ABATE of Washington

Transcription

ABATE of Washington

ABATE of
Washington
Black Thursday
Legislative Packet
including
SB5198, ESB5623, HB1515, HB1748
January 21, 2016
© 2016 ABATE of Washington
Printed by BoltPDF (c) NCH Software. Free for non-commercial use only.
INTRODUCTION
ABATE of Washington is a not-for-profit organization that is interested in citizens Rights as they
apply to motorcyclists in particular, as well as all citizens. ABATE is the largest Motorcycle
Rights Organization in Washington State. The members of ABATE of Washington include;
Engineers, Ministers, Teachers, Law Enforcement Officers, Doctors, Nurses, Pilots, Construction
Workers, Commercial Drivers, Business Owners, Legislators, and many more.
is three-fold. First we are again
seeking to amend RCW 46.37.530 to allow those over 18 years of age to exercise their individual
right to choose whether or not to wear a motorcycle helmet for each and every time they ride
their motorcycles. Secondly; we will be continuing our efforts to pass a unified form of HB1515
and ESB5623, to reduce traffic congestion and increase the safety of motorcyclists traveling on
the roadways within Washington State. Thirdly; ABATE of Washington is open to assist other
Motorcycle Rights Organizations in a unified community effort as requested to support other
motorcycle legislation our membership deems appropriate.
Each year ABATE of Washington host a legislative day to allow our membership to speak faceto-face with legislators in Olympia concerning our issues. This packet and the accompanying
data is part of that annual legislative effort. Within this packet, you will find information on the
issues that ABATE is most concerned with this session; amending RCW 46.37.530 (HB1748 &
SB5198) and introducing regulated lane filtering in Washington State (HB1515 & ESB5623).
The effort to amend RCW 46.37.530 has many benefits to the citizenry of Washington State.
When passed, Washington would be able to join the majority of states in the country that allow
Freedom of Choice in the wearing of motorcycle helmets. Data will be provided that shows the
result of such an amendment in the state of Michigan. It is hoped after understanding this
information that you will support the passing of these bills, and allow the motorcycling
community in Washington State to exercise their Right to choose for themselves when and if it is
proper for them to wear a motorcycle helmet.
Lane filtering, as proposed in HB1515and ESB5623, is the technique
between the lanes of stopped or slow moving traffic. As laid forth in HB1515 (and the original
tually written using the guidelines developed by the
CHP. Studies sponsored by the CHP and California Office of Traffic Safety, have found that by
using these techniques, lane filtering is as safe as any other motorcycling activity. The attached
CD contains copies of studies that support each of these efforts. As well as data from several
government and law enforcement agencies, and videos that may be of assistance in placing these
Bills in the proper context of their meaning.
1
THE
MYTH
According to the Chief Council of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; there is
no such thing as a DOT
admits this fact freely. The US
Dept. of Transportation does not approve or reject motorcycle
, who must ensure their helmet would
meet the minimum standards of FMVSS-218 if tested
even required to test the helmet
such time as that model helmet is randomly chosen to undergo independent testing, and either
passes or fails testing.
Between 1980 and 2008, 1,540
models were independently tested by
NHTSA contracted laboratories. Of those,
945 helmets failed to meet the minimum
standards of FMVSS-218. That is a 61.4%
failure rate over a 28 year period. This is
significant because according to the
left, that same WSP brochure st
are more likely to die in a motorcycle
collision if you are wearing a bogus
high rate of non-compliance, why are Washington States motorcyclists mandated to wear them?
Only through laboratory testing can a helmet be found compliant or non-compliant with the
federal standard. NHTSA states that; To assess a products conformance to the Federal motor
vehicle safety standards, NHTSA follows the test procedures specified in the applicable standard.
Additionally, more detailed testing procedures that NHTSA-contracted laboratories use to test
compliance are available on NHTSA s website. Visual inspection of a helmet does not meet the
technical level of testing to conform with the test procedures specified in FMVSS-218.
After testimony by ABATE of Washington and other motorcycle rights organizations during a
Senate Transportation Committee hearing; the Washington State Patrol representative was able
2
THE
HELMETS SAVE LIVES MYTH
cle operators and 50% of
motorcycle operators who died in 2010 were wearing helmets.
NHTSA data for Washington State shows that in 2010, 90% of motorcycle fatalities were
wearing helmets. While in 2011, 100% of fatalities were wearing helmets. According to the
same NHTSA publication (Washington Traffic Safety Facts 2008-2012), the average percentage
of motorcycle fatalities wearing helmets was 91.7% between 2008 and 2012. This is a scenario
that has been consistent for decades. While it may be quite counter-intuitive, both accidents and
fatalities tend to be lower in states with a helmet choice option. This pattern has held true for
decades, as shown below.
National Motorcycle Fatalities
60%
40%
20%
0%
Deaths Wearing
Helmets
Deaths Without
Helmet
CDC statistics as cited in a 2013 letter from the CDC to Congressman Thomas Petri
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Mandatory Helmet Use
Voluntary Helmet Use
Reported
Accidents
Fatalities
Accidents and Fatalities from the 1994 Motorcycle Statistical Annual, Motorcycle Industry Council.
3
In another NHTSA publication the 2012 NHTSA Traffic Safety Report, NHTSA
that motorcycle
-
Helmets Preventing Fatal Injuries
63%
Ineffective
37%
Effective
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
4
In 2007, NHTSA released a study showing that 81% of helmeted motorcycle fatalities
suffered no head injuries. Their deaths were due to injuries to other portions of their bodies.
To put it in plain language; if 100% of motorcycle fatalities in Washington State were wearing
helmets (as was the case in 2011), their motorcycle helmets did nothing to prevent the deaths of
81% of those involved.
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
81%
40%
30%
20%
19%
10%
0%
Percentage of Fatalities With Head
Injuries
All Other Bodily Injuries Resulting
In Fatality
A further example of the counter-intuitive nature of the helmet issue, is the state of Michigan. In
2012, Michigan repealed their universal helmet law. Opponents claimed the death rate for
motorcyclists would skyrocket due to helmetless riders. The opposite has been shown to be true.
This same argument has been made repeatedly here in Washington State by opponents of
amending the universal helmet law here.
Both of the successive years since the repeal (2013 and 2014) have shown a reduction in
fatalities. By 2014 motorcycle fatalities in Michigan have dropped to the lowest point in five
years (since 2009), a full three years prior to the repeal of the universal helmet law in Michigan.
The presumed sharp rise in carnage from unhelmeted motorcyclists filling hospital emergency
rooms from the sudden increase in horrific motorcycle accidents estimated to occur by opponents
to amending the helmet law simply failed to materialize.
5
MICHIGAN MOTORCYCLE FATALITIES 2008-2014
140
120
100
80
60
125
103
40
125
109
129
128
107
20
0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
1. Figures from Michigan Office of Highway Safety Planning
It is not just fatalities that have shown such a marked decrease. Incapacitating injuries have
dropped sharply
correspond with the real world data.
HELMET IMPACT VELOCITY ATTENUATION
Impact velocities that helmets must be able to attenuate to be DOT compliant are actually quite
low. They do not factor in any forward momentum or speed of the motorcycle. Only the vertical
drop of the helmet is even factored into the formula. The impact test velocity for an impact on
the rear of the helmet is a mere 11.6 mph (the equivalent of dropping the helmet from a height of
four and one half feet). The highest impact velocity a DOT compliant helmet is required to
6
attenuate is a velocity of 13.4 mph (or the speed a helmet attains being dropped from a height of
six feet). It is for this reason that motorcycle manufacturers (such as Bell helmets) provide
written warnings with new motorcycle helmets to replace them if
ow
The following charts show the actual impact points and velocities a helmet must be able to
attenuate to meet the minimum standards to be DOT compliant. The charts on the following
page indicate the height from which the helmet is to be dropped to achieve these velocities.
7
As can be seen, these impact velocities have no forward velocity at all. These tests provided
only the impact force of a stationary motorcyclists impacting the ground. Is it merely a
coincidence that the maximum impact velocity of the standard is only 13.4 mph? Studies have
shown that as impact velocities rise above that level, there begins an increasing trade-off
between head protection and neck injury. Even at these very low impact levels, helmet
manufacturers urge consumers to replace any helmet that is subjected to this level of impact
because its impact attenuation protection has been so severely compromised that it is now
ineffective as a head impact protection device.
THE GOLDSTEIN STUDY
The Goldstein Study found several key points regarding motorcycle fatalities. These include:
1.
The major determinants of fatality are the rider's crash speed (kinetic energy) and blood
alcohol level. For the average rider involved in the average accident, it is found that the
probability of death increases from 2.1% to 11.3% when the rider's blood alcohol level
8
increases from 0.0 to 0.1 (from sober to legally intoxicated in most states). In the same
vein, an increase in the crash speed from 40 to 60 mph increases the probability of
death from 7.1% to 36.3%.
2.
It is found that helmets have a statistically significant effect in reducing head injury
severity. We can reject the hypothesis that helmets have no effect on head injuries in
favor of the claim that they reduce head injuries.
3.
It is shown that past a critical impact velocity to the helmet (approximately 13 mph),
helmet use has a statistically significant effect which increases the severity of neck
injuries. Thus we reject the claim that, helmets have no effect on neck injuries in favor of
the claim that, past a critical impact speed, they exacerbate neck injuries.
4.
As a result, we establish that a tradeoff between head and neck injuries confronts a
potential helmet user. Past a critical impact speed to the helmet (13 mph), which is
likely to occur in real life accident situations helmet use reduces the severity of head
injuries at the expense of increasing the severity of neck injuries. (Emphasis was
from the author of the study) Further statistical tests reveal the qualitative nature of this
tradeoff. It is shown that an individual who wears a helmet and experiences an impact
velocity to the head greater than 13 mph may avoid either severe or minor head injuries
and incur either severe or minor neck injuries; all permutations of the tradeoff are equally
likely to occur.
Figures compiled by the US Dept. of Transportation, actually supports the findings of the
Goldstein Study; in that speed is a prime factor in motorcycle fatalities. In virtually every year
between 2006 and 2010 in Washington State, speed was a contributing factor in more deaths than
all other factors combined. Only in 2007 did the combined numbers of all other contributing
factors slightly exceed speed, as shown in the chart below.
Speed Vs All Other Contributing Factors
Fatalities
50
41
0
39
33
36
42
39
24
46
35
34
Speed Related Deaths (Red) Vs All Other Deaths (Gray)
2006-2010
Data compiled from FARS 2010 Preliminary Report and WA Traffic Safety Commission report 1/26/2012
9
The Washington Traffic Safety Commission statistics also support the findings of the Goldstein
Study. The WTSC found that between 2006 and 2010 a high percentage of fatalities were
impaired at the time of the fatal crash.
Impaired Operator Percentage Of Fatalities
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
58.00%
30.00%
58.00%
60.00%
46.30%
46.40%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Data compiled from WA Traffic Safety Commission report 1/6/2012
There are those who believe that motorcyclists wish to choose whether or not to wear a helmet
out of some macho invulnerable attitude. Quite the opposite is true. The combination of the
Goldstein study; the fact that DOT helmets need not be tested by the manufacturer, the high
percentage of DOT helmets that fail independent testing, brings serious questions for the
individual about whether it is worth the possible risk to wear a DOT motorcycle helmet for each
and every ride we take. Such questions cannot rationally be answered by a blanket mandate to
wear a helmet that the facts show is only marginally effective while simultaneously posing a
significant risk for neck injury. The fact that the additional weight of a helmet on the head of a
motorcyclist can lead to additional fatigue; and in some cases can actually exacerbate preexisting injuries, and in of itself poses a risk of contributing to a crash. While a properly fitting
motorcycle helmet being worn as prescribed provides absolutely zero protection while riding
safely down the road. During a crash, the governments own data
effectiveness in preventing fatal injuries to motorcyclists. Motorcycle helmets are not the answer
for every ride, in every circumstance. It should be the individual motorcyclists right to choose.
10
being injured in an accident. While the federal governments own statistics do not bare this out, it
is still widely believed. For example, a report by University of North Carolina's Highway Safety
Research Center found that 49.5 percent of injured motorcyclists had their medical costs covered
by insurance, which is almost identical to the 50.4 percent for other road trauma victims.
50.50%
50.00%
49.50%
49.00%
Motorcyclists
Medical Costs
Covered By
Insurance
Medical Costs
Covered By Public
All Other Highway Trauma Victims
Percentage of Medical Cost Paid By Insurance vs Paid By Public
society as
anyone else, let us break down the numbers even further using 2012 Washington State D.O.T.
figures. First, let us factor in the actual numbers of each set, and not just the percentages. By
doing this it becomes obvious that motorcyclists are
highway users.
2000
1500
1000
Motorcyclists
500
All Other Highway Trauma Victims
0
Serious Injuries
Uninsured/"Burden"
Numbers of Accident Victims--"Public Burden"
11
not covered by insurance are
brings the numbers down to 198 motorcyclists not covered by insurance, and 905 Nonmotorcyclists that are not covered by insurance.
According to the National Center For Health Statistics, only 1.16% of total US health costs are
attributable to motor vehicle accidents. The cost of treating motorcyclists injuries account for
attributable to the cost of treating un-helmeted motorcyclists.
Washington State Statistics
Between 2008 and 2013, the motorcycle fatality rate fell 9.8% (from 81 fatalities in 2008 to 73 in
2013).*
Between 2008 and 2012, 93% of motorcycle fatalities were wearing helmets. *
In 2011, 100% of motorcyclist fatalities were wearing helmets.*
*These Performance Measures Were Developed By The National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA)
and the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) (See Publication: DOT HS 811 025
12
LANE FILTERING---HB1515 & ESB5623
Lane filtering it the technique that allows a motorcycle to move forward between lanes of
stopped or slow moving traffic. It is the accepted means of behavior in Europe and Asia.
Lane Filtering in London, Malaysia and California
using the guidelines laid out in HB1515, and the original language of ESB5623. A study done
for the California Office of Traffic Safety shows that lane filtering when done using the
guidelines issued by the CHP and embedded in the language of these bills originally is as safe as
any other motorcycling activity.
The MAIDS (Motorcycle In-depth Accident Study) shows that if only 10% of the highways
users were riding motorcycles, and used the lane filtering technique, overall traffic congestion
would be reduced by 40%. Can you imagine the traffic flow on I-405, I-5, WA520, or I-90 being
reduced by 40%? Another benefit of lane filtering, as shown by the MAIDS is a reduction in
commute times for all highway users. When motorcyclists lane filter through stopped or slow
moving traffic, they are not taking up space in a lane better used by a larger vehicle. The more
13
motorcyclists that are using this technique, the better flow traffic can have. As shown by
MAIDS, this can reduce traffic commute times for all users by 20 minutes or more.
Lane filtering provides a much safer mode of riding for motorcyclists by vastly reducing the
odds of being involved in a rear end collision. Also, it allows motorcyclists to limit exposure the
noxious fumes that a 2014 University of Washington study showed contributes to several major
health issues such as; heart disease, cancer, hypertension, etc.
Lane filtering can also reduce the risk of injuries to motorcyclists by lowering the risk of crashes
related to fatigue. An example of this would be this common situation; a motorcyclist and his
passenger are caught in heavy traffic inching forward at 5 mph, having to walk the motorcycle
through traffic on his feet to stay upright. Imagine the motorcycle, motorcyclist, and his
passenger (the total weight can easily reach over 1,000 pounds) being kept up only by the
motorcyclists legs for up to an hour as they slowly inch forward through traffic. As fatigue sets
into the motorcyclists legs, the motorcycle can become very unstable and lead to a crash.
Traveling at speeds below about 10 mph motorcycles tend to be unstable by nature, adding the
stress to the rider of needing to support the motorcycle for so long can easily result in rider
fatigue, a significant factor in motorcycle crashes. Allowing a motorcycle to safely filter forward
between lanes of slow moving or stopped traffic greatly reduces the risk of rider fatigue, and
therefore would lower the risk of a crash.
The 2014 study done for the California Office of Traffic Safety also shows that the risk of severe
injuries is lower for motorcyclists who lane filter using the guidelines in the original language of
HB1515, and even the language ESB5623 had when it left the Senate Transportation Committee.
The lower difference in vehicle speeds (no more than 10 mph per the bills language) actually
lowers the actual of numbers of head injuries, limb injuries, and torso injuries when a crash does
occur.
It has been shown since the 1981 Hurt Report that giving motorcyclists the ability to travel
forward between lanes of traffic can reduce the risks of rear end collisions by approximately onethird. Even the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) has given its
support to states allowing motorcyclists to be allowed to use this technique due to its increasing
the safety of the motorcyclist. Lane filtering is safer, lane filtering reduces traffic congestion,
lane filtering should be allowed in Washington State.
e difficulty in
enforcing this law should it be passed. ABATE of Washington has a three-fold reply to the WSP
on these issues. The first, is that the California Highway Patrol (who has decades of institutional
experience with this practice) considers it
14
still have discretion to use their enforcement powers to cite motorcyclists who violate the law by
riding in an unsafe manner. Excessive speed, negligent riding, etc., will still be viable
enforcement tools to use against those motorcyclists who may violate the law. Thirdly, the WSP
bar height bill, the blue
possible carnage has come to fruition. When performed in the manner described in the original
language of these bills (1. No more than 10 mph above the speed of traffic, and 2. When traffic is
flowing no faster than 25 mph) it has been shown that motorcycles lane filtering help to reduce
commuters, reduce the emissions during peak traffic times by helping to reduce traffic
congestion and commute travel time.
ABATE of Washington and other members of the motorcycling community in Washington State
hope you will support the bills to bring lane filtering to the citizens in our state. We ask that
ESB5623 be amended to restore the language it had when it was passed out of the Senate
Transportation Committee, as the language it currently contains is now so restrictive that it
effectively defeats the purpose of the bill entirely, and restricts the motorcyclists of Washington
to dangerous areas of the state highways in order to filter forward. As currently formed,
ESB5623 is not supported by virtually the entire motorcycle community in Washington State.
Since this bill was written originally by motorcyclists, it should show the extent of the possible
risks of this bill as currently amended.
ABATE of Washington, thanks you for your consideration, and any support you may give on
these issues. If you have any questions on these issues, feel free to contact ABATE by emailing
[email protected]. Your questions will be answered as quickly as possible.
15

ABATE of Washington

Transcription

Similar documents

July - ABATE of Illinois

cowtown showdown - Custom Performance Cycles

Purchase a ticket to the Guns N` Roses concert on Monday, August

los güeros contact information form document information family

137.50 OFF MSRP - South Bay Riders

a Printable Version - Law Offices Of Richard Troutman

Dirtbike Magazine

2012 Vintage Festival Poster

HELMET MCH-MID LUBAWA

SafetySpeak! Vol 8 No 1

Motorcyclist Traffic Fatalities by State