Motorcycle fatalities among out-of-state riders and the role of universal helmet laws

Several studies have demonstrated that universal helmet laws (UHLs) and other motor vehicle policies are effective in reducing fatal and non-fatal motorcycle injuries. Although state policies can improve traffic safety overall, very little is known about how they affect different segments of motorcycle riders. In this paper, we investigate the differential effectiveness of such policies by license state of the rider (i.e., in-state versus out-of-state). From a policy perspective, this information gap is noteworthy because variations in state regulations may influence where individuals choose to ride. We use state-level longitudinal (1988–2008) data on motorcycle fatalities in the United States from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). Our results reconfirm the effectiveness of UHLs and offer new evidence suggesting that states without such policies may attract more risky riders from out-of-state. In particular, not having a UHL increases out-of-state rider fatalities by 18 percent and this effect is more pronounced for out-of-state riders who reside in a UHL state. These findings have important implications regarding unintended spillover effects of state-specific motor vehicle policies.

► Universal helmet laws (UHLs) may have differential effects on motorcycle fatalities of in-state versus out-of-state riders. ► States with UHLs have a significantly lower ratio of out-of-state to total fatalities compared to states without UHLs. ► Our findings suggest that states without UHLs may be attracting riders from states with UHLs. ► State policies may alter the behaviors of certain motorcycle riders who seek jurisdictions that do not require helmets.