Consider the new and improved motorcycle Helmet

(hell with I'm cranking up the power, yee ha!)

From Gold Iron: Here is one of the current technologies for tracking motorcyclists. This technology has other uses by LEO and other government agencies than 911 response.


ScienceDaily (Feb. 15, 2008) — Brycen Spencer, an engineering student at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, has designed a safety helmet that could help save the lives of thousands of outdoor sports enthusiasts involved in accidents each year. His Wireless Impact Guardian, or WIG, which signals for help even when the wearer is unconscious, is a giant leap forward in helmet safety.

“The WIG will be activated when it is buckled on,” says Spencer. “If you fall and hit your head, the helmet will detect that and beep for a minute or so. If you don’t turn it off, WIG sends for help, either directly to 911 or to a third-party service that relays the emergency call to 911. Included with the message will be a GPS location giving your geographical coordinates so the emergency team knows precisely where you are.”

Nicknamed “The OnStar of Helmets,” Spencer’s WIG would be a boon for motorcyclists, bicyclists, ATV enthusiasts and others, especially those venturing into remote areas. There were 113,900 ATV injuries requiring emergency room treatment in 2002 and 76,000 motorcycle-related injuries in 2004. In many instances, victims had to wait a long time for emergency response crews to find them.

At this time, the WIG has no competition. A similar invention on the market is a personal locator beacon that skiers and others use in case of accidents, but this device must be manually activated. There is also a football helmet that detects if the wearer suffers a concussion, but nothing on the market phones for help automatically like the WIG.

Spencer has started a seed-stage business with a business plan that recently won a $1,250 prize from the Executive Summary Competition in the UMass Amherst Technology Innovation Challenge. Last spring he also won $1,250 from the Grinspoon Foundation for Entrepreneurship, whose scholarship provides monetary awards to students who demonstrate the “entrepreneurial spirit” and who have a strong desire to own their own businesses. Spencer has also invested $2,500 of his own money, no small amount for a student, in a one-year Provisional Patent that will lead, patent pending, to a 20-year Utility Patent.

Spencer has used all the prize money to buy the inner workings for his helmet, including an accelerometer to detect any impact that exceeds a predetermined safety level and a communications device to provide the user’s location for rescue crews. All the electronics are small and relatively inexpensive, allowing them to fit in the current helmet configuration with little physical modification or increase in overall helmet price.

In January, Spencer was invited to the Advanced Invention to Venture (AI2V) workshop in intensive entrepreneurship held for student business teams from UMass Amherst. The AI2V workshop was hosted by Robert Hyers of the UMass Amherst mechanical and industrial engineering department and sponsored by several campus groups including the Isenberg School of Management, the College of Engineering, the Office of the Vice Provost for Research, the UMass Amherst Innovation System and the UMass Entrepreneurship Initiative. All these entities are working closely to help student entrepreneurs get their businesses off the ground.

After the success he’s already enjoyed with his invention, and with all the help he’s getting on campus to incubate his new business, Spencer is convinced his WIG is an idea whose time has come.

Adapted from materials provided by University of Massachusetts Amherst

NOW CONSIDER HO W BADLY THE GOVERNMENT WANTS YOU IN A HELMET !

NOW CONSIDER FROM A POST BELOW:

Oregon's Department of Transportation (ODOT) has released a report on a pilot program that examined the feasibility of replacing the gas tax with a fee based on miles driven in Oregon and collected at fueling stations. The pilot program also explores the feasibility of using this system to collect congestion charges.

ODOT launched a 12-month pilot program in April 2006 designed to test the technological and administrative feasibility of this concept. The program included 285 volunteer vehicles, 299 motorists, and two service stations in Portland. The 101 page report can be found at www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/RUFPP/docs/RUFPP_finalreport.pdf.

Watch out for this as there is going to be a nationwide push for this. We have posted on it before and it is coming. We ain't lied yet. This issue was at Senate committee meeting aired on C-span. Because of increased use of Fuel efficient vehicles states are not collecting enough tax revenue to keep up with the nations deteriorating infrastructure. Will need to do some checking but have yet to hear where your motorcycle per mile charge won't be subsidizing an SUV's per mile cost. During the hearing there was also much discussion of creating toll zones on the interstates around heavily congested cities, Los Angles, Huston, Dallas, Northeast corridors, Central Florida south, as a way to reduce traffic on the interstates. Currently this is against federal law. However there were not many objections to changing the law. It was pretty much agreed that this needs to be done but introduced gradually so the public would buy into it. Where do Motorcycles fit in? Discussion I have heard is that they would like to reroute them from the interstates in heavily congested areas. IF ANYONE HAS MORE INFO ON THESE PLANS AND THE VALIDITY OF THE ABOVE OR LACK THEREOF PLEASE SEND IT AND WE WILL POST IT

THEN CONSIDER IN ORDER FOR THE ABOVE PLAN TO WORK YOUR VEHICLE HAS TO COMMUNICATE WITH SOMEBODY OR SOMETHING BESIDES YOU!

OH, you thought the clerk at the gas mart was going to take your word on how many miles you drove????? Yeah o.k. I admit it. I'm whacked. Nothing we have ever written here is true. I stick nine volt batteries to my tongue while running a dry tattoo needle up and down my leg and type this crap at the same time. But what thing I never did do. And that was believe that we should be invading Iraq when "Bin Laden" was in Afghanistan. How about you?Add to Technorati Favorites

An open challange to U.S. DOT Mary Peters

Across the country Motorcycle Rights Organizations, motorcycle safety advocate organizations, motorcycle rights and safety activists are asking through mailings, blogs and the internet, how can you do what you are doing???

The 2010 motorcycle training and awareness funds set aside by Congress in the last Highway Bill (PL 109-59) was set aside for just that, training and awareness!!!

They were not set aside for you to skirt the law against lobbying for helmet laws by using the term "Helmet use" to accomplish an agenda, that not only further demonstrates your bureaucracies ignorance when it comes to motorcycle issues, but also your willingness to go to any length to avoid admission of your short sightedness including, but not limited to, risking the lives you are sworn to protect.

This is governmental negligence and fiduciary mismanagement at it's worst and is not only inexcusable but will lead to losing more lives than it can possibly save. Loss of life in which you will be complicit and an accessory by attempting to lead the public into a false sense of security while the real issues go unresolved.

Any high school science student can tell you for every action there is a reaction and there would be no need for a helmet were there not first a crash. Thus the reasonable approach to saving lives is to prevent the crash.

The evidence shows that the way to do this is stiffen penalties of drivers who violate right of way leading to the death of motorcyclists. Stiffen the penalties for speeding that results in an accident. Immediately ban all wireless devices, hands free or other, that distracts the vehicle drivers attention from the roadway where it belongs. Revoke the licenses from repeat offenders. In other words Ms. Peters communicate loudly and clearly to the motoring public that negligence and driving, like drinking and driving, do not mix and will no longer be tolerated.

So why do you not do these things Ms. Peters??? Why the incessant focus on helmets Ms. Peters??? It it because the telecommunications industry is the 5th largest lobbying organization in Washington and you are afraid of them? Is it because you are afraid of the blow back from the automotive industry that has already invested millions to turn the driving compartment into an electronic playground in order to sell their vehicles Ms. Peters.

YOU say you are a "motorcyclists" because you own and ride a motorcycle. I say you are a "charlatan," a "RUB", a misguided bureaucrat taking orders or trying to score brownie points from somebody who is pulling your strings.

And all this Ms. Peters from somebody who on most occasions wears a helmet. So why should I and others be enraged Ms. Peters. Because we have been riding OUR BIKES long enough and in enough traffic to know "our" helmets are little defense against the the self centered negligent driver YOU ignore at our peril.

In short Ms. Peters, you have not only figured out how to misappropriate our money, you have figured out how to do it in such a manner that will insure more of us will die.

The Challenge Ms. Peters, sell your motorcycle! You shame the AMERICAN BIKER when you touch the key!

I would ask that you assist us in saving lives. But I believe that is a concept beyond your capacity to grasp.Add to Technorati Favorites

U.S. Transpotation Secretary Peters and Outlaw Gang wishes to steal our money to use it against us

MRF E-MAIL NEWS Motorcycle Riders Foundation
236 Massachusetts Ave. NE
Suite 510
Washington, DC 20002-4980
202-546-0983 (voice)
202-546-0986 (fax)
http://www.mrf.org (website)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Jeff Hennie, MRF Vice-President of Government Relations
jeff@mrf.org (e-mail)

16 February 2008

MRF Strongly Opposes US DOT Attack on [Motorcycle] Training Funds

The Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) has learned that United States Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters sent letters to Capitol Hill with draft legislation outlining her intention to raid the 2010 motorcycle training and awareness funds set aside by Congress in the last Highway Bill (PL 109-59). Peters announced on Thursday, February 14 that she would like to see the earmarked training and awareness funds made available to promote the use of helmets in individual states.

"The MRF is extremely disappointed that Mrs. Peters would choose this small, yet critical, grant program to raid. We understand her desire to encourage helmet use, but couldn't the Secretary of Transportation find a more suitable program to fund her personal helmet hunt?" said Jeff Hennie, Vice President of Government Relations for the MRF.

The 2010 funds were a direct result of years of intense lobbying by state motorcyclists' rights organizations (SMROs) and individual motorcyclists from across this country, and were intended for two very specific aspects of motorcycle safety -- motorcycle rider education and motorist awareness of motorcycles. These two aspects of motorcycle safety have been grossly under-funded at the state level for years, often solely at the direct expense of motorcyclists themselves through licensing and registration fees.

The 2010 funding program, in its second year, is a way for the motorcyclists of this country to get a little help from the feds to save lives. The fact is that helmet use has always been a major plank in the platform at the US Department of Transportation (DOT). So why now take away funds desperately needed for other areas of motorcycle safety? The training and awareness programs in statewide operation now are in jeopardy of reduced or zero funding every year. This federal program was designed to allow a trickle of cash to the states to at least keep current programs running. Should Peters get her way, that trickle becomes nothing but a drip. In addition, the current 2010 grant program is not funding failing programs. In order to qualify for the grant, each state has to demonstrate success in its programs by reducing fatalities.

Secretary Peters narrowly skates around an existing law that bans the federal government from lobbying states to enact statewide legislation. She does this by not asking that the money be used for helmet LAW advocacy, but by asking the money be used for helmet USE advocacy.

What's actually happened and how concerned do we need to be? You may be asking yourself that very question about now. Here is the real world scenario: Mary Peters has sent two letters to Congress - one to Speaker Pelosi and the other to Senate President Cheney. The letters include draft legislation that would amend section 2010 to allow funds to be used for the promotion of helmet use.

Sent by Bruce at LongdistanceRiders.com
Here is the letter sent by Mary Peters to Nancy Pelosi:
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/MaryPeters080213.pdf

Response from Letter to MS. Petters/NHTSA


Here you have my note to U.S. Transportation Secretary Ms. Peters:

U.S. Transportation Secretary Peters Unveils Legislation to Help States Target Motorcycle Helmet Use

And here is their response:
NHTSAHotline@telesishq.com to me
show details 7:39 PM (1 hour ago)

Reply


Thank you for contacting the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Vehicle Safety Hotline Information Center.

We appreciate the time you have taken to contact us and value your opinion. Your comments have been forwarded to the appropriate NHTSA personnel.

However, if you need additional information on our services please feel free to contact us at 1-888-327-4236.

Thank you,

NHTSA.dot.gov Response Team

Disclaimer: "This response is for information purposes only and does not constitute an official communication of the U.S. Department of Transportation. For an official response, please write U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE, West Building, Washington, DC 20590.

NOTE: This response was received in my inbox this Sunday evening at 7:39. I can only assume that my tax dollars are hard at work generating automatic responses.

But I have a question or two ? Why did they give me this address to contact them with a big pretty, well big anyway, picture of Ms. Peters next to it? Why did they tell me they would insure that my note got to the addressee and why do they provide me with an e address to write to if they are going to turn around and ask me to write snail mail?

An intentionally designed system of redundancies maybe to guarantee that you will burn out before they will have to answer YOU, the person that pays there salaries?Add to Technorati Favorites