You folks are all so naive I want to pat your collective heads.

With the implementation of a command healthcare system you will do what you are damn well told to do and enjoy it. – The logic is irrefutable; when we all pay for every bodies heath care, every bodies lifestyle choice is every bodies business.

If it is decided that helmets are safer (B.T.W. they are) you will wear a helmet because nobody will want to cover the additional hospitalization costs.

That is until they decide that motorcycles are too dangerous for any but law-enforcement.

Don’t believe me? Look at the fate of smokers. – They just wanted to go to a remote corner and puff away. – They died a few years sooner, thereby helping keep the Social Security Trust Fund afloat and over the span of lifetime probably consuming less healthcare. – They have been hounded from the public square and are intentionally being taxed into poverty.

Every now and then some fat, blue state governor, trying to give the public appearance of being onther than bloodless will throw you a bone by repealing a helmet law and be seen, bare headed, astride a honkin’ big hog at a gay pride parade or something. - You will all applaud and ignore the tightening fetters.

You had your chance and you blew it, enjoy

I hope people realize that "Helmet Laws" and "Seatbelt Laws" (both of which I am against) are all in place because of Insurance Lobbyists seeking to reduce the payouts of insurance companies. Our government sold the the highest bidder and wrecked by Corporate influence.

Smokers are victims of the same GOP beloved Corporate rule.  Profits over People.

I'd wear my full face helmet either way - cause I'm just too pretty for road rash on my face and my hair is too great to get messed up by road rash. 

Like many have said I support the right to choose, but I always wear a quality certified helmet myself even living here in a state where it is not required. I know there are many cases where even with a helmet people have died or suffered major injuries, I just do everything I can to minimize the chances of it happening to me.

What's ironic about all of this DOT stuff is that there isn't one helmet state out there that will provide a list of DOT approved helmets. Evidence once more that government wants to mandate but not take responsibility.

Peace

Well I personally like the free feeling of not wearing a helmet so I don't anytime I ride whare it is not required. When a helmet is required I wear a novelty helmet. The exception is when I worked in the metro Atlanta area and used the bike to go to work, then I wore a DOT helmet.

Just an opinion: If you hit something hard enough to require a late model helmet to keep you alive....you probably would, later, not want to be alive.

Especially [again an opinion not necessarily based in reality] wonder about them huge Dartvader helmets with the 'jaw' sticking out 4 inches in front. A sure broken neck from a otherwise survivable fall due to the extreme 'lever arm' as you roll? Them things are for CARS!

I ride with a helmet that is time stamped 1968. That was before DOT existed. Inside is the "Snell Foundation" approval and the serial number. A sticker says" This helmet exceeds the USA.S.I. Z901 1966 safety standards". Never been asked to see the approval sticker by a law enforcement officer...but I can but wonder what the response will be if/when it happens. 1968 was 45 years ago...most lawmen are not that old. If I am ticketed I'm simply going to let my attorney handle it.

@jimmyacorn.... The list is on the back of a helmet! If it says DOT than it is approved in every state that requires a helmet! The government did take responsibility on that one. I however wear a non-DOT novelty helmet or none at all!
My choice, my decision!

Trippin

I didn't say DOT helmets weren't approved in every state or that states didn't require DOT approved helmets.  What I said was "states will not provide a list of DOT approved helmets".  In fact, a particular states DOT and the "NHTSA do not have the authority to approve or disapprove any equipment item"; a quote from the Chief Council of the NHTSA. 
ISTEA forbids the NHTSA from lobbying.  And to actually "approve" any manufacturer's helmet would be against the rules because it is a form of lobbying.  Some years back the NHTSA distributed pro-helmet videos and this did not fall under their legal right to do so and they were forbidden to distribute or make anymore videos.  They set standards and that is all.  They don't stamp the helmets.  They don't provide the stickers or tabs so they will NOT say any particular helmet is DOT approved.  If Alabama said specifically and listed BELL helmets as approved and you sustained a head injury in Alabama while wearing a BELL helmet you could sue and probably win a small fortune against Alabama DOT.  But don't take my word for it.  Ask Russ Brown.

"Motorcycle helmets are subject to FMVSS No. 218 (49 CFR §571.218), which specifies performance requirements for helmets to ensure that helmets reduce the likelihood of head injuries in crashes. The DOT symbol on the helmet is a certification by the helmet manufacturer, not the DOT, that the helmet conforms to FMVSS No. 218.

Ahhhhhhh, I stand corrected sir!

Trippin

NASHVILLE — A proposal to do away with the state’s motorcycle helmet law passed a Senate panel Wednesday despite Gov. Bill Haslam’s opposition.

The proposal sponsored by Republican Sen. Mike Bell of Riceville was approved 6-3 in the Senate Transportation Committee.

Thirty-one states allow riding without a helmet, Bell said.

Under his proposal, a person would be required to have $25,000 in additional medical coverage, a minimum two-year motorcycle license, have taken a motorcycle riding course, and be at least 25 years old.

The purchase of a $50 sticker to go on the helmet would also be required. Forty dollars of that would go to trauma centers.

Supporters have questioned the safety benefits of helmets and argued that ending the law would boost motorcycle tourism to Tennessee.

Opponents say not wearing a helmet will lead to more deaths and higher costs to trauma hospitals.

Sen. Todd Gardenhire testified before the committee and said his district has one of the top trauma hospitals in the state and that it would be among those affected if the proposal becomes law.

“Even with helmets on, there’s an enormous cost to the trauma centers that have to pay indigent care,” said the Chattanooga Republican, who wore a motorcycle helmet during his testimony. “And that’s just not fair.”

The measure is one of at least 22 bills Haslam has given so-called “philosophical flags,” stating an administration representative will seek a meeting with the lawmaker for discussion.

Bell said after the vote that he’s received flag letters from the Republican governor before.

“I understand the governor doesn’t like the bill,” Bell said. “But this bill has passed the Senate at least on two prior occasions, and I expect it’s got a good chance to pass the Senate again.”

A similar proposal was withdrawn from the legislative process last year.

At the time, a legislative analysis of the measure projected that changing the law would lead to an increase in traumatic brain injuries, carrying a $1.1 million price tag for TennCare, the state’s expanded Medicaid program.

Jimmyacorn

Thanks for the concise rundown. So, I take it, a traffic officer would not be able to determine DOT approval, or lack of approval, by brand of helmet. So, I would assume, only the presence or absence of a DOT sticker would be used to determine the legality of a particular helmet if the officer is standing alongside the road when making the determination. Is that sorta correct?

Too many laws in this Country trying to look after the welfare of the citizens. I've been on this sight a while now and I think that you citizens can take care of yourselves. Helmet laws suck! The right to wear one? A priviledge of U.S. commerce.

I feel it should be your Choice I choose to wear That being said here is a Quote for Lamar Alexander on a FISHING BILL but yet Tennessee says you must wear WTF
“We don’t want a government that’s strong enough to make our lives risk-free. We can do that for ourselves,” says Alexander in the ad, which touts his work to pass a measure that placed a two-year moratorium on efforts to restrict fishing access in certain areas in the state. I will Be asking him personaly about the helment law in Tennessee

As I mentioned in an earlier post I have always worn a helmet although for the most part it was a half helmet.  Then we had our accident and we decided to go to helmets that provided a little more protection.  I got me new helemt today and I love it.  It has been years since I have worn a helmet with so much coverage and back then they were heavy and very uncomfortable.

After trying on probably 50 helmets I decided to go with the HJC 3/4 helmet (which is the same on Harley sells with their logo).  I found it at HelmetCity.com for just $130.  It is super comfortable and with the ventilation system not that hot either.

An most of all, I think I look damn good in it!!!!

Here in Georgia it is required by law to have a DOT sticker on the helmet and must be seen at all times. If I could I would mostlikely use a off brand one because I could. But I still think everyone should have the right to make their own choice and not have it made for them.

choice would be no helmet but not allowed in tn , so that also means no novelty , only dot unless you want to spend $ 250 for a ticket to show you have more balls than brains or more cash than you have of the other 2 . LET THE RIDER DECIDE !

Have wondered about the wording of the law regarding alteration of a helmet. Anyways, how would a lawman along side the road be able to make that determination? In my crowd we remove the fabric liner and,using a rotary tool, thin out the Styrofoam in the area above the head. Usually until it is about 1/4 inch or so thick at the top. At least an inch or so is removed especially with the later model offerings. Makes the helmet sit a lot lower so that the wind does not so easily try to lift the helmet and scoot it rearwards. Also has the added advantage of not looking so high above the head which, although we have in large measure gotten used to it, makes the modern helmets sit really real high on the head rather than simply 'covering' the head. Most new helmets are now so thick at he top that they sorta make the helmet look like an ant carrying a biskut. Another advantage is to make the interior of the liner fit the head a heck of s lot better.

Also: If the limp wrested liberal song and dance is that not wearing a helmet costs society an excessive amount [over and above the goodie-to-shoes that religiously wear them] then something has sure gotta be done with the hordes of tubbys that swarm the streets. A large portion of our medical tax dollars are being used as blotters to soak up the lard. Drive by even a high school and what do you see? And they only get worse with age. Every disease or malady that humans have is made much worse by obesity. First things first....put in jail and levy fines upon the 'tanks' that are crippling our health care systems. Overall, the Helmet or no Helmet issues is a minor and esoteric subject when scrutinizing health care costs. But real problems, such as super -fat people are never mentioned.

I have an idea...have the obese people that ride the courtesy scooter at the food market wear a helmet and pay a state fee...that would ease some of that financial burden. They already have back up warning indicators on them. Seems to fit the same logic.

there are pros and cons to both sides
I'm pro choice in most everything. As long as it neither picks my pockets or breaks my arm.
That being said, if you choose not to wear a helmet, should your insurance rates be higher.
Over the, more than, 50 years I've been riding two incidents stand out in my personal experience.
I have one friend that died from from a broken neck, due the the extra weight of the helmet, that his neck was not 'designed' for. I also have an old riding partner that will never be quite the same due to a head injury from getting knocked over while waiting for a light to change.
This was before insurance was mandatory in this state (WA).
Mikey, no helmet, had insurance, but only collision, no medical.
Jonjon had no insurance.
My question is
If you choose to not wear a helmet, should you pay a higher insurance premium?
I would most likely wear one, even if it wasn't mandatory.
I would like to have the choice, though!!!!!

Glad everyone agrees on freedom to choose. This is a argument for argument sake. Its a no winner.