shoes and I know if our communities take an interest in the cause like last year, we can get it done.”

    Benson says he was challenged because he was responsible for the High Desert coming together to contribute approximately 6,000 pairs of used shoes to Illusion Cycles, in Westminster, in their quest to gather 25,000 last year. If the goal was met, the nonprofit organization would have given the American Solider Network $10,000 to benefit the Wounded Warrior Battalion of Camp Pendleton. Florida-based Soles 4 Souls refurbishes old shoes for people in impoverished countries.

    The goal was short about 12,000 pairs of shoes, but the American Soldier Network still received a check based on the total weight of the amount of shoes collected.

    “This drive helps Third-World countries and more importantly our veterans,” Benson said. “There is no cheaper way to show our troops that we care about them than to clean out your closets and donate your old shoes. This is now a national event so there is a lot of competition, but I know that High Desert can be No. 1 again this year.”

    According to Benson, Annie Nelson, founder of the American Soldier Network, has reached out to various of her friends from across the country. Benson said he heard thousands of old shoes are being collected in the east. He is sure the 25,000 goal will be met, but is seeking a large portion of the shoes to come from the High Desert.

    Last year, students from Quail Valley Middle School in Phelan joined the effort and collected 1,708 pairs of old shoes.

    Benson had several shoe drop-off points throughout the High Desert last year, including the Victorville Harley-Davidson dealership. The motorcycle dealership is back on board this year, along with David’s Automotive Repair in Hesperia. The motorcycle dealership also donated a truck and trailer to deliver all the shoes they collected to Benson’s store in Barstow.

    Benson has also set up multiple drop off points in the Barstow area:

    — Nick’s Computer Works, 25434 Main St., Barstow

    — Barstow Senior Center, 555 Melissa Ave., Barstow

    — Barstow Senior Thrift Store, 907 E. Williams St., Barstow

    — Barstow Motorcycle Center, 2380 W. Main St., Barstow

    Jose Quintero can be reached at 760-256-4122 or JQuintero@DesertDispatch.com. You can also follow him on Twitter at @DD_JQuintero.

- See more at: http://www.vvdailypress.com/article/20141029/NEWS/141029749#sthash.7ihmdEho.dpuf

Benson hopes to crank up shoe drive efforts

CA - Community: National City Police Department receives grant for special traffic enforcement and crash prevention.

OFF THE WIRE

Read don't know where u got it.....

The National City Police Department has been awarded a $180,900.00 grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) for a year-long program of special enforcement and public awareness efforts to prevent traffic related deaths and injuries. The National City Police Department will use the funding as part of the city’s ongoing commitment to keep our roadways safe and improve the quality of life through both enforcement and education. “The National City Police Department is committed to providing the highest level of traffic safety for our residents and community. We will accomplish this by working in partnership with residents and businesses to create public awareness, outreach and conducting special enforcement operations to prevent traffic-related deaths and injuries,” said National City Police Chief Manuel Rodriguez. After falling dramatically between 2006 and 2010, the number of persons killed and injured in traffic collisions saw slight increases in 2011 and 2012. Particularly worrisome are recent increases in pedestrian and motorcycle fatalities and the dangers of distracting technologies. This grant funding will provide opportunities to combat these and other devastating problems such as drunk and drugged driving and speeding. “California’s roadways are still among the safest in the nation,” said OTS Director Rhonda Craft. “But to meet future mobility, safety, and sustainability objectives, we must create safer roadways for all users. The National City Police Department will be using these and other resources to reach the vision we all share – Toward zero deaths, every 1 counts.” Activities that the grant will fund include: • Educational presentations • DUI checkpoints • DUI saturation patrols • Motorcycle safety enforcement • Distracted driving enforcement • Seat belt and child safety seat enforcement • Speed, red light, and stop sign enforcement • Warrant service operations targeting multiple DUI offenders • Compilation of DUI “Hot Sheets,” identifying worst-of-the- worst DUI offenders • Specialized DUI and drugged driving training such as Standardized Field Sobriety Testing (SFST), Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement (ARIDE), and Drug Recognition Evaluator (DRE) • Court “sting” operations to cite individuals driving from DUI court after ignoring their license suspension or revocation • Stakeout operations to observe the “worst-of-the-worst” repeat DUI offender probationers with suspended or revoked driver licenses Funding for this program is from the California Office of Traffic Safety through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.For full details, view this message on the web.

Sent by National City Police Department 1200 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950

- Cop Explodes & Threatens a Man With Jail For Saying “God Bless You”

OFF THE WIRE

By Jay Syrmopoulos

Cop Explodes & Threatens a Man With Jail For Saying “God Bless You”

(Video: http://bit.ly/1pZbhLH)

The video picks up with the officer telling the man in a condescending and annoyed tone, “Have a good day, get outta my face before I decide that this might not be the best judgment that I made.”

Miami Beach, Fla. – A video posted to YouTube on October 27, by Albert Valdes, shows a Miami Beach police officer, who identified himself as officer MacLeod, engaging in some extremely unprofessional behavior towards a citizen during a traffic stop for an obstructed license plate.
While we don’t see the earlier interaction between the man and the officer, the video shows the officer becoming enraged as he speaks to the citizen.
The video picks up with the MacLeod telling the man in a condescending and annoyed tone,
“Have a good day, get outta my face before I decide that this might not be the best judgment that I made.”
Valdes replies, “You have a great day too.”
MacLeod then responds, “Trust me I will.”
Valdes replies back, “God bless you.”
At this point the officer becomes livid and decides to throw around his perceived authority over the citizen and threaten the man him with jail, as he obviously feels disrespected in some way.
Officer MacLeod says,

“You know what, fuck it. I’ll throw your ass in jail. You wanna be a sarcastic bitch, I’ll be fuckin a bigger bitch. You’re fuckin with the wrong dude bro. I’ve been here longer than you’ve fuckin been alive. I’ve put up with more shit than you can ever think of, so if you wanna test me again you’ll be finding Dade County jail real fuckin hunky dory tonight.”

For those that think perhaps this is a “reap what you sow” scenario, that simply isn’t the case.
Perhaps Valdes was being sarcastic with the officer, but a citizen is under no obligation to not be sarcastic to an officer. On the other hand, the officer is a professional bound by a strict code of ethical conduct dictating how they are to conduct themselves in dealing with the public.
The officer is clearly in the wrong as he arbitrarily threatens a man with jail for telling him, “Have a great day too…  god bless you.”
When did talking sarcastically become a jailable offense?
No matter how sarcastic these words may have been, the abuse of authority in this situation is stunning.
When the officer accepted the job as an officer of the law he agreed to follow certain rules of conduct that come along with his taxpayer-funded salary. Even when challenged by citizens or talked to with perceived “disrespect,” an officer is still bound by the ethical requirements of this code of conduct.
Detective Vivian Thayer said Valdes has not filed a complaint, but an internal affairs investigation has already begun into the incident, according to the Miami Herald.
“Even though we don’t have a formal complaint, we are being proactive and investigating it,” she said.
If the officer can’t handle the proverbial heat of dealing with citizens in a professional manner perhaps he needs to find a line of work better suited for him, or better yet perhaps the taxpayers should relieve him of that responsibility if he can’t or won’t deal with the public in a more professional manner.
One thing is certain, every instance of officers abusing citizens that comes to light, whether verbally or physically, simply continues to erode any remaining public confidence or credibility that law enforcement once had.

---

Jay Syrmopoulos is an investigative journalist, freethinker, researcher, and ardent opponent of authoritarianism. He is currently a graduate student at University of Denver pursuing a masters in Global Affairs. Jay’s work has previously been published on BenSwann.com and WeAreChange.org. You can follow him on Twitter @sirmetropolis and on Facebook at Sir Metropolis.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cop-explodes-threatens-man-jail-god-bless-you/#thTlJgVgidDWDdz1.99

BABE OF THE DAY

New Motorcycle Helmet Laws App Aids Bikers on Road Trips

OFF THE WIRE

Dear Philip:

I came across your website while doing research on national motorcycle helmet laws.  I found your website very interesting and informative.  The Michigan law firm that I work, Buckfire & Buckfire, P.C. created a State by State Motorcycle Helmet Laws Infographic Map to visually display the helmet law requirements in every State, and have now taken it one step further as a resource to bikers. We recently created the FREE Motorcycle Helmet Laws App! 

Motorcyclists can now access important helmet law information quickly and conveniently right from your smartphone with the Motorcycle Helmet Laws App.  The App is completely FREE and is available for the iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, and Android. It has already received five star raving reviews from bikers nationally, and is continuing to be recognized in motorcycle publications and by motorcycle clubs and chapters worldwide.

The app is completely FREE. Features include, but not limited to, access helmet laws in multiple countries, GPS Bike Finder allow users to place a GPS pin for their bike’s location and set a time for when the user needs to return, as well as quickly and easily email your current location to your friends, submit images of the cool helmets and see your images in the cool helmet gallery, utilize the accident checklist – what to do after a motorcycle accident, receive exclusive discounts at some of your favorite bike shops around the country, and more!

I have pasted below both the iTunes and Google Play link so that you may be able to download the free app. You can also view more information about the app as well as the QR codes for download, and watch a demo video of how the app works at http://bit.ly/MIMotorcycleAccidentLawyers

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/motorcyle-helmet-laws/id573720859?mt=8

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.app_buckfire.layout&feature=search_result#?t=W251bGwsMSwyLDEsImNvbS5hcHBfYnVja2ZpcmUubGF5b3V0Il0

Feel free to copy and paste the QR codes to place the codes directly on your site. Please share this app with other fellow bikers that you believe will also find it interesting or beneficial to themselves and others.  If you have a Facebook site, we would appreciate if you would vote it a "like" (if you do of course) by “liking” this page http://bit.ly/MIMotorcycleAccidentLawyers), and also use your Twitter, Google Buzz, Digg, and other accounts to promote it as well.

Thanks for your time and consideration. If you have any further questions about the app, please feel free to contact me via email at marketing@buckfirelaw.com  Thanks and have a wonderful day!

Catherine Kazda

Buckfire & Buckfire P.C.

25800 Northwestern Highway Ste. 890

Southfield, Michigan 48075

(248) 569-4646

Fax: (248) 569-6737

marketingassistant@buckfirelaw.com

www.BuckfireLaw.com

BABE OF THE DAY

BABE OF THE DAY

CA - DUI Checkpoint Release

OFF THE WIRE

This is the form letter issued by the OTS to the different police districts who they fund for DUI check points. Notice the wording that  has been added . This is the new name for their DUI check points.

                                          (D.U.I. DRIVER LICENSE CHECK POINTS)

What are the OTS people doing funding  an illegal stop for driver license enforcement that has nothing to do with DUI Safety but everything to do with an illegal stop and investigation and search and impoundment. The OTS is way out of line here, I took this off of their website,

PRESS RELEASE

For Immediate Release:                    Contact: 

[Date]         Name / Phone No. / Email

DUI/Drivers License Checkpoint Planned this Weekend

Anytown, CA – Anytown Police Department Traffic Unit will be conducting a DUI/Drivers License Checkpoint on Date, at location [Depending on your Dept Policy add location or/] at an undisclosed location within the city limits between the hours of #:00 p.m. to #:30 a.m.

The deterrent effect of DUI checkpoints is a proven resource in reducing the number of persons killed and injured in alcohol or drug involved crashes. Research shows that crashes involving an impaired driver can be reduced by up to 20 percent when well-publicized DUI checkpoints and proactive DUI patrols are conducted routinely.

In California, this deadly crime led to 802 deaths in 2012 because someone failed to designate a sober driver. Nationally, the latest data shows nearly 10,000 were killed by an impaired driver. “Over the course of the past three years, DUI collisions have claimed # lives and resulted in### injury crashes harming ### of our friends and neighbors,” said Sgt Doe. [**Please insert your city’s DUI stats]

Officers will be looking for signs of alcohol and/or drug impairment with officers checking drivers for proper licensing delaying motorists only momentarily. When possible, specially trained officers will be available to evaluate those suspected of drug-impaired driving.  Recent statistics reveal that 30 percent of drivers in fatal crashes had one or more drugs in their systems.  A study of active drivers showed more tested positive for drugs that may impair driving (14 percent) than did for alcohol (7.3 percent).  Of the drugs, marijuana was most prevalent, at 7.4 percent, slightly more than alcohol.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), checkpoints have provided the most effective documented results of any of the DUI enforcement strategies, while also yielding considerable cost savings of $6 for every $1 spent.  Nearly 90 percent of California drivers approve of DUI checkpoints.

DUI Checkpoints are placed in locations based on collision statistics and frequency of DUI arrests affording the greatest opportunity for achieving drunk and drugged driving deterrence. Locations are chosen with safety considerations for the officers and the public.

Drivers caught driving impaired can expect the impact of a DUI arrest to include jail time, fines, fees, DUI classes, other expenses that can exceed $10,000 not to mention the embarrassment when friends and family find out.

Funding for this checkpoint is provided to Anytown Police Department by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, reminding everyone to ‘Report Drunk Driver – Call 9-1-1’.

# # #

BABE OF THE DAY

ALL ABOUT THE BUTT`S TUESDAY

CA - 2014 Lane Splitting Survey

OFF THE WIRE
agingrebel.com
The Sacramento Bee ran a story yesterday about the most recent results of a lane splitting survey conducted annually in California for the last three years. The story was picked up by The Associated Press and has been widely reported in the last 24 hours although the survey on which it is based is actually five months old.
The report has the unwieldy title “Motorcycle Lane-Share Study Among California Motorcyclists And Drivers 2014 And Comparison To 2012 And 2013 Data.” It was conducted by a Ewald and Wasserman Research Consultants for the California Office of Traffic Safety and The Safe Transportation Research and Education Center at the University of California at Berkeley and the headline is that more California motorcyclists are lane splitting on both freeways and surface streets than ever before. The sub headline is that unless you are stupid about lane splitting it is no more dangerous than anything else you are likely to do on a motorcycle.
Lane splitting does in fact actually lower your chances of being struck from behind by a car. The bad news is that you are a little more likely to run into something when you lane split than when you just sit safely in the middle of your lane.

California Riding

California, which for a couple of decades in the last century had a reputation as a great place to ride a motorcycle on great roads, has always been the most rational of all the states about lane splitting – or as it has often been formally described, “lane sharing.”
A couple of years ago, the California Highway Patrol actually acknowledged that it is legal to split lanes in the Golden State and issued a brief set of “Lane Splitting General Guidelines” so that bikers would at least know what would and would not get them a ticket.
The guidelines told bikers and cops to stop worrying about crossing the white line that divides lanes and to just ride cautiously. Cautiously meant not going more than ten miles an hour faster than other traffic, not splitting lanes going faster than 40 miles per hour, splitting only the far left lanes and using “reasonable care.” At the time, it seemed like a useful thing for a big police department to say so it wasn’t long before somebody objected.
A gadfly named Kenneth Mandler, who has a business advising people about how to get state jobs, took offense. He claimed the Highway Patrol had created an “underground regulation” when it published “guidelines for safe lane splitting” so the CHP took the guidelines down. But they are still easy to find on the web and most police departments in California seem to have embraced the reasoning in the guidelines whether the regulation they offer is underground or not.

More Commuters

The 2014 update to the ongoing study is intended to make everybody a slightly more informed motorcyclist. It found that more people were commuting on motorcycles in 2014 than in the previous two years. It found that about 40 percent of California riders used their bikes mostly on the weekends but about 38 percent of riders use their motorcycles every day.
About 40 percent of the bikers who ride six or seven days a week split lanes on California’s freeways whenever they ride while only about seven percent of infrequent riders, who ride once or less a week, do. Taken as a whole, 71 percent of California’s motorcyclists sometimes split lanes on surface roads which is a ten percent increase over 2013. Sixty-two percent of all riders in the state sometimes split lanes on both surface streets and freeways which is a more than seven percent increase over the previous year.
The younger the rider the more likely he is to split lanes. Riders are splitting at slightly faster speeds in stop and go traffic but overall riders are going a little slower this year than last when they split.
Motorcyclists who split are most concerned about drivers who text when driving and that problem may be getting worse. About six percent more riders listed that as their top concern in 2014 than last year.

People In Cars

The publication of the Highway Patrol’s guidelines and a subsequent ad campaign made California safer for bikers. Sixty-one percent of California’s vehicle operators now know that lane splitting is legal which is about five percentage points more than last year.
The younger a driver is, the more likely he is to be aware than lane splitting is legal in California. Ten percent more drivers between 18 and 35 now know the practice is legal than knew last year. In California, sixty percent of all drivers now know lane splitting is legal on freeways. But only about half of all drivers know it is legal to split on surface streets.
About eight percent of drivers who don’t know that lane splitting is legal approve of the practice anyway. Men are more likely to approve of lane splitting than women.
You can download a complete copy of the 51-page survey here.

Lane Splitting with CHP Motorcycle Police Officer in Los Angeles.

Not a lot of videos out there on Motor Officers splitting lanes so I figured I'd post this one up, class act Officer for letting me by. Would recommend watching in HD, enjoy!

VIDEO
http://youtu.be/sVlMFx3-Vsw

CHP Removes Tips For Lane-Splitting From Website Amid
Concerns They Were Endorsing The Practice...

VIDEO http://youtu.be/vmt_J52MU7o

 The CHP does not endorse lane-splitting even if their website suggested to motorcyclists how do practice the maneuver more safely. Rachel Kim reports.

THANK YOU
 OC VAGO & STROKER

The gadfly named Kenneth Mandler sounds like a jackass.
From Wikipedia:
“A gadfly is a person who upsets the status quo by posing upsetting or novel questions.”
also:
“In modern politics, a gadfly is someone who persistently challenges people in positions of power, the status quo or a popular position.[3] For example, Morris Kline wrote “There is a function for the gadfly who poses questions that many specialists would like to overlook. Polemics are healthy.”[4] The word may be uttered in a pejorative sense, while at the same time be accepted as a description of honourable work or civic duty.[5]”

For my part, I think the apt definition of Mr. Mandler should be “Whiney little Putz!”

BABE OF THE DAY

BABE OF THE DAY

MICHIGHAN - Ready to put them helmets back on?

OFF THE WIRE
Senator Rebeka Warren introduced a bill to reinstate the helmet law. It was referred to the Transportation committee. You can check out who the members of the Transportation Committee are at the link below. AND CALL OR EMAIL THEM!
That being said she is a democrat, and most of the committee is made up of republicans, including the sponsor of our helmet repeal bill Senator Pavlov. It is very doubtful that this bill will ever see daylight on the senate floor. BUT, make no mistake that our freedom of choice regarding helmets will be challenged over and over and over again. Only WE can make sure we keep it free.
Senate Bill 1120 (2014)

Sponsor
Rebekah Warren

Categories  Vehicles, motorcycles; Vehicles, equipment; Traffic control, traffic regulation

Vehicles; motorcycles; motorcycle helmet requirement; provide for. Amends sec. 658 of 1949 PA 300 (MCL 257.658).

Bill Document Formatting Information (gray icons indicate that the action did not occur or that the document is not available)

Documents

	Senate Introduced Bill Introduced bills appear as they were introduced and reflect no subsequent amendments or changes.
	As Passed by the Senate As Passed by the Senate is the bill, as introduced, that includes any adopted Senate amendments.
	As Passed by the House As Passed by the House is the bill, as received from the Senate, that includes any adopted House amendments.
	Senate Enrolled Bill Enrolled bill is the version passed in identical form by both houses of the Legislature.

History(House actions in lowercase, Senate actions in UPPERCASE)

Date	Journal	Action
10/22/2014	SJ 71 Pg. 1842	INTRODUCED BY SENATOR REBEKAH WARREN
10/22/2014	SJ 71 Pg. 1842	REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

CA - Cop Arrests Woman for DUI, Then He Steals Nude Photos from Her Phone

OFF THE WIRE

By John Vibes

California Highway Patrol officer Sean Harrington, of Martinez, California is accused of forwarding nude photos of a DUI suspect from her cellphone to his, while she was locked up in a holding cell.

According to a spokesperson for the CHP, Harrington is still on the police force, but he has been reassigned to desk duty while the accusations against him are being investigated. Just this week, prosecutors suggested that they have enough evidence against Harrington to go to trail.
“We’ve been investigating this for quite some time, the investigation is coming to a conclusion and we expect to make a charging decision this week,” deputy district attorney Barry Grove said in a statement on Wednesday.
According to investigators, Harrington searched a 23-year-old woman’s phone after he arrested her for a DUI and discovered six explicit photographs. Harrington then forwarded the photographs to himself, and the victim suspects that he shared the photos with other officers.
Harrington did attempt to erase the record of the media transfer, and the transfer was locally deleted from her phone. However, a record of the woman’s iCloud account showed that her explicit photos were transferred to another number while she was in custody. She then discovered that the number belonged to her arresting officer.
Rick Madsen, the attorney who will be representing the unnamed victim said that his client was traumatized by her arrest and the following experience.
“We think it’s a horrendous breach of the public trust. We believe Officer Harrington committed a clandestine and illegal intrusion into her privacy which is unspeakable considering his sworn duty to protect the public. My client remains understandably distraught as we await further information about who else may possess the photos and what further investigation may uncover,” Madsen said.
Last week, investigators served a search warrant at Harrington’s home and confiscated his iPhone 5S and Apple laptop containing photographs, text messages and instant messages from the woman’s phone, according to the search warrant.
“We’re confident that the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office is committed to determining the scope of this matter, but it’s clear it’s not isolated to one victim or one particular officer because we believe multiple search warrants have been served. As humiliating as this has been to my client, she came forward to prevent the same indignity from ever occurring again,” Madsen said.

---

John Vibes is an author, researcher and investigative journalist who takes a special interest in the counter culture and the drug war. In addition to his writing and activist work he is also the owner of a successful music promotion company. In 2013, he became one of the organizers of the Free Your Mind Conference, which features top caliber speakers and whistle-blowers from all over the world. You can contact him and stay connected to his work at his Facebook page. You can find his 65 chapter Book entitled “Alchemy of the Timeless Renaissance” at bookpatch.com.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cop-steals-nude-photos-womans-phone-dui-arrest/#VpZ6mzTg8PxHe8iL.99

ALL OVER AMERICA

OFF THE WIRE
ALL OVER AMERICA the wrong people are given guns and badges. This is easily proven by their actions, and lack of ethics. Such as officers who stop the public from video taping events, not to forget those who destroy video evidence. The fact is police are never held liable or accountable for their actions, even when totally illegal and criminal.
LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF
This video shows how police abuse power and even cause events which end with the use of deadly force. Officers abuse their rights and often due to ego cause problems where none exist.
http://youtu.be/jAFWYCbOeIs

MURDER OF JOHN MOODY BY MANTECA CALIFORNIA POLICE DEPARTMENT
One of the most obvious murders by a police officer happened in Manteca California by Officer John Moody who stalked Ernest Duenez Jr. and when Ernest exited his vehicle as ordered by Moody he was shot to death, not by one shot but 11 times. No weapon was ever found, regardless of how John Moody tried to imply this. Warning Video is Graphic http://youtu.be/LhnY17F_eiQ
Full Details on the Ernest Duenez Jr. at
http://www.uglyjudge.com/victims/california/manteca/ernest-duenez-jr/

Tipton Case Won’t Go Away

OFF THE WIRE

The Iron Order Motorcycle Club, the “law abiding,” three piece patch, gun toting, snitching, trouble making, motorcycle club led by an edgy, former Cinnabon executive, a bumpkin lawyer, a pogue lieutenant colonel, a thousand or so mentally disturbed cops and assorted other weekend tough guys has not yet harangued the murder of Black Piston Zachariah “Nas T” Tipton out of the historical record.

As of today, Tipton was still murdered following a blatantly staged and avoidable confrontation in one of the parking spaces that flank Hopson Road outside Nippers Beach Grille in Jacksonville Beach, Florida. Jacksonville prosecutor Angela Corey still hasn’t figured out how to charge the shooter without drawing attention to the appalling incompetence and corruptness of the Jacksonville Beach police. And Derek Kinner has another 1,300 words about the case in today’s edition of Folio Magazine. You can read his full report here.

Shooter

Kinner summarizes Tipton’s murder like this: “While many clubs have rules respecting others’ patches and colors, as well as territories, the Iron Order refuses to acknowledge those rules, and, many in the biker community say, use them to provoke altercations across the country. The indifference to the rules has led to many skirmishes since the Iron Order’s inception on July 4, 2004, but the shooting at Nippers has quickly become a watershed moment.”

Kinner says he has learned the name of the shooter in the case: “both through multiple sources familiar with the shooting and through a “Stored Vehicle Report” from the Jacksonville Beach Police Department that the magazine has obtained. (That report names the owner of a motorcycle that was towed from the scene as part of a homicide investigation.) The shooter is a medic stationed at Camp Blanding; like many other members and prospects of the Iron Order, he is affiliated with the military or law enforcement. The Stored Vehicle Report lists his address as being in Middleburg, though two sources say he moved immediately after the shooting out of concern for his safety. One source said the military assisted with the move.”

Camp Blanding Joint Training Center is a training base for the Florida National Guard and for certain members of the Army Reserve.

Kinner does not make a connection between the immediate relocation of the shooter and the job duties of international club officer Michael “Cgar” Couse. At the time of the shooting Crouse was the International Sergeant at Arms for the Iron Order. Crouse is now Vice-President of the club. Crouse is a Lieutenant Colonel assigned to the United States Army Reserve Command. He has described his duties there as: “…a Force Development Officer responsible for the full integration of all TDA and MTOE structure for the various 2 Star Commands. Conducts thorough analysis of the current and projected force structure and prepare options and recommendations to the current command.” In other words, Crouse reassigns soldiers. Crouse has previously used his staff position to identify, harass and threaten critics of the Iron Order who have served in the Army Reserve.

Crisis Management

Kinner extensively quotes former club President Ray “Izod” Lubesky.  According to Kinner, “Lubesky says he’s confident that when all the facts come out, the family and the public will understand what really happened that night. He says Iron Order members are sympathetic to Tipton’s family members, the real victims in the case.”

On July 6, ten days after Tipton’s murder, Lubesky told Iron Order members: “It is critical that all brothers follow our directions on what is said to everyone outside our club.”

“This is about crisis management at a time we are protecting our club, our prospect, and our brothers. This is our area of expertise. This is our responsibility. Your responsibility is to follow the sheet music, march to the drum and keep your mouths shut, both internally and externally. Only say what you are told to say. If you post something stupid on the forum, Facebook, Topix or any other social media we will take it down or tell you to take it down. This is not a time in our history we will be asking. Asking sinks ships and gets people hurt in times like this. Let us do our job.”

Apparently, washing and spin drying Tipton’s murder is still Lubesky’s responsibility. Kinner reports that current Iron Order President Patrick “Brit” Ward of West Palm Beach, Florida “did not return Folio Weekly’s phone calls.”

BABE OF THE DAY

MARTINEZ, Calif - CHP officer accused of forwarding nude suspect photos

OFF THE WIRE
Officer finds photos while booking 23-year-old woman.

MARTINEZ, Calif. —Court documents show a California Highway Patrol officer is suspected of secretly sending nude photos of a DUI suspect from her cell phone to his own phone.
The Contra Costa Times cites records that reveal a Contra Costa District Attorney investigator has recommended felony computer theft charges against 35-year-old Sean Harrington.
The CHP says the five-year veteran based in Dublin has been assigned to desk duties during the probe.
Investigators say Harrington discovered and forwarded to himself six explicit photos while booking the 23-year-old San Ramon woman in August. The photos depict the woman, who is not being identified, in a bikini and in various states of undress.
Prosecutors said Wednesday they could decide any day whether or not to press charges.
Efforts to reach Harrington for comment were unsuccessful.

Read more: http://www.kcra.com/news/chp-officer-accused-of-forwarding-nude-suspect-photos/29296170#ixzz3H1X1vomk

FLORIDA - Tipton Case Won’t Go Away

OFF THE WIRE
agingrebel.com
The Iron Order Motorcycle Club, the “law abiding,” three piece patch, gun toting, snitching, trouble making, motorcycle club led by an edgy, former Cinnabon executive, a bumpkin lawyer, a pogue lieutenant colonel, a thousand or so mentally disturbed cops and assorted other weekend tough guys has not yet harangued the murder of Black Piston Zachariah “Nas T” Tipton out of the historical record.
As of today, Tipton was still murdered following a blatantly staged and avoidable confrontation in one of the parking spaces that flank Hopson Road outside Nippers Beach Grille in Jacksonville Beach, Florida. Jacksonville prosecutor Angela Corey still hasn’t figured out how to charge the shooter without drawing attention to the appalling incompetence and corruptness of the Jacksonville Beach police. And Derek Kinner has another 1,300 words about the case in today’s edition of Folio Magazine. You can read his full report here.

Shooter

Kinner summarizes Tipton’s murder like this: “While many clubs have rules respecting others’ patches and colors, as well as territories, the Iron Order refuses to acknowledge those rules, and, many in the biker community say, use them to provoke altercations across the country. The indifference to the rules has led to many skirmishes since the Iron Order’s inception on July 4, 2004, but the shooting at Nippers has quickly become a watershed moment.”
Kinner says he has learned the name of the shooter in the case: “both through multiple sources familiar with the shooting and through a “Stored Vehicle Report” from the Jacksonville Beach Police Department that the magazine has obtained. (That report names the owner of a motorcycle that was towed from the scene as part of a homicide investigation.) The shooter is a medic stationed at Camp Blanding; like many other members and prospects of the Iron Order, he is affiliated with the military or law enforcement. The Stored Vehicle Report lists his address as being in Middleburg, though two sources say he moved immediately after the shooting out of concern for his safety. One source said the military assisted with the move.”
Camp Blanding Joint Training Center is a training base for the Florida National Guard and for certain members of the Army Reserve.
Kinner does not make a connection between the immediate relocation of the shooter and the job duties of international club officer Michael “Cgar” Couse. At the time of the shooting Crouse was the International Sergeant at Arms for the Iron Order. Crouse is now Vice-President of the club. Crouse is a Lieutenant Colonel assigned to the United States Army Reserve Command. He has described his duties there as: “…a Force Development Officer responsible for the full integration of all TDA and MTOE structure for the various 2 Star Commands. Conducts thorough analysis of the current and projected force structure and prepare options and recommendations to the current command.” In other words, Crouse reassigns soldiers. Crouse has previously used his staff position to identify, harass and threaten critics of the Iron Order who have served in the Army Reserve.

Crisis Management

Kinner extensively quotes former club President Ray “Izod” Lubesky.  According to Kinner, “Lubesky says he’s confident that when all the facts come out, the family and the public will understand what really happened that night. He says Iron Order members are sympathetic to Tipton’s family members, the real victims in the case.”
On July 6, ten days after Tipton’s murder, Lubesky told Iron Order members: “It is critical that all brothers follow our directions on what is said to everyone outside our club.”
“This is about crisis management at a time we are protecting our club, our prospect, and our brothers. This is our area of expertise. This is our responsibility. Your responsibility is to follow the sheet music, march to the drum and keep your mouths shut, both internally and externally. Only say what you are told to say. If you post something stupid on the forum, Facebook, Topix or any other social media we will take it down or tell you to take it down. This is not a time in our history we will be asking. Asking sinks ships and gets people hurt in times like this. Let us do our job.”

Apparently, washing and spin drying Tipton’s murder is still Lubesky’s responsibility. Kinner reports that current Iron Order President Patrick “Brit” Ward of West Palm Beach, Florida “did not return Folio Weekly’s phone calls.”

Motorcycle lane-splitting study finds: the more speed, the more danger

OFF THE WIRE
By Tony Bizjak
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/transportation/article3204990.html

A yearlong California study of motorcycle lane-splitting has concluded the practice is no more dangerous than motorcycling in general, if the rider is traveling at speeds similar to or only slightly faster than the surrounding traffic.
The maneuver becomes more dangerous, however, when a motorcyclist is speeding or riding more than 10 mph faster than the traffic the cyclist is passing.
Lane-splitting occurs when a motorcyclist passes other vehicles by riding between them along the lane line. California is the only state that does not ban the controversial practice, frowned on by many car drivers who consider it a safety hazard and applauded by some motorcyclists who say they consider lane-splitting a safety tool that allows them to get out of risky situations.
Lane-splitting in California appears to be on the rise. The state Office of Traffic Safety study found 62 percent of motorcyclists say they lane-split on both freeways and other roads, a 7.5-percentage-point increase over 2013. Seventy-five percent of riders between the ages of 18 and 24 report they lane-split on all roads, including freeways. Notably, the survey found that motorcyclists were splitting lanes at slightly slower speeds and in slightly slower traffic than the year before.

Related Stories

Back-seat Driver: Motorcycle lane-splitters are slowing down

Related Links

California Lane Splitting Crash Analysis.pdf

California Lane Splitting Habits Survey.pdf

The lane-splitting crash study, conducted by UC Berkeley and commissioned by the California Highway Patrol and the Office of Traffic Safety, also found that lane-splitters are less likely to be rear-ended by car drivers but are more likely to rear-end other vehicles.
Lane-splitters had a greater chance of being involved in a crash during the morning and afternoon commute hours than motorcyclists who were not lane-splitting. The study also found that lane-splitting cyclists who were involved in crashes typically wore safer helmets than motorcyclists as a whole.
“What we learned is, if you lane-split in a safe or prudent manner, it is no more dangerous than motorcycling in any other circumstance,” Office of Traffic Safety spokesman Chris Cochran said. “If you are speeding or have a wide speed differential (with other traffic), that is where the fatalities came about.”
The study was conducted statewide by 80 law enforcement agencies who filled out a supplemental information sheet involving 8,262 motorcycle riders in collisions.
The study’s authors said the report, the first of its kind about lane-splitting, is limited in scope and will be followed up by more detailed analysis, including looking at rider age, rider gender, motorcycle characteristics and collision and roadway characteristics.
The CHP last year published written guidelines on when motorcyclists should or should not lane-split, suggesting riders should not travel more than 10 mph faster than surrounding traffic and should not lane-split at all if other vehicles are traveling faster than 30 mph. The CHP took those guidelines down, however, after a disagreement over whether publishing them constituted illegal regulations.

Call The Bee’s Tony Bizjak, (916) 321-1059.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/transportation/article3204990.html#storylink=cpy

Please join us Tuesday Nov. 11, 2014 for Veterans + Labor Motorcycle Run.

OFF THE WIRE
Please join us Tuesday Nov. 11, 2014 for Veterans + Labor Motorcycle Run. All info for the event is on the flyer. inbox us if you have any questions.
Tag & Share

Chicago Drivers Have Wised Up to Speed Cameras, Their Good Behavior is Bankrupting the City

OFF THE WIRE

By Matt Agorist

Citizens in Chicago are costing the city tens of millions by obeying the law, giving credence to the notion that crime really does pay, and is not only profitable but necessary for the state to survive.
Over the last year Rahm Emanuel and company have flooded the city with speed cameras in an attempt to create a windfall of revenue generation.
Original estimates of revenue to be collected were upwards of $100 million but good drivers set back this greedy political goal $50 million. This shortage is in spite of the city’s best efforts to trick drivers into getting the tickets by placing the cameras in the proximity to schools and parks.
The tickets come with a $100 sticker price and the residents of Chicago got wise to this scam real quick.

Good behavior is bad for the budget.

Now the city will have to rob the citizens of Chicago in other ways to make up for their $50 million dollar budget shortfall.
This is a perfect example of how the system never sets out to prevent crime, they only wish to control it for profit.
A report done by Chicago Inspector General Joe Ferguson, maintained “the City cannot prove red-light camera locations are based on safety considerations.” In fact, there are a very many studies which illustrate the negative safety impact of speed cameras, they are listed at the bottom of this article.
This is a swift kick in the pants of Mayor Rahm Emanuel as it has taught him that underestimating the intelligence of the Chicago citizens can have dire consequences.
It also helps to shed light on potential revolutionary measures which ‘we the people’ can take to incite incredible change. The state is dependent upon you breaking their arbitrary traffic ‘laws’ in order to pay themselves. If we stop speeding, we literally give them a drastic pay cut.
Imagine it, we could defund the police state through good driving! In theory anyway.
Even if the good driving revolution never gets off the ground, it is quite heartening to see the huge effect that it is having in Chicago. Hopefully it opens the eyes of people across the country to the fact that the state needs them to break its laws in order to survive.

Starve the system. Drive the speed limit.

---

U.S. PIRG Red Light Camera Report – Caution: Red Light Cameras Ahead
According to a this study by the national public interest advocacy group, U.S. PRIG, local governments hungry for revenue are signing contracts with red-light camera companies that put profit over traffic safety.
Los Angeles Red Light Cameras Lead To Increased Accidents
A local TV station fact-checked the city’s claims that their ticket cameras reduced accidents and found that the opposite was true. At 20 of the 32 intersections studied, accidents increased and several intersections tripled their accident rate.
Virginia Accidents Increased After Ticket Camera Installation
The Virginia Transportation Research Council released a report expanding upon earlier research into the safety effects of red light cameras in Virginia. It showed an overall increase in crashes after cameras were installed.
A Long Term Study of Red-Light Cameras and Accidents
The conclusion of this Australian study was that RLCs are not an effective countermeasure and that they can increase the number of rear end crashes.
AAA Michigan Study Shows Cameras Aren’t Needed
AAA Michigan partnered with a number of communities to improve intersection safety. Their inexpensive structural changes resulted in a 47-percent decrease in crashes and a 50-percent decrease in injuries.
Red Light Running Cameras: Would Crashes, Injuries and Automobile Insurance Rates Increase If They Are Used in Florida?
A report published in Florida Public Health Review journal found that red light cameras increased accidents and insurance industry profit.
Red-Light-Running Behaviour at Red-Light Camera and Control Intersections
Monash University study showing red-light cameras have no effect on reducing violations.
A Detailed Investigation Of Crash Risk Reduction Resulting From Red-Light Cameras In Small Urban Areas
A study prepared by the North Carolina A&T State University found that red-light cameras increased the number of accidents at intersections.
A Response to Unfounded Criticisms of Burkey and Obeng (2004) Made by the IIHS
The North Carolina A&T University study above was criticized by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). This is a rebuttal of IIHS’s claims by the authors of the North Carolina study.
Impact of Red-Light Camera Enforcement on Crash Experience — A Synthesis of Highway Practice
A recent study by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) illustrates the lack of evidence supporting the effectiveness of red-light cameras.
Evaluation of the Red-Light-Camera-Enforcement Pilot Project
This report from Ontario, Canada’s Ministry of Transportation’s concluded that jurisdictions using photo enforcement experienced an overall increase in property damage and fatal and injury rear-end collisions.
Development of Guidelines for Identifying and Treating Locations with a Red-Light-Running Problem
This Texas Transportation Institute study highlights the efficacy of increasing yellow-light times. An extra second yielded a 40-percent reduction in collisions.
Virginia DOT Study on Red-Light Cameras
The Virginia Department of Transportation released a biased report in favor of the cameras that still documented an increase in accidents, including more rear-end collisions and injuries.
Critique of IIHS 2001 Oxnard Study
California Senate Committee on Privacy critiqued the Oxnard study. The results show that IIHS’s study is flawed on many levels.
The Red-Light-Running Crisis: Is It Intentional?
This report was prepared by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey’s staff. It looks at the problems of red-light cameras and how to really deal with traffic-light violations.
Driver Behavior Characteristics at Urban Signalized Intersections
This study shows that providing adequate all-red clearance intervals can significantly impact intersection safety by reducing the probability of occurrence of right angle crashes, even if drivers run the red light.
Misleading San Diego Report
Although the report clearly credits the most significant reduction in violations to an increase in yellow time — a fact buried on page 78 — the report nonetheless credits these benefits to the red-light cameras everywhere else in the report, especially in the summary.
University of South Florida Criticism of Oxnard Study
University of South Florida researchers uncovered fundamental flaws in the first US study to claim red light cameras decrease accidents.
Report Critiques Red Light Camera Research Methods
A peer-reviewed article published in the Florida Public Health Review elaborates on the conclusion that red light cameras are associated with increased injury accidents.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/chicago-drivers-wised-speed-cameras-good-behavior-bankrupting-city/#1la7obRWcRY5FaX5.99

Helmet Efficacy to Reduce Head Injury and Mortality in Motorcycle Crashes

Published 2010
Citation: J Trauma. 69(5):1101-1111, Nov 2010

Download

1. Authors
2. Introduction
3. I. Statement of Problem
4. II. Methods and Process
5. III. Recommendations
6. IV. Scientific Foundation
7. V. Summary
8. VI. References
9. VII. Table

Authors

MacLeod, Jana B. A. MD; DiGiacomo, J. Christopher MD; Tinkoff, Glen MD, FACS, FCCM

Author Information

From the Department of Surgery (J.B.A.M.), Grady Hospital, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia; The Port Authority Heroes of September 11 Trauma Center (J.C.D.), Jersey City Medical Center, Jersey City, New Jersey; and Department of Surgery (G.T.), Christiana Care Health System, Wilmington, Delaware.

Submitted for publication March 11, 2010.

Accepted for publication August 22, 2010.

Presented at the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma, January 19–23, 2010, Phoenix, Arizona.

Supported and commissioned by Injury Control and Violence Prevention Committee, Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Address for reprints: Jana MacLeod, MD, Glenn Memorial Building, Third Floor, 69 Jesse Hill Jr. Drive, SE, Atlanta, GA 30303; email: jm7072003@yahoo.com.

Introduction

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Association, in 2008, 5,290 motorcyclists died and 96,000 were injured. Motorcycles make up ∼3% of all registered vehicles in the United States and account for only 0.4% of all vehicle miles traveled. However, motorcycle crashes accounted for ∼10% of all motor vehicle crash fatalities, and per mile traveled, motor cycle crashes are ∼37 times more lethal than automobile crashes.

Head injuries are one of the most common injuries after motorcycle crashes and were estimated to be the cause of death in >50% of these fatalities. In close to a third of these victims, the head injury is the sole organ system that is injured. However, in the majority of patients, estimated as high as 90% of some patient cohorts, a head injury is present along with other injuries. Despite these facts, it is estimated that only 50% of motorcyclists routinely wear helmets.

It was intuitive even to our earliest ancestors that a hard shell would protect the head from injury. However, establishing the effectiveness of the motorcycle helmet remains a challenging effort especially in light of the powerful opposition to universal helmet laws. Furthermore, quantifying the protective effect of helmets supports the promotion of helmet programs regardless of the controversial nature of legislative efforts.

In the United States, an increasing recognition that helmet use is associated with reductions in fatalities without apparent harm increased the implementation of universal helmet laws. In response to the 1966 Federal Highway Act, which withheld federal funds from states that did not enact a helmet law, Georgia became the first state to enact a mandatory universal motorcycle helmet law in 1967. By 1975, 47 of the 50 states had universal helmet laws. However, public and political concerns over individual rights versus public safety opened a new debate. In the following years, political changes reversed and/or limited previous sanctions and grants that encouraged states to enact universal helmet laws, which further eroded support for helmet laws. An increasing number of states either repealed their mandatory laws altogether or significantly reduced the laws to apply only to minors. At present, only 20 states have universal helmet laws, another 26 states require only partial coverage, and 4 states have no helmet laws (Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, and New Hampshire).

A large volume of literature has quantified the consequences of not wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle. Although motorcycle riding and registration are increasing and more states with universal helmet laws are introducing bills to repeal their laws, the debate continues on the personal advantages of helmet usage. Therefore, we have reviewed the literature and summarize the evidence basis for the use of motorcycle helmets. In particular, we have sought to assess the impact of helmet use on overall mortality, head injury-related mortality, nonlethal head injury after a motorcycle crash, and the impact universal helmet laws on helmet use.

I. Statement of Problem

Motorcycles are a significant cause of injury-related fatality and disability. In particular, head injury is a common associated cause of death and long-term disability after a motorcycle crash. Despite these facts, there remains an ongoing controversy as to the survival and disability advantages for riders who wear motorcycle helmets. In the public and legislative sectors, there remains a significant policy controversy resulting in a push to retain partial coverage helmet laws and to repeal universal helmet laws in many others.

Questions to be Addressed

A. Do nonhelmeted riders in comparison with helmeted riders have a higher or lower overall death rate after a motorcycle crash?

B. Do nonhelmeted riders in comparison with helmeted riders incur higher or lower rates of lethal head injury after a motorcycle crash?

C. Do nonhelmeted riders in comparison with helmeted riders incur higher or lower rates of nonlethal head injury or is the nonlethal head injury more or less severe after a motorcycle crash?

D. Do geographical areas (i.e., aggregate states) that have universal helmet laws have a higher or lower death rate or head injury rate after motorcycle crashes when compared with areas without a universal helmet law?

II. Methods and Process

A computerized search of the world's literature was undertaken using , of the US National Library of Medicine, extending back to 1990 to the present (2009) using the key words: helmet + (motorcycle OR crash). There were 507 citations identified. The abstract for each was reviewed, and 197 candidate articles having possible applicability to the guideline topic were retrieved and reviewed. General reviews, letters to the editor, single case reports, and retrospective reviews of poor quality were excluded. This left 45 articles that were felt to have sufficient merit to form the basis for the guidelines (Table 1). The articles were reviewed in detail by the authors J.M., G.H.T., and J.C.D.

Over the past decades, the volume of literature supporting helmet usage prevents, and ethically so, any randomized control trials or even controlled trials of helmet usage. Therefore, the most robust studies published in the past 20 years are predominantly prospective and retrospective epidemiologic studies. As there are no class I studies to review, the studies we did review do not vary across the classes of evidence in a useful manner. Therefore, we categorized the articles in this review by study design. There are prospective cohort and cross-sectional studies. However, the majority of the studies are retrospective, either before and after cross-sectional studies of helmet law changes or cross-sectional studies of helmeted in comparison with nonhelmeted riders. Finally, we also identified case-control studies.

III. Recommendations

Level I

All motorcyclists should wear motorcycle helmets when riding motorcycles to reduce the incidence of head injury and severe head injury after a crash.

NB: This statement was made a level recommendation despite a lack of class I data because of the volume of consistent class II data, including robust prospective data, to support this finding without any methodologically similar data to refute it.

Level II

All motorcyclists should wear motorcycle helmets when riding motorcycles to improve overall survival and reduce head injury-related mortality after a crash.

Mandatory universal motorcycle helmet laws should be introduced or reenacted to reduce mortality and head injury after a crash.

IV. Scientific Foundation

The evidence reviewed here that assesses the effectiveness of helmets for motorcyclists comes from the following 45 study designs:

1. Prospective cohort study of motorcycle riders.^[1]
2. Prospective cross-sectional studies that compare helmeted riders with nonhelmeted riders for different outcomes.^[2–5]
3. Retrospective before and after cross-sectional studies in which outcomes of motorcycle crashes are compared before and after either the repeal of or the enactment of a mandatory universal helmet law.^[6–24]
4. Case-control studies of motorcycle riders.^[25–27]
5. Retrospective cross-sectional studies that compare helmeted riders with nonhelmeted riders across different outcomes.^[28–43]
6. Comparison of mortality between states with helmet laws and states without helmet laws.^[44][45]

The outcomes reported included any one or more of the following: mortality, head injury-related mortality, prevalence of head injury, and prevalence of severe head injury.

Do Nonhelmeted Riders in Comparison With Helmeted Riders Have a Higher or Lower Overall Death Rate After a Motorcycle Crash?

Two prospective cross-sectional studies showed a reduction in mortality for helmeted riders in comparison with nonhelmeted riders, with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.40 and 0.22, respectively.^[2][5] However, Kelley's sample size was not adequate to reach statistical significance, and therefore, no death reduction can be concluded from this study. Nine retrospective cross-sectional studies reported mortality as an outcome, but two showed no reduction^[35][42] while seven showed reductions that varied from a maximal OR estimate of 0.29^[33] to a minimal OR estimate of 0.84.^[28] Of the studies that showed a mortality reduction, only three were adjusted for rider and/or environmental factors.^[28][33][34]

There were five studies that compared crashes before and after helmet law repeal. Two of the studies showed an increase in fatality after repeal of the helmet law, 26% and 30% increases, respectively.^[8][10] However, two further studies had nonsignificant increases in the ORs of death: OR of 1.08^[7] (per 10,000 motorcycle registrations) and OR of 1.01^[9] (per 1,000 crashes). Interestingly, although the study of Bledsoe and Li did not show an overall reduction in mortality, there was a significant increase in riders who were blood alcohol positive at the time of the crash and who were also not wearing a helmet after the repeal when compared with before (14.2% vs. 33.6%, OR: 2.37, p < 0.05).

There were 12 studies that compared crashes before and after helmet law establishment or reenactment. Auman et al. showed close to a halving of the relative risk (RR) of fatality after the law was reenacted (RR: 0.51, 9.3 fatalities per 10,000 motorcycle registrations to 4.7 fatalities per 10,000 registrations). Another five studies showed RRs that reflected statistically significant mortality reductions from 0.57 to 0.81.^{[15][21–24]} One study, by Chiu et al., showed no change in mortality during the study period (4.0%).

Do Nonhelmeted Riders in Comparison With Helmeted Riders Incur Higher or Lower Rates of Lethal Head Injury After a Motorcycle Crash?

The RR of head injury-related mortality was reduced by more than half after the enactment of a helmet law in Texas from 6.8 fatalities to 3.1 fatalities per 10,000 motorcycle registrations^[23] (RR: 2.19, p < 0.05). In Pennsylvania, after the repeal of the helmet law, the head injury-related death rate per 10,000 motorcycle registrations increased by 36.9%^[6] (1.6 to 2.2 fatalities per 10,000 registrations, p < 0.05).

Do Nonhelmeted Riders in Comparison With Helmeted Riders Incur Higher or Lower Rates of Nonlethal Head Injury or Severity of Nonlethal Head Injury After a Motorcycle Crash?

All 25 of the studies that had prevalence of a nonfatal head injury as an outcome had a significantly lower incidence for helmeted riders, after reenactment or before repeal of a helmet law. One of the prospective studies that observed motorcycle riders to determine the incidence of head injury-associated crashes showed that nonhelmeted riders sustained a head injury more than twice the rate of helmeted riders^[1] (4.7% vs. 1.9%). Three studies showed an ORs of a head injury after a crash to vary from 2.3 times to 4.4 times higher for nonhelmeted riders when compared with helmeted riders^[3][4] (p < 0.05). Ouellet and Kasantikul showed an ORs of sustaining a serious injury to be 3.5 times higher (p < 0.05) for nonhelmeted riders.

Retrospective studies confirm the consistent findings of the prospective studies that head injury is uniformly more frequent and more severe when sustaining a crash without a helmet. The magnitude of the increased prevalence of a head injury after a nonhelmeted crash is as high as 4.3 times to a low of 1.7 times higher than after a helmeted crash in nine retrospective cross-sectional studies. However, for severe head injuries, most commonly defined as an Abbreviated Injury Scale score ≥2, the magnitude of the estimate is uniformly larger. For three retrospective studies, the ORs of a severe head injury were 18.1 (12.5–25.3), 4.4 (2.58–7.37), and 3.7 (1.9–7.3), respectively.^[13][32][38] Lin et al. showed a 41% increase in trauma-induced brain hemorrhage, including subarachnoid, subdural, and epidural hematomas when a rider was nonhelmeted during a crash.

The case-control studies showed an adjusted OR of 0.26 (0.14–0.48) and 0.41 (0.21–0.81), which represents a significant protective effect of wearing a helmet in reducing the incidence of a head injury after a motorcycle crash.^[26][27] In four retrospective studies in which universal motorcycle helmet laws were enacted, the incidence of nonlethal head injury decreased from 29% to reductions of 63%.

In one study in which the motorcycle law was repealed, the incidence of hospitalizations for head injury increased by 42%, from 15.4 to 21.9 per 10,000 motorcycle registrations (p < 0.05).^[6]

Do Geographical Areas (i.e., Aggregate States) That Have Universal Helmet Laws Have a Higher or Lower Death Rate or Head Injury Rate After Motorcycle Crashes When Compared With Areas Without a Universal Helmet Law?

Two studies compared regions with and without helmet laws. Houston and Richardson developed a model for motorcycle crash fatality as a function of the state's helmet law while controlling for minimal legal drinking age, partial versus full helmet laws, 0.08 blood alcohol concentration law, roads with maximum speed limit of 65, daily temperature, daily percent precipitation, gender, age, per capita income, per capita alcohol consumption, and population density. Their results showed 1.3 fewer fatalities per 10,000 motorcycle registrations in helmet law states that can be attributed in their model to the presence of the helmet law. Furthermore, using hospital discharge data from 33 states, Coben et al. calculated a RR of 0.65 (p < 0.05) and 0.72 (p < 0.05), respectively, for severe head injury and fatalities in states with universal helmet laws when compared with states without universal helmet laws.

Study Limitations

The main limitation of these uncontrolled and observational studies involves the collection and incorporation in the analysis of potential confounders for the outcomes studied. The wearing of helmets is associated with multiple factors, many of which have also been shown to be associated with the incidence and severity of crashes. Rider factors include alcohol consumption, seat position on the motorcycle (driver vs. passenger), age, and gender. There are also environmental factors such as weather, time of day; other policy factors such as speed limits and DUI laws; and other intrinsic motorcycle factors such as the size and type of motorcycle itself (the potential kinetic energy of the crash) also contribute to motorcycle crash occurrence and severity and ultimately crash consequences for the rider. Unfortunately, many of these factors are not easy to reliably measure on a crash-to-crash basis, and therefore, only nine studies, in part, adjusted for at least a portion of these factors. There were other studies that stratified the study group by various factors but did not control for them in their analysis. The majority of the studies did not control for any potential confounders. A second methodological concern is selection bias. The subjects in these studies were not selected randomly, except for the one cohort study that chose the students randomly. There were missing data, and no studies had information on those “not chosen” to confirm that they were the same as those included in the study.

A large number of the studies reported fatalities and prevalence of head injuries as a rate, a function of either the number of motorcycle registrations or the number of crashes. This eliminates the misinterpretation of changes in absolute fatalities that reflect changes in the number of riders or the number of riders who crash. However, changes in registrations may not be an accurate denominator to reflect the active riders who are engaging in motorcycle usage and, therefore, may obscure difference. Perhaps, vehicle miles driven are a better denominator for this purpose for the same reason it is used in motor vehicle collision fatality rates. A good example is in the study by Bledsoe and Li, in which registrations decreased and thereby crashes decreased, but the fatality rate increased. However, perhaps because of the decreases, the absolute increase seems minimal and statistically not significant.

The variation in helmet usage in these studies was substantial. Internationally, Conrad et al. reported that the helmet usage was as high as 89% in Indonesia, whereas LaTorre et al. reported only a 12% rate of helmet usage in Italy. Nationally, in America, Brandt et al. reported in their study from Michigan a prevalence of 80.5% of riders wearing a helmet during a crash, whereas a study conducted in Illinois by Kelly et al. reported a 14.6% prevalence of helmets in riders involved in crashes. Without nonrandom selection of these studies, the variation in helmet usage can also impact the results obtained.

The studies reviewed here discuss only the use of helmets. However, the issue of misuse as noted by Peek-Asa et al. in his 1999 study in Thailand can also be a major factor in postcrash injury. Further study is required to better understand and to quantify this problem. Furthermore, in these studies, we did not explore in depth the impact of partial helmet laws, although the studies by Houston and Richardson and Tsai SY attempted to address this issue. Interestingly, Houston and Richardson found that partial helmet laws showed no improvement in outcomes over states with no helmet laws.

V. Summary

A. The use of motorcycle helmets decreases the overall death rate of motorcycle crashes when compared with nonhelmeted riders.

B. The use of motorcycle helmets decreases the incidence of lethal head injury in motorcycle crashes when compared with nonhelmeted riders.

C. The use of motorcycle helmets decreases the severity of nonlethal head injury in motorcycle crashes when compared with nonhelmeted riders.

D. Mandatory universal helmet laws reduce mortality and head injury in geographical areas with the law when compared with areas without it.

VI. References

1. ^ ^a b Lin MR, Hwang HF, Kuo NW. Crash severity, injury patterns, and helmet use in adolescent motorcycle riders. J Trauma. 2001;50:24–30.
2. ^ ^a b Ouellet JV, Kasantikul V. Motorcycle helmet effect on a per-crash basis in Thailand and the United States. Traffic Inj Prev. 2006;7:49–54.
3. ^ ^a b LaTorre G, Bertazzoni G, Zotta D, Van Beeck E, Ricciardi G. Epidemiology of accidents among users of two-wheeled motor vehicles. A surveillance study in two Italian cities. Eur J Public Health. 2002;12:99–103.
4. ^ ^a b Conrad P, Bradshaw YS, Lamsudin R, Kasniyah N, Costello C. Helmets, injuries and cultural definitions: motorcycle injury in urban Indonesia. Accid Anal Prev.1996;28:193–200.
5. ^ ^a b Kelly P, Sanson T, Strange G, Orsay E. A prospective study of the impact of helmet usage on motorcycle trauma.Ann Emerg Med. 1991;20:852–856.
6. ^ ^a b c Mertz KJ, Weiss HB. Changes in motorcycle-related head injury deaths, hospitalizations, and hospital charges following repeal of Pennsylvania's mandatory motorcycle helmet law. Am J Public Health. 2008;98:1464–1467.
7. ^ ^a b O'Keeffe T, Dearwater SR, Gentilello LM, Cohen TM, Wilkinson JD, McKenney MM. Increased fatalities after motorcycle helmet law repeal: is it all because of lack of helmets? J Trauma. 2007;63:1006–1009.
8. ^ ^a b Kyrychenko SY, McCartt AT. Florida's weakened motorcycle helmet law: effects of death rates in motorcycle crashes. Traffic Inj Prev. 2006;7:55–60.
9. ^ ^a b Bledsoe GH, Li G. Trends in Arkansas motorcycle trauma after helmet law repeal. South Med J. 2005;98:436–440.
10. ^ ^a b Ho EL, Haydel MJ. Louisiana motorcycle fatalities linked to statewide helmet law repeal. J La State Med Soc.2004;156:151–157.
11. ^ Ichikawa M, Chadbunchachai W, Marui E. Effect of the helmet act for motorcyclists in Thailand. Accid Anal Prev.2003;35:183–189.
12. ^ Servadei F, Begliomini C, Gardini E, Giustini M, Taggi F, Kraus J. Effect of Italy's motorcycle helmet law on traumatic brain injuries. Inj Prev.2003;9:257–260.
13. ^ ^a b Christian WJ, Carroll M, Meyer K, Vitaz TW, Franklin GA. Motorcycle helmets and head injuries in Kentucky, 1995–2000. J Ky Med Assoc.2003;101:21–26.
14. ^ Auman KM, Kufera JA, Ballesteros MF, Smialek JE, Dischinger PC. Autopsy study of motorcyclist fatalities: the effect of the 1992 Maryland motorcycle helmet use law. Am J Public Health. 2002;92:1352–1355.
15. ^ ^a b Ferrando J, Plasència A, Orós M, Borrell C, Kraus JF. Impact of a helmet law on two wheel motor vehicle crash mortality in a southern European urban area. Inj Prev.2000;6:184–188.
16. ^ Chiu WT, Kuo CY, Hung CC, Chen M. The effect of the Taiwan motorcycle helmet use law on head injuries. Am J Public Health. 2000;90:793–796.
17. ^ Tsai MC, Hemenway D. Effect of the mandatory helmet law in Taiwan. Inj Prev. 1999;5:290–291.
18. ^ Peek-Asa C, Kraus JF. Estimates of injury impairment after acute traumatic injury in motorcycle crashes before and after passage of a mandatory helmet use law. Ann Emerg Med.1997;29:630–636.
19. ^ Kraus JF, Peek C. The impact of two related prevention strategies on head injury reduction among nonfatally injured motorcycle riders, California, 1991–1993. J Neurotrauma.1995;12:873–881.
20. ^ Panichaphongse V, Watanakajorn T, Kasantikul V. Effects of law promulgation for compulsory use of protective helmets on death following motorcycle accidents. J Med Assoc Thai.1995;78:521–525.
21. ^ ^a b Mock CN, Maier RV, Boyle E, Pilcher S, Rivara FP. Injury prevention strategies to promote helmet use decrease severe head injuries at a level I trauma center. J Trauma.1995;39:29–35.
22. ^ ^a b Kraus JF, Peek C, McArthur DL, Williams A. The effect of the 1992 California motorcycle helmet use law on motorcycle crash fatalities and injuries.JAMA.1994;272:1506–1511.
23. ^ ^a b c Fleming NS, Becker ER. The impact of the Texas 1989 motorcycle helmet law on total and head-related fatalities, severe injuries, and overall injuries.Med Care.1992;30:832–845.
24. ^ ^a b Muelleman RL, Mlinek EJ, Collicott PE. Motorcycle crash injuries and costs: effect of a reenacted comprehensive helmet use law. Ann Emerg Med.1992;21:266–272.
25. ^ Norvell DC, Cummings P. Association of helmet use with death in motorcycle crashes: a matched-pair cohort study.Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:483–487.
26. ^ ^a b Tsai YJ, Wang JD, Huang WF. Case-control study of the effectiveness of different types of helmets for the prevention of head injuries among motorcycle riders in Taipei, Taiwan. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;142:974–981.
27. ^ ^a b Gabella B, Reiner KL, Hoffman RE, Cook M, Stallones L. Relationship of helmet use and head injuries among motorcycle crash victims in El Paso County, Colorado, 1998–1990. Accid Anal Prev. 1995;27:363–369.
28. ^ ^a b c Croce MA, Zarzaur BL, Manotti LJ, Fabian TC. Impact of motorcycle helmets and state laws on society's burden: a national study. Ann Surg.2009;250:390–394.
29. ^ Goslar PW, Crawford NR, Petersen SR, Wilson JR, Harrington T. Helmet use and associated spinal fractures in motorcycle crash victims. J Trauma.2008;64:190–196; discussion 196.
30. ^ Lin JW, Tsai SH, Tsai WC, et al. Survey of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage in Taiwan. Surg Neurol. 2006;66:S20–S25.
31. ^ Eastridge BJ, Shafi S, Minei JP, Culica D, McConnel C, Gentilello L. Economic impact of motorcycle helmets: from impact to discharge. J Trauma.2006;60:978–984.
32. ^ ^a b Javouhey E, Guérin AC, Chiron M. Incidence and risk factors of severe traumatic brain injury resulting from road accidents: a population-based study.Accid Anal Prev.2006;38:225–233.
33. ^ ^a b c Nakahara S, Chadbunchachai W, Ichikawa M, Tipsuntornsak N, Wakai S. Temporal distribution of motorcyclist injuries and risk of fatalities in relation to age, helmet use, and riding while intoxicated in Khon Kaen, Thailand. Accid Anal Prev. 2005;37:833–842.
34. ^ ^a b Hundley JC, Kilgo PD, Miller PR, et al. Nonhelmeted motorcyclists: a burden to society? A study using the National Trauma Data bank. J Trauma.2004;57:944–949.
35. ^ ^a b Brandt MM, Ahrns KS, Corpron CA, Franklin GA, Wahl WL. Hospital cost is reduced by motorcycle helmet use. J Trauma. 2002;53:469–471.
36. ^ Peek-Asa C, McArthur DL, Kraus JF. The prevalence of non-standard helmet use and head injuries among motorcycle riders. Accid Anal Prev.1999;31:229–233.
37. ^ Petridou E, Skalkidou A, Ioannou N, Trichopoulos D. Fatalities from non-use of seat belts and helmets in Greece: a nationwide appraisal. Hellenic Road Traffic Police. Accid Anal Prev. 1998;30:87–91.
38. ^ ^a b Rowland J, Rivara F, Salzberg P, Soderberg R, Maier R, Koepsell T. Motorcycle helmet use and injury outcome and hospitalization costs from crashes in Washington state. Am J Public Health. 1996;86: 41–45.
39. ^ Orsay E, Holden JA, Williams J, Lumpkin JR. Motorcycle trauma in the state of Illinois: analysis of the Illinois Department of Public Health Trauma Registry. Ann Emerg Med. 1995;26:455–460.
40. ^ Rutledge R, Stutts J. The association of helmet use with the outcome of motorcycle crash injury when controlling for crash/injury severity. Accid Anal Prev. 1993;25:347–353.
41. ^ Braddock M, Schwartz R, Lapidus G, Banco L, Jacobs L. A population-based study of motorcycle injury and costs.Ann Emerg Med. 1992;21:273–278.
42. ^ ^a b Offner PJ, Rivara FP, Maier RV. The impact of motorcycle helmet use. J Trauma. 1992;32:636–641; discussion 641–642.
43. ^ Shankar BS, Ramzy AI, Soderstrom CA, Dischinger PC, Clark CC. Helmet use, patterns of injury, medical outcome, and costs among motorcycle drivers in Maryland. Accid Anal Prev. 1992;24:385–396.
44. ^ Houston DJ, Richardson LE Jr. Motorcycle safety and the repeal of universal helmet laws. Am J Public Health.2007;97:2063–2069.
45. ^ Coben JH, Steiner CA, Miller TR. Characteristics of motorcycle-related hospitalizations: comparing states with different helmet laws. Accid Anal Prev.2007;39:190–196.

VII. Table

Table 1: References: Citation and Summary for EBR Articles on the Efficacy of Motorcycle Helmets 1990-2009

Prospective Cohort Studies:
Class	Authors	Title	Citation	Summary
II	Lin MR Hwang HF Kuo NW	Crash severity, injury patterns, and helmet use in adolescent motorcycle riders	2001 Journal of Trauma 50:24-30	4,721 randomly selected junior college students in Taipei were followed prospectively for 20 months, during which time 1,284 were involved in 1,889 motorcycle crashes. 33% of the crashes the rider was wearing a helmet. Head injuries occurred in 4.7% of injured riders without a helmet compared to 1.9% of helmeted riders.
Prospective Cross-sectional Studies:
Class	Authors	Title	Citation	Summary
II	Ouellet JV Kasantikul V	Motorcycle helmet effect on a per-crash basis in Thailand and the United States	2006 Traffic Injury Prevention 7:49-54	1,869 motorcycle crashes in Los Angeles and Thailand were prospectively investigated in detail. Approximately 6%of riders were killed at both locations and 20-25% were hospitalized. Non-helmeted riders were 2.5 times more likely to be killed and 3.5 times more likely to sustain a serious brain injury.
II	LaTorre G Bertazzoni G Zotta D Van Beeck E Ricciardi G	Epidemiology of accidents among users of two-wheeled motor vehicles. A surveillance study in two Italian cities.	2002 European Journal of Public Health 12(2):99-103.	Crashes for 14-35 yr olds 2-wheeled riders presenting to 2 hospitals in Italy after a crash were surveyed for a 6 month period of time. Injury and crash data was collected. 12% of the riders wore a helmet at the time of the crash. The risk of head injury is 4.35 times higher when not wearing a helmet.
II	Conrad P Bradshaw YS Lamsudin R Kasniyah N Costello C	Helmets, injuries and cultural definitions: Motorcycle injury in urban Indonesia.	1996 Accident Analysis and Prevention. 28(2): 193-200.	Prospective observational study of motorcycle riders in Indonesia. Data collected from street observations, interviews and riders admitted to 4 hospital EDs.89% of drivers wore helmets but only 55% wore them correctly. Indonesia has a mandatory helmet law. The risk of a head injury was 0.41 for riders in a crash while wearing a helmet.
II	Kelly P Sanson T Strange G Orsay E	A prospective study of the impact of helmet usage on motorcycle trauma	1991 Annals of Emergency Medicine 20:852-856	Prospectively collected data of motorcycle crash victims presenting to emergency departments in 8 varying institutions across the State of Illinois, over a 7 month period. Only 14.6% of the 398 patients were wearing helmets at the time of the crash. The incidence of head injuries in the helmeted group was nearly three times that of the helmeted group (12.1% vs. 32.6%).
Retrospective Before-After Cross-Sectional Studies:
Class	Authors	Title	Citation	Summary
II	Mertz KJ Weiss HB	Changes in Motorcycle-Related Head Injury Deaths, Hospitalizations, and Hospital Charges Following Repeal of Pennsylvania’s Mandatory motorcycle Helmet Law	2008 American Journal of Public Health 98(8):1464-14667	Retrospective review of motorcycle-head related mortality and injuries comparing the pre-repeal period (2001-2) to the post repeal period (2004-5). There was a 32.8% increase in head injured related mortality and a 42.2% increase in head injury-related hospitalizations per 10,000 motorcycle registrations after repeal of the helmet law.
II	O’Keefe T Dearwater ST Gentilello LM Cohen TM Wilkinson JD McKenney MM	Increased Fatalities After Motorcycle Helmet Law Repeal: Is it all Because of lack of helmets?	2007 Journal of Trauma Injury, Infection, and Critical Care63:1006-1009	Retrospective review of fatalities pre- and post-motorcycle helmet law repeal (July 1, 2000) in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Police crash and medical examiners records were reviewed for fatalities per registered motorcycle riders from 1997 to 2003. Motorcycle helmet usage in fatal crashes dropped from 80% to 33%. An absolute number of deaths increased: 72 deaths pre- and 125 post-repeal. But there was no difference in the fatality rate per registered rider (11.6 pre- to 12.5 deaths post-repeal per 10,000 motorcycle registrations, p=0.61).
II	Kyrychenko SY McCartt AT	Florida’s weakened motorcycle helmet law: Effects of death rates in motorcycle crashes	2006 Traffic Injury Prevention 7:55-60	Retrospective review of police reported crashed 1998-2002 from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. The helmet law was changed from universal to exclude riders 21 years and older with at least $10,000 of Medical Benefit Insurance in mid 2000. Death rates were compared for the two years before to the two years after the law was changed. The death rate rose from 30.8 deaths per 1000 crashes to 38.8.
II	Bledsoe GH Li G	Trends in Arkansas motorcycle trauma after helmet law repeal	2005 Southern Medical Journal98:436-440	Retrospective review of data from the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration for motorcycle registrations, motorcycle crash data from the Arkansas State Police Highway Safety Office, and motorcycle fatality data for Arkansas from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). The Arkansas helmet law was repealed in 1997. The study compares the 4 years before to the 4 years after the repeal. Fatalities per crash increased non- significantly from 41.9 to 42.2 per 1000 crashes but in the same period of time, crashes and fatalities per 1000 registered motorcycles decreased. The percentage of motorcycle fatalities not wearing a helmet increased from 47.0% to 78.2% after the repeal.
II	Ho EL Haydel MJ	Louisiana motorcycle fatalities linked to statewide helmet law repeal	2004 Journal of the Louisiana State Medical Society156:151-157	In 1999 Louisiana repealed its universal motorcycle helmet law to exempt riders 18 and older with $10,000 Health Insurance Policies. This is a retrospective review of 8,916 motorcycle crashes and 300 fatalities for 1994-2002, except 1999, combining data from NHTSA, Louisiana Highway Safety Commission, and a level I Trauma Registry. The fatality rate increased from 3.0% per collision to 3.7% after repeal. Helmet use decreased from 71.4% to 35% after repeal.
II	Ichikawa M, Chadbunchachai W Marui E	Effect of the helmet act for motorcyclists in Thailand	2003 Accident Analysis and Prevention 35:183-189	Retrospective analysis of Trauma Registry data comparing 2 years before to 2 years after enactment of a motorcycle helmet law in Thailand. 12,002 patients were reviewed, including 129 deaths. As compared to the pre-Law period, head injuries decreased 41.4% and motorcycle related deaths decreased 20.8%.
II	Servadei F Begliomini C Gardini E Giustini M Taggi F Kraus J	Effect of Italy’s motorcycle helmet law on traumatic brain injuries.	2003 Injury Prevention 9: 257-260	Retrospective review of traumatic brain injuries at a regional neurosurgery referral center for one year before and after implementation of a universal motorcycle helmet law. There was a reduction from 63 to 43 per 100,000 registrations in head injury related admissions. There was also a 76% decrease in the diagnoses of traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, subdural hematoma, and epidural hematoma after the enactment of the law.
II	Christian WJ Carroll M Meyer K Vitaz T Franklin GA	Motorcycle helmets and head injuries in Kentucky 1995-2000	2003 Journal of the Kentucky Medical Association 101:21-26	Retrospective review of head injury and head injury severity after a motorcycle crash from a single level I trauma center from 1995-2000. Of note, Kentucky repealed their helmet law in 1998. A non-helmeted rider was 4.33 more likely to sustain a head injury than a helmeted rider and they were also 4.36 more likely to sustain a severe head injury than non-helmeted riders.
II	Auman KM Kufera JA Ballesteros MF Smialek JE Dischinger PC	Autopsy study of motorcyclist fatalities : The effect of the 1992 Maryland motorcycle helmet use law	2002 American Journal of Public Health 92:1352-1355	Retrospective comparison of motorcycle fatalities in Maryland for the 33 months before and after implementation of a universal helmet law. 61.3% of fatalities occurred before the law was enacted and 38.7% after. The fatality rate per 10,000 registrations decreased from 9.3 2 to 4.7 per 10,000 motorcycle registrations in the 3 year period before and after the enactment.
II	Ferrando J Plasencia A Oros M Borrell C Kraus JF	Impact of a helmet law on two wheel motor vehicle crash mortality in a southern European urban area	2000 Injury Prevention 6:184-188	Retrospective study comparing the 2 year period before and after implementation of a universal motorcycle helmet law in Spain. Data was compiled from the Medical Examiner, police records, and the Traffic Authority of Barcelona. Annual fatalities decreased from 60 in the first year of the review to 32 in the last year, with the crash mortality rate decreasing from 6.9 to 5.2 per 1000 crashes. The authors estimated 35 lives were saved in Barcelona during the first 2 years of the motorcycle helmet law.
II	Chiu WT Kuo CY Hung CC Chen M	The effect of the Taiwan Motorcycle helmet use law on head injuries	2000 American Journal of Public Health 90:793-796	Retrospective study comparing motorcycle related head injuries seen at 56 major hospitals across Taiwan for one year before and after implementation of a universal helmet law, based on the Head Injury Registry of Taiwan. Total number of motorcycle related head injuries decreased 33%. In hospital death rates remained unchanged at 4.0%.
II	Tsai MC Hemenway D	Effect of the mandatory helmet law in Taiwan	1999 Injury Prevention 5:290-291	Retrospective review in 3 cities comparing 6 months before to 6 months after enactment of a mandatory motorcycle law in Taiwan. Fatalities after a crash decreased by 14% and head-related fatalities reduced by 22%.
II	Peek-Asa C Kraus JF	Estimates of injury impairment after acute traumatic injury in motorcycle crashes before and after passage of a mandatory helmet use law.	1997 Annals of Emergency Medicine 29:630-636	Retrospective review comparing 4790 non-fatally injured motorcycle riders for one year before and after enactment of the California mandatory motorcycle law, linking medical records to police reports. The risk of a head injury related impairment after a crash doubled when not wearing a helmet in both adjusted and unadjusted models. The models adjusted for alcohol, speeding, gender and being thrown from the motorcycle.
II	Kraus JF Peek C	The impact of two related prevention strategies on head injury reduction among nonfatally injured motorcycle riders, California, 1991-1993	1995 Journal of Neurotrauma12:873-881	Retrospective review of non-fatally injured motorcycle riders before and after enactment of the California mandatory motorcycle helmet law of 1992. The law resulted in 85.6% of injured riders wearing a helmet. Head injuries decreased from 38.2% of the injuries seen before the enactment to 24.1% of the head injuries after the law was enacted.
II	Panichaphongse V Watanakajorn T Kasantikul V	Effects of law promulgation for compulsory use of protective helmets on death following motorcycle accidents	1995 Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand 78:521-525	Retrospective review comparing the 2 years before and after implementation of a motorcycle helmet law. Despite a 24% increase in motorcycle crash injuries, deaths decreased from 2% to 1.4%. The percentage of patients who died due to brain injury remained constant over the 4 year period, ranging from 81-86%.
II	Mock CN Maier RV Boyle E Pilcher S Rivara FP	Injury prevention strategies to promote helmet use decrease severe head injuries at a level I Trauma Center	1995 Journal of Trauma 39:29-35	Retrospective review of the Trauma Registry of a level I Trauma Center over 8 years comparing helmeted to non-helmeted motorcycle riders. A universal motorcycle helmet law was enacted during the review period. The mortality rate decreased from 10% before enactment of the helmet law to 6% after, and severe head injury decreased from 20% of crash admissions to 9%.
II	Kraus JF Peek C McArthur DL Williams A	The effect of the 1992 California Motorcycle helmet use law on motorcycle crash fatalities and injuries	1994 Journal of the American Medical Association272:1506-1511	Retrospective review of all motorcycle fatalities for the year before and after implementation of a mandatory motorcycle helmet law, based on death certificates and police reports. There was a 37.5% decrease in absolute number of fatalities statewide during the first year after enactment, and with a decrease in the fatality ratio from 70.1 to 51.5 fatalities per 100,000 registrations in California.
II	Fleming NS Becker ER	The impact of the Texas 1989 motorcycle helmet law on total and head – related fatalities, severe injuries, and overall injuries.	1992 Medical Care30:832-845	Retrospective review of all motorcycle fatalities in Texas from 1984 through 1990, with a helmet law being enacted in 1989. Overall mortality reduced from 12.1 to 9.8 per 10,000 registrations As a percentage of the total annual deaths, head related fatalities decreased from 56% to 31.5%.
II	Muelleman RL Mlinek EJ Collicott PE	Motorcycle crash injuries and costs : Effect of a reenacted comprehensive helmet use law	1992 Annals of Emergency Medicine 21:266-272	Retrospective review of one year before and after the re-enactment of the motorcycle helmet law in Nebraska. Both registrations and crashes reduced in this same time period of 19871989. The overall death rate dropped from 13 to 8 per 10,000 registrations. The frequency and severity of brain injury were similar for the two time periods.
Case Control Studies:
Class	Authors	Title	Citation	Summary
II	Norvell DC Cummings P	Association of helmet use with death in motorcycle crashes: A matched-pair cohort study	2002 American Journal of Epidemiology156:483-487	Matched Pair Cohort Study using the NHTSA-FARS database for fatalities within 30 days of the crash that occurred from 1980-1998. 60.8% of the fatalities involved non-helmeted riders. The relative risk of death for a helmeted rider was estimated to be 0.61 compared to a non-helmeted rider, controlling for motorcycle and crash related variables, age, gender, and seat position.
II	Tsai YJ, Wang JD, Huang WF.	Case-control study of the effectiveness of different types of helmets for the prevention of head injuries among motorcycle riders in Taipei, Taiwan	1995 American Journal Of Epidemiology42(9):974–81	Motorcycle riders crash admissions in 15 hospitals in Taipei, Taiwan from for 3 months in 1990. Cases were head injured motorcycle crash victims. Controls were motorcycle crash victims with injuries other than head. Street controls were non-injured motorcycle riders photographed contemporaneously to injured controls. Head Injury was involved in 41.5% of the 1,351 injuries during the study period.
II	Gabella B Reiner KL Hoffman RECook MStallones L	Relationship of helmet use and head injuries among motorcycle crashvictims in El Pasocounty, Colorado, 1998-1990	1995 Accident analysis and Prevention 27:363-369	A county based study of head injury after motorcycle crashes determined by traffic accident reports and the Injury Epidemiology Program of Colorado. A case was a motorcycle rider with a head injury after a crash in a 2 year period of time from 1989-1990. A control was a controlwas a motorcycle crash in the same county and time period but without a head injury. Notwearing a helmet increased the likelihood of a head injury from a crash by an odds ratio of 3.34 relative to those riders wearing a helmet.
Retrospective Cross-sectional Studies:
III	Croce MA Zarzaur BL Manotti LJ Fabian TC	Impact of motorcycle Helmets and State Laws on Society’s Burden: A National Study	2009 Annals of Surgery 250:390-394	Retrospective review from 2002-2007 of National Trauma Data Bank. Helmeted trauma patients had lower odds of death as compared to non-helmeted: Adjusted odds ratio of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.76-0.93). N=75,644 Helmeted patients had better GCS scores.
III	Goslar PW Crawford NR Petersen SR Wilson JR Harrington T	Helmet Use and Associated Spinal Fractures in Motorcycle Crash Victims	2008 Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection and Critical Care53:469-471	Retrospective review of trauma registry of one Level I trauma center from July 1st, 2002-June 30th, 2005. Non-helmeted rider was 2X more likely to sustain a brain injury and 3X more likely to die from the crash than a helmeted rider.
III	Houston DJ Richardson LE	Motorcycle Safety and the Repeal of Universal Helmet Laws	2007 American Journal of Public Health 97(11): 2063-2069	Retrospective review of all 51 states from the NHTSA Fatal Accident Reporting System from 1975 -2004. Mortality was analyzed controlling for other rider and state factors that affect motorcycle-related mortality: demographic, social, traffic safety and population density across states. There was a 13.7% mortality reduction in states attributable to universal helmet law.
III	Coben JH Steiner CA Miller TR	Characteristics of motorcycle-related hospitalizations: Comparing states with different helmet laws.	2007 Accident Analysis and Prevention 39:190-196	A one year retrospective review of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) registry. The HCUP State Inpatient Database (SID) contains data from 33 states and captures ~80% of all hospital discharges in the US. 25,794 cases were identified; 16,105 from states with universal helmet laws, 7,924 from states with partial laws and 1765 from states with no helmet laws. Cases from states without universal helmet laws were 52% more likely to sustain the most severe forms of traumatic brain injury (RR: 1.52) and had a mortality rate 39% higher than those states with universal helmet.
III	Lin JW Tsai SH Tsai WC Chiu WT Chu SF Lin CM Yang CM Hung CC	Survey of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage in Taiwan	2006 Surgical Neurology S2:20-25	Retrospective review of 90,250 head trauma case admitted to the hospital in Taiwan, excluding dead on arrivals and outpatients over an 8 year period. 47% of all injuries were motorcycle related. Those not wearing a helmet had a 32.9% incidence of intracranial hemorrhage, compared to 25.2% for those who were. The chance of having an intracranial hemorrhage was 1.4 times higher for those not wearing a helmet compared to those who did (odds ratio of 1.40).
III	Eastridge BJ Shafi S Minei JP Culica D McConnel C Gentilello L	Economic impact of motorcycle helmets: from impact to discharge.	2006 Journal of Trauma Injury Infection and Critical Care60:978-984.	Motorcyclists who crashed and found in NHTSA GES database for pre-hospital data and NTDB for hospital data from 1994 to 2002. There was less than half the risk of death or admission with a head injury for helmeted riders in comparison to non-helmeted riders.
III	Javouhey E Guerin AC Chiron M	Incidence and risk factors of severe traumatic brain injury resulting from road accidents: A population-based study.	2006 Accident Analysis and Prevention 38:225-33.	Motorcycle crashes were identified in a population based road trauma registry in France from 1996-2001 to determine risks for severe head injury. A non-helmeted rider had an 18 fold higher risk of having a severe head injury as defined by AIS of 2 or higher as compared to helmeted riders.
III	Nakahara S Chadbunchachai W Ichikawa M Tipsuntornsak N Wakai S	Temporal distribution of motorcyclist injuries and risk of fatalities in relation to age, helmet use, and riding while intoxicated in Khon Kaen, Thailand	2005 Accident Analysis and Prevention 37:833-842	Retrospective review of 9,552 patients injured in motorcycle crashes in Thailand and transferred to the regional Medical Center over 5 years. The case fatality rate was 0.25 for helmeted riders and 0.94 for non-helmeted riders. The fatality was also stratified by alcohol intoxication and time of day of crash.
III	Hundley JK Kilgo PD Miller P R Chang MC Hensberry RA Meredith JW Hoth JJ	Non-helmeted motorcyclists: a burden to society? A study using the National Trauma Data bank.	2004 Journal of Trauma Injury Infection and Critical Care57:944-9.	Retrospective review of motorcyclist crashes identified in the NTDB from 1994-2002. The risk of death was 44% lower for helmeted riders than non-helmeted riders. 69.2% of all riders were listed as wearing a helmet.
III	Brandt MM Ahrns KS Corpron CA Franklin GA Wahl Wl	Hospital cost is reduced by motorcycle helmet use.	2002 Journal of Trauma Injury Infection and Critical Care53(3):469-71.	Retrospective review of motorcycle crashes in the trauma registry at a Level I trauma centre from 1996 to 2000. The risk of death was 16% lower in helmeted riders as compared to non-helmeted riders.
III	Peek-Asa C McArthur DL Kraus JF	The prevalence of nonstandard helmet use and head injuries among motorcycle riders	1999 Accident Analysis and Prevention 31:229-233	Retrospective review comparing helmets which met the 1992 California Mandatory Helmet Use Law requirements to those which did not. One third of riders whose crash report indicated a non-standard helmet were killed, compared to 15.5% on non-helmeted riders and 13.6% of helmeted riders. Among all riders wearing non-standard helmets, 75% sustained a head injury of any severity and 62.5% sustained a head injury ³ 3. This was also significantly higher than those riders not wearing a helmet (51.9% and 37.4%) and those wearing a standard helmet (30.7% and 21.8%). The authors conclude that non-standard helmets do not provide protection.
III	Petridou E Skalkidou A Ioannou N Trichopoulos D	Fatalities from non-use of seat belts and helmets in Greece: A nationwide appraisal. Hellenic Road Traffic Police.	1998 Accident Analysis and Prevention 30:87-91	Retrospective analysis of all motorcycle crashes in Greece for 1985 and 1994. No motorcycle laws were in effect during either period, and helmet use rates were similar for two periods. In 1985, 3.5% of helmeted riders died in motorcycle crashes compared to 4.3% of unhelmeted riders. In 1994, 2.9% of helmeted riders died in motorcycle crashes compared to 5.1% for unhelmeted riders. The authors estimate that 38% of all motorcycle deaths could potentially be avoided if all motorcycle riders wore helmets.
III	Rowland J Rivara F Salzberg P Soderberg R Maier R Koepsell T	Motorcycle helmet use and injury outcome and hospitalization costs from crashes in Washington State	1996 American Journal of Public Health 86:41-45	Retrospective review combining State crash information, hospital records, and death records for 1989 in Washington State. There were 2,090 crashes with 59 fatalities (2.8%). Motorcycle riders who were hospitalized after a crash were 2.9 times more likely to be hospitalized with a head injury and 3.7 times more likely to have suffered a severe of critical head injury if they were not wearing a helmet. Non-helmeted riders had 1.62 times the risk of a fatal crash compared to helmeted riders.
III	Orsay E Holden JA Williams J Lumpkin JR	Motorcycle trauma in the State of Illinois: Analysis of the Illinois Department of Public Health Trauma Registry	1995 Annals of Emergency Medicine 28:455-460	Retrospective review of the Illinois Trauma Registry for 18 months comparing helmeted to unhelmeted motorcycle riders. Of the 1231, 18% were helmeted and 56% were not. 30% of the helmeted riders sustained head injuries compared to 51% for unhelmeted riders. The unhelmeted riders also had more severe head injuries.
III	Rutledge RStutts J	The association of helmet use with the outcome of motorcycle crash injury when controlling for crash/injury severity	1993 Accident Analysis and Prevention 25:347-353	Retrospective analysis of the North Carolina State Trauma Registry over 3.5 years, comparing 892 patients. Helmet information was available for 460 (51.6%). Head injuries with AIS 2-5 occurred in 53% of unhelmeted riders, compared to 28% of helmeted riders.
III	Braddock M Schwartz R Lapidus G Banco L Jacobs L	A population-based study of motorcycle injury and costs.	1992 Annals of Emergency Medicine 21:273-278	Retrospective review of 112 motorcycle deaths in Connecticut over a two year period. The fatality rate for unhelmeted riders was 26.7 per 1000 crashes, compared to 7.9 for helmeted riders.
III	Offner PF Rivara FP Maier RV	The Impact of Motorcycle Helmet Use.	1992 Journal of Trauma Injury Infection and Critical Care32(5):636-42.	Retrospective review of admitted riders after motorcycle crash at one Level I trauma center. The trauma registry identified the cases from 1985 to 1990. Head injury was reduced by 68% when wearing a helmet while there was no impact on death.
III	Shankar BS Ramzy AI Soderstrom CA Dischinger PC Clark CC	Helmet Use, Patterns of Injury, Medical Outcome and Costs among Motorcycle Drivers in Maryland.	1992 Accident, Analysis and Prevention 24(4): 385-96.	Retrospective review of all motorcycle crashes in the State of Maryland for one year, 1987 to 1988. Riders wore a helmet in 35% of the crashes.

« Back to guidelines