It is a clear day, traffic is heavy and a motorist who is heading north bound in the right-hand lane of a four lane highway, and impulsively decides to turn across the left hand north bound, the middle turn lane and the two south bound lanes to enter a gas station. The turn is best described as a “swerve” by those who were cutoff by this motorist. The motorist almost makes this “turn,” the only obstacle was a south bound motorcyclist who was taken unawares by this motorist and unable to stop in time. The motorist hits the motorcyclist and his bike, running over top of both of them. The motorcyclist was seriously injured and tragically, died from those injuries. The motorist is fine, and won’t be worrying about getting gas for a while, hopefully while sitting behind bars for a number of years.
What I described really happened, and if you would relate this to another person, the first comment elicited from them will be, “was he wearing a helmet?” It is almost as if the accident was caused by the motorcyclist because he was or was not wearing a helmet. An analogy of this kind of thinking would be if someone was shot by a gun wielding nut, and the blame would be placed on the victim because they were not wearing a Kevlar vest. You say that I am going too far in that analogy? Why, for it could be part of the argument put forward by the insurance company in a civil action, to discredit the victim. In the accident described above, the motorcycle rider was the victim, but partial blame is going to be assigned to him for not wearing a helmet in the minds of the public at large. The blame assigned to the motorist is almost lessened because of the mindset created by the insurance companies and the media about motorcyclists.
So far this year, there have been many serious automobile accidents, and there have been only a small number of motorcycle accidents. But the attention in the media on a motorcycle accident will center on the wearing of helmet invariably, even though of all these accidents, only one or two can be attributed to rider error. In almost all of the other accidents, the riders were hit by a motorist who was not paying attention or breaking the law. Somehow the illegal act of the motorist takes second place in the blame game to the idea that the rider’s not wearing a helmet that “could have, should have or maybe” made a difference. Does this assigning of blame have implications on other issues in our society?
For when you see a rider wearing a helmet on a motorcycle, and the first word image that is presented in your mind is “responsible.” You see another rider who is not wearing a helmet, the word image that comes to mind, is “risk taker.” The issue is not the helmet, but the image that has been successfully planted in people’s minds about this issue. In Ohio, motorcycle riders have a choice, to wear or not to wear a helmet. This choice was not given to the riders, but came about only after an intensive lobbying and grassroots action by riders across the state against an earlier imposed statute that required the wearing of a helmet by riders. It is a choice that riders are allowed to make, and when you consider the multitude of statutes, one of the few still around. But because of the images planted in public mindset, motorcyclists are seen as risk takers, and not wearing a helmet is the supreme act of risk taking. Risk taking is a part of life and part of American Culture, for our history is full of risk takers who placed their lives at risk to accomplish or to do something out of the norm. The difference is who taking the risk, after all we are governed by risk decision makers, the difference is that they place others in the risk taking roles, i.e., soldiers in combat, and don’t personally take the risks themselves, unlike a motorcyclist.
Choice is also a word that is used in the American Culture, for it is also symbolic of the idea that is the foundation of our freedoms here, that we as individuals have the right to make choices, and as long as those choices do not interfere with the rights of others. Wearing a helmet is one of those choices, and whether it is worn or not, this choice does not impede the on the rights of others. We live in a society that has become so regimented in the rules and or laws that have to be complied with, that our individualism is in danger of being snuffed out. Maybe that is why when a people look at a motorcycle rider out on the highway or on the local streets; they see an individual act of being different, not conforming to society’s strictures, of exercising personal freedom, which is characteristically the basic element of our American Culture.
Maybe that is what scares the establishment the most?
No comments:
Post a Comment