InstructionsThe Body RevisionFollow the directions below for the completion of the body paragraphs revision assignment for Unit VII. If you have questions, please email your professor for assistance.P

Body of Research Paper

George Landry

Columbia Southern University

05/31/2019

Body of Research Paper

Helmets use laws was introduced for states to receive funding for interstates highways construction. The states were expected to lose approximately 10 percent for failure to enact the law. The states were in a hurry to enact the laws in order to benefit from the states funding on construction. The helmets use law brought in some health benefits to the motorcyclist riders through lowering injuries, reducing family-related medical burden, lowering states expenditure on roadblock and emergencies, reduction in hospital supplies. The cons that arise due to the helmets use laws included a problem with rider's eyesight problem, increase riders risk behavior for over speeding and lowering freedom of riders. This resulted to rider's controversy where riders advocated for the abolition of the state's helmets laws; others questioned the legality of the laws which made some to challenges the law in court. The advocacy of motorcyclist riders led to states to lift the limits making the law unconstitutional which gave some rider's freedom to ride without helmets.

The helmets use laws reduced bodily related injuries because the helmets helped in reducing head injuries or severe injuries that could result to over bleeding. As a result, the hospital reduces its operating expense, for example, the need to increase its blood banks. The cost of running and expanding the emergencies room reduce because there was no demand for emergency rooms (Philip, Fangman, Liao, Lilienthal, & Choi, 2013). The law enforcement department reduce it costs allocated for the roadblock, the number of officers assigned on each roadblock and cost of emergencies where the police have to be at the scene of accidents to help the victims of the accident. The reduction in bodily injuries helps families save on the cost of medication for caring for their loved one. The families will use the same funds to upgrade their living standard. The rider in a coma cannot help the family members after the accidents but the helmets will remedy that by making the rider not to stay long in the hospital hence providing for their families.

The helmets law brought about some disadvantage to the riders, for example, it affected their freedom to riders. Riders were happy to ride on open air without the helmets which give them a sense of visibility even during rainy days or sunny days. The riders could see well because they don't have helmets that prevent them from enjoying their time. The helmets in addition to preventing others from seeing well it also contain odor smell that results after one sweat which provides discomfort to riders hence affecting their concentration and perfection in the road (Croce, Zarzaur, Magnotti, & Fabian, 2009). The air blowing and that odor smell will make the riders uncomfortable. Helmets are heavy which may make some users experience neck issue for overuse and in case of accidents, the rider may break their neck which put some use to some condition which could have been avoided if they did not wear it. The female riders may not feel comfortable when the helmets interfere with their hairs and makeup. The riders risk behavior of over speeding will increase because some will feel safe while they are under helmets or think that they have the freedom to over speeding which put other road users to risk.

The rider's freedom violation through the helmet use laws enactment increases debate on the legality of this law were some tries to find loopholes or gaps about the law in order to challenge it in court. The stakeholder affected by this law challenges the provision citing it as unconstitutional because it curtails their bill of right or freedom protected in the U.S constitution. Those challenging the law based their arguments on the merits of the laws and reason for implementing it where some emphasize that the law was financially driven and was not drafted with riders needs in mind because they were not consulted even if the laws were to reduce states related injuries caused by motorcyclist riding. The rider's movements opposed the bill and even pressured the Congress to consider their intention on the helmet use laws. This caused the states to repeal the law that gave rider freedom to the rider without helmets unless one would like to wear a helmet. Some states lift limits on adults but other states made it illegal for children less than 18 years to ride without helmets.

References

Croce, M. A., Zarzaur, B. L., Magnotti, L. J., & Fabian, T. C. (2009). Impact of motorcycle helmets and state laws on society's burden: a national study. Annals of surgery, 250(3), 390-394.

Eltorai, A. E., Simon, C., Choi, A., Hsia, K., Born, C. T., & Daniels, A. H. (2016). Federally mandating motorcycle helmets in the United States. BMC public health, 16(1), 242.

Homer, J., & French, M. (2009). Motorcycle helmet laws in the United States from 1990 to 2005: politics and public health. American journal of public health, 99(3), 415-423.

Jones, M. M., & Bayer, R. (2007). Paternalism & its discontents: motorcycle helmet laws, libertarian values, and public health. American Journal of Public Health, 97(2), 208-217.

Philip, A. F., Fangman, W., Liao, J., Lilienthal, M., & Choi, K. (2013). Helmets prevent motorcycle injuries with significant economic benefits. Traffic injury prevention, 14(5), 496-500.

Williams, C, (Mar 17, 2011). The Next Era: A Helmet Law History. Mrf resources library. Retrieved from http://mrf.org/library2/index.php/mrf-white-papers/white-vol3/a-helmet-law-history/