Motorcyclists who've tried and failed for two decades to repeal Nebraska's law mandating helmets are gearing up for another fight and hopeful new faces in the Legislature will help them finally ride bareheaded.About one-third of the Legislature, including bill sponsor Sen. John Lowe of Kearney, is new this year because of term limits and the 2016 election. Lowe, who presented his bill to the Legislature's Transportation and Telecommunications Committee Monday, took over the annual effort for a personal reason: he rode a motorcycle in college and eventually gave it up in part because he said wearing a helmet made it harder to hear and limited his peripheral vision.His bill would allow riders age 21 or older to wear eye protection instead of full helmets and prohibit children age 6 or younger from being passengers on motorcycles. Lowe described it as "pro-freedom and pro-tourism" and predicted it would return up to $1.7 million in annual tourism revenue lost because motorcyclists drove through neighboring states.

Of the states bordering Nebraska, only Missouri requires all motorcyclists wear helmets. motorcycle shop limestone nyIowa has no law, and South Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado and Kansas only mandate helmets for riders younger than 18.The measure restores freedom to adult Nebraskans, said Dave Bloomfield, the former senator who pushed similar legislation for the past several years."motorcycle tires murrieta caI cannot just sit idly by the wayside and watch freedom denied to Nebraskans who are wise enough and old enough and deserve to make these decisions for ourselves," Bloomfield said.buy motorcycle helmets edmontonDoctors and motorcycle accident survivors who opposed the bill said survivors never walk away from motorcycle accidents regretting that they wore helmets.harley davidson military sales overseas tour

Patrick Lange, who spoke to the committee while wearing a leather Harley-Davidson jacket, choked up describing the accident that killed his new wife and put him in a coma for more than 50 days. motorcycle helmet law debateThey were on a motorcycle during their honeymoon in South Dakota in 2010, not wearing helmets, when a tire blew out on the highway."motorcycle shops in fukuokaI will wonder the rest of my life what would have happened if I had taken the extra safety precaution that day," Lange said. "I didn't get my wife home safe."Gary Hausmann, who was in a motorcycle accident 10 years ago, said dozens of experts told him he would have died had he not been wearing a helmet. He spoke against the legislation for the ninth year in a row on behalf of Madonna Rehabilitation Hospitals in Lincoln and Omaha.The average cost of medical bills for motorcyclists who sustain brain injuries is about $1.41 million, Hausmann said, and that often gets passed on to taxpayers because riders don't have adequate health insurance or qualify for Medicare or Medicaid.Arguments about motorcycle accidents costing the state don't hold up

, said motorcyclist Greg Koellner. He leaned on a crutch as he walked to deliver his testimony, and he explained it was from a partial hip replacement caused by falling out of his truck — not a motorcycle accident."The one thing I hear is that we as motorcyclists are a drain on the system," he said. "A lot more goes on in everyday life."The panel appeared likely to advance the bill to a floor vote again this year. It's been successfully filibustered the past few times it came up. Nebraska panel kick-starts new debate on motorcycle helmets LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — A Nebraska lawmaker has renewed the state's perennial effort to allow many motorcyclists to ride without helmets. Sen. John Lowe of Kearney says his bill allowing riders 21 or older to wear eye protection instead of helmets is "pro-freedom and pro-tourism." Motorcyclists praised it at a committee hearing Monday. Proponents of the bill say Nebraska loses $1.7 million in tourism revenue annually from motorcyclists who instead ride through neighboring states that don't require helmets.

Doctors and motorcycle accident survivors who spoke against the measure say the state-funded costs of treating riders with brain injuries are larger than any tourism revenue. Of Nebraska's neighbors, only Missouri requires all riders to wear helmets. Iowa has no law, and South Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado and Kansas only mandate helmets for riders younger than 18. Stay informed with a wide selection of the top news, sports, entertainment and lifestyle headlines. Helmet Laws and Motorcycle Accident Cases Download article as a PDF A helmet is by far the most important and most effective piece of protective equipment a motorcycle driver or passenger can wear. Helmets save lives by reducing the extent of head injuries in the event of a traffic accident. A helmetless motorcyclist involved in an accident is three times as likely to suffer a brain injury as a motorcyclist wearing a helmet, and a large number of motorcyclists die each year because of head injuries sustained in accidents.

Because of this danger, motorcycle operators and passengers in many states are required by statute to wear safety helmets. Despite a lack of support among some motorcyclists, a number of states have enacted statutes requiring the use of protective equipment when riding a motorcycle. Some of these laws require that a motorcycle rider and/or his or her passenger wear equipment such as goggles or face shields, but most common (and most controversial) are those laws that require the wearing of a helmet. Mandatory helmet laws for motorcycle operators and their passengers have, for the most part, proven to be an effective strategy in both increasing helmet use and reducing head injuries and fatalities in motorcycle accidents nationwide. But, while having an unmistakably positive effect on the overall safety of motorcycle riding, helmet laws have been met by resistance in the motorcycling community. The most vocal opposition to helmet laws has come by way of challenges to the legality of the laws themselves.

Although in some cases, specific language in helmet statutes has been successfully attacked on constitutional grounds, the principle of requiring motorcyclists and their passengers to wear safety helmets has consistently been upheld as constitutional. Failure to Wear a Helmet In a personal injury action brought by an injured motorcyclist, the opposing motorist may raise an issue with regard to the motorcyclist's own negligence. A motorcyclist's legal recovery might be barred, or reduced, as a result of his/her contributory negligence in causing the accident. In defining what constitutes contributory negligence, there is an important distinction between negligence contributing to the accident and negligence contributing to the injuries sustained. An act or omission that merely increases or adds to the extent of the injuries suffered by the motorcyclist will not itself defeat a legal recovery. In a number of states that have enacted mandatory helmet statutes, the laws either: (1) provide only for criminal penalties, or (2) do not state what effect a violation has on the determination of whether a motorcyclist was negligent.

Thus, in these jurisdictions, and in those that do not have helmet laws, the effect of a motorcyclist's failure to wear a helmet on the determination of his negligence is unsettled. In such states, the failure to wear a helmet may be found to constitute negligence on the part of a motorcyclist, or may be relevant to the issue of injuries and damages where it appears the failure to wear a helmet was a substantial factor in bringing about the motorcyclist's injuries. In some states, the failure to wear a helmet as required by a statute is treated as any other possible act of negligence on the part of a motorcyclist, such as traveling at an excessive rate of speed or failing to use turn signals. In such states, when the failure to wear a helmet contributes to the motorcyclist's injuries, it is deemed a proximate cause of his injuries and it may serve to bar or limit his or her recovery. However, when the failure contributes in no way to the motorcyclist's injuries, it is not a proximate cause and it has no effect on the motorcyclist's ability to recover.