A brief history of motorcycle helmet technology and mandates

The dawn of the early motorcycle era occurred in the late 1800s, and in the early 1900s many of today’s well-known motorcycle manufacturers began to take root. In predictable fashion, it wasn’t long before riders had to know which motorcycle could go faster, and so motorcycle racing began to spring up all across the nation. At first these early races took place on horse racing tracks and bicycle velodromes, but soon dedicated motordromes with steep wooden banks were made specifically for cars and motorcycles.

Initially, motorcycles were simply a tool in bicycle velodromes. Eventually they would invent their own racing venues called the “motordrome” where the motorcycle would become the center of excitement. Photo provided by Motorcycle Timeline.

With the rising speed and danger of the banked motordromes, most racers began wearing leather helmets and goggles for protection. These board-track racers could reach speeds of 100 mph. Having a little leather cap on hardly seems adequate, but the low cost and availability of the leather cap made it a top choice for not only motorcyclists but also aviators, auto racers, and American football players. In 1914, British physicist Eric Gardiner commissioned the first shellacked canvas helmet, essentially the first “hard helmet” dedicated to motorcycling. He also lobbied for the Isle of Man TT to make head protection mandatory for the legendary race, and was surprisingly successful in this endeavor. It is peculiar to think that one of the most dangerous motorcycle races known today was actually one of the first to make this historic safety decision.

T.E. Lawrence was fatally injured in an accident on his Brough Superior SS100 motorcycle in Dorset while trying to avoid two young boys in the road on bicycles. His untimely death inspired Dr. Hugh Cairns to dedicate his life's work to preventing head injuries. Photo provided by Wikimedia Commons.

The next big leaps for motorcycle helmets came about in the World Wars, and the most notable advances are thanks to Hugh Cairns and his research into head injuries. Doctor Cairns was deeply impacted by the loss of T.E. Lawrence, famously known as “Lawrence of Arabia,” when he tragically died due to a motorcycle accident and head injury. Doctor Cairns began gathering data of head injuries suffered from motorcycle accidents, and as a consulting neurosurgeon to the British Army he published his 1941 study in the British Medical Journal titled "Head Injuries in Motor-cyclists - the importance of the crash helmet." This medical study influenced the British Army to make helmets mandatory for dispatch riders, and now with a control group of helmeted riders to compare to the typically bare-headed civilian population, Cairns was able to make some correlations about the benefits of head protection. His continued studies showed that helmets could reduce skull fractures by 75%, and overall fatalities were dramatically reduced. 

Jump forward to the 1950s, and Professor Lombard of the University of Southern California invented the first helmet with impact-absorption capabilities. It’s also in this same timeframe we see the birth of many of the helmet brands we know today, such as AGV, Bell Helmets, Arai, and Shoei.

Bell introduced the first full-face helmet in 1963. Bell photo.

In 1963, Bell Helmets introduced the iconic Bell Star 500, their first full-face helmet to the market. The other helmet brands were quick to follow and by the 1970s the MotoGP grid was all full-face helmets, and this new-age technology began showing up on everyday street riders, as well.

It is here in the mid ‘60s where the helmet evolution story begins to dovetail with politics. As the decade has been historically known for massive social change and revolution, the progress made in the name of safety from a motor vehicle standpoint is often overlooked.

The Highway Safety Act of 1966 and the first helmet laws

In 1960, 90,000 Americans died due to unintended injuries with 41% of those deaths due to traffic incidents. After five years of watching the motor vehicle fatality rate rise, the federal government was finally spurred into action. 

President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Motor Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Highway Safety Act on September 9, 1966. In his speech he noted that auto accidents were “the biggest cause of death and injury among Americans under 35. And if our accident rate continues, one out of every two Americans can look forward to being injured by a car during his lifetime – one out of every two!” Photo provided by LBJ Presidential Library.

Both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate unanimously voted through the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and President Johnson signed it into law in 1966. It was a truly bi-partisan and unifying effort, and it has been extremely effective at saving American lives. The law led to changes such as seat belts in cars and improved road design to increase safety. It set the stage for many safety measures that have followed since, from tougher penalties for drunk driving to safety seats for children to air bags — and even laws requiring the use of motorcycle helmets. The adoption of these safety issues are nearly universal across all states and still hold to this day, but the one issue that didn’t have staying power was the motorcycle helmet laws. 

The initial 1966 safety act was successful at compelling 22 states to adopt helmet laws as early as 1967, and another 14 states joined them by 1968. By 1975, 47 out of 50 states had a motorcycle helmet law on the books. The Safety Act was successful in persuading states to adopt helmet laws because it gave authority to the Secretary of Transportation to set uniform standards for state highway safety programs. In 1967, motorcycle safety standards enacted by the secretary required that states adopt universal helmet use laws -- laws that mandate helmet use by all motorcycle riders. States that failed to comply would lose a portion of their federal funding for highway construction.

But 1975 would turn out to be a pivotal year, when the pendulum begins to swing in the opposite direction of helmet laws. The three hold-out states refusing to pass helmet laws had come under the scrutiny of the Secretary of Transportation, and so the DOT prepared to impose the sanctions the 1966 safety act had originally outlined for non-compliance. Senators from California, Utah, and Illinois lobbied for enough support in congress to amend the safety act, and so in 1975 Congress eliminated the motorcycle helmet law requirement and withdrew the threat of withholding of funds from states without such laws. Those amendments essentially opened the floodgates for all state governments to roll back their helmet laws.

For the several decades since, many states have been on a confusing journey of repealing, reenacting, and revising their motorcycle helmet laws. For better or worse, the splintering of helmet laws state by state has actually allowed us to study the effectiveness of wearing a helmet. And after almost 40 years of comparing data, the findings are pretty clear. 

Modern day motorcycle helmet laws and safety statistics

When it comes to the effectiveness of motorcycle helmets, multiple studies conclude that wearing a helmet reduces the risk of a fatality by as much as 42%, and that those who do not wear a helmet are three times more likely to suffer traumatic brain injuries. It’s important to note that once brain cells are destroyed or damaged, they do not regenerate, and so brain injuries suffered in motorcycle accidents are pretty much non-reversible. Unsurprisingly, head injury is the leading cause of death in all motorcycle crashes. 

All DOT-certified helmets will have this sticker on the back of it. This Arai Corsair X also meets the arguably more strict SNELL testing standards as seen below the DOT sticker. Photo by Jen Dunstan.

Not all helmets are created equal, either. Riders wearing “novelty helmets” — that is, helmets that have not been rated to the DOT standard — are two times as likely to die in an accident as compared to a rider in a full-face DOT-certified helmet. When it comes to half helmets, studies have shown that riders are twice as likely to suffer traumatic brain injuries compared to riders in full-face or open-face three-quarters helmets.

According to NHTSA, a half-face helmet like the one pictured is less protective than a full-face helmet in a crash, even if it is DOT-rated. Photo by Street & Steel.

The real point here is that the overwhelming evidence proves that helmets can and do save lives. The data also support the notion that helmet laws are quite effective in convincing riders to wear one. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported in 2020 that 94% of motorcyclists in a universal helmet law state do choose to wear a helmet, compared to only 60% in non-mandatory states. And wouldn’t you know it, states that implemented universal helmet laws saw on average a 26% reduction in fatalities. For those states that repealed or amended their helmet laws, they saw pretty much the inverse. For instance, Texas saw a 31% increase in fatalities after repealing its helmet law. The correlation of helmet laws saving lives is incredibly strong.

As of this writing, this is the current status of helmet laws across the United States. Please visit the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety helmet law page for in-depth details on each state law. IIHS illustration.

Despite all the science behind the safety and protection of motorcycle helmets, only 18 of 50 states have a universal helmet law in effect. Three states (Illinois, Iowa, and New Hampshire) do not have any helmet requirements whatsoever. As for the rest of the states, their partial helmet laws are sporadic and littered with all sorts of random restrictions. These partial laws can have footnotes about required eye protection, required health insurance standards, special rules for those on a learning permit, proof of “financial security,” and other regulations for the privilege of riding without a helmet on. Each of these partial law states will have their own age of limitation, typically starting from age 17 and the oldest on record being at age 26. Data on crashes in states where only minors are required to wear helmets show that fewer than 40 percent of the fatally injured minors wear helmets even though the law requires them to do so, proving that helmet laws that govern only minors are difficult to enforce. 

Helmet or no helmet? In Sturgis, South Dakota, the choice is up to the riders. But, do not forget your eye protection or else you can be slapped with a hefty ticket for that. J&P Cycles photo.

The right to decide how to ride

For rider advocacy groups opposed to helmet laws, the science behind the safety of wearing a helmet is immaterial. Whether or not helmets and helmet laws save lives isn’t the point for them. What they argue for instead is personal freedom.

Not unlike the convoluted politics behind the rise, fall, repeal, and reenactment of helmet laws across the nation, the decision to not wear a helmet can be a bit complex, and personal. It is said that in a free society, each individual must be left free to take their own risks, even if they are perceived as foolish ones. It is a matter of choice for these riders, their choice to ride in a helmet or not. 

On the mean streets of Philly, both of these riders can legally opt out of wearing a helmet if they so choose. Street & Steel photo.

Riding motorcycles is inherently dangerous, yet many of us choose to do it anyway. Each of us has our own unique tolerance for risk, and how much we are willing to take on. For riders opposed to helmet laws, it is their position that the government shouldn’t be making that determination for us. They argue that each of us individually must make that judgment all on our own. More or less, most state governments seem to agree with them. Helmet requirements have more often been reduced than increased in recent years. In 2020, Missouri recently rolled back its universal helmet law, and Nebraska also looks poised to do so in 2023. 

Do you think helmet laws have helped protect you on the ride? Or are they an unwelcome overreach? It’s a debate as old as the helmet laws themselves, and one that isn’t going to be over any time soon.

Source: Revzilla

Disclaimer:
As a service to the sport we all love and follow, Biker Life posts numerous media releases from a wide variety of sources on our website. Due to the large number, and sometimes short time available, it is nearly impossible to review each public release. These articles are written by reporters, writers or press officers who work for various organizations, event organizers, teams, drivers, riders, and other parties, and they do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Biker Life.