2009 House Bill 4138 (Require extra insurance for helmetless motorcycle rider )

[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Rep. Kathy Angerer (D) on February 4, 2009, to require motorcyclists who choose to ride without a helmet to purchase and pay for the unlimited personal injury protection (PIP) required for other vehicle owners under the state no-fault automobile insurance law.
- Referred to the House Regulatory Reform Committee on February 4, 2009.

Most Recent Comments

1) Re: 2009 House Bill 4138 (Require extra insurance for helmetless motorcycle rider ) [by chrisrich on June 30, 2009]

To me it just makes sense for everyone to wear a helmet. You can surivie a broken neck....but not a broken head. Where I am from, helmets are the law. It has not afftected my enjoyment of riding at all.

Line

2) Re: 2009 House Bill 4138 (Require extra insurance for helmetless motorcycle rider ) [by rjollis on June 7, 2009]

The use of safety equipnent is the RIGHT of the user. The state has no right to tell me what to wear on my head or on my ass. If the state of Michigan politicians would tend to performing their elected responsibilities the state would not be in the mess that it is.

Line

3) Re: 2009 House Bill 4138 (Require extra insurance for helmetless motorcycle rider ) [by crazycajun on February 16, 2009]

by the way.. motorcycle insurance doesn't drop a dime if i die. only if i'm hurt.

life insurance covers what happens when i die. perhaps we should require, as part of the sentence for criminal negligence for the driver's with cellphones in their ears, that they carry an extra life insurance policy to cover the deaths that occur from their negligence.

that way, every driver who owns a cell phone must have a life insurance policy payable to whomever they hit. sounds good to me. true DRIVER'S RESPONSIBILITY.

Line

View Full Conversation