[giantg2]

It really is surprising to dig into the stats around alcohol, drugs, and non-use of existing safety systems. We end up with a lot of discussions on all sort of new laws but a lot of the problem is that the existing laws and tools aren't used.

I was not aware of the 50% alcohol involvement in motorcycle fatalities, but it doesn't surprise me. About 35% of all vehicle fatalities involve drunk driving, 50% of all pedestrian deaths involve either the driver or pedestrian being drunk, and 20% of cyclist fatalities invovle drunk cyclists (I assume alcohol is a factor for many other cyclist desths too). Then we have 45% of traffic fatalities that don't wear a seatbelt, about 35% of child fatalities did not use restraints, and 80-90% of child restraints are misused. I'm not sure about motorcycle accidents, but 60% of cyclist fatalities did not use a helmet.

The drunk driving and not properly restraining kids are really the biggest issue since it affects others. Things like not wearing a helmet, cycling DUI, and not using a seatbelt are a little more Darwinian in thier punishment.

[tonyedgecombe]

>but 60% of cyclist fatalities did not use a helmet.

I wonder what portion of those would have been a fatality even with a helmet. Cycling helmets are flimsy things.

[giantg2]

They are not flimsy, mnless you are buying some sort of uncertified junk (rare). There are several different rating agencies that test and rate the helmets. Wearing a helmet isn't foolproof, and one could certainly die if the impact raring is exceeded or if they suffered severe trauma to another area. However, studies seem to indicate a 60-70% reduction in head and brain injuries and about a 65-70% reduction in fatalities. Clearly they are a significant factor.