Protecting the Safety of Minnesota Motorcyclists

The Minnesota Motorcycle Safety Center was created by the legislature in 1983, one of the nation's first comprehensive state safety programs for motorcyclists. Its mission includes training, testing and research, as well as public outreach. The funding for MMSC comes from fees motorcyclists pay and the bikers zealously guard the fund from political interference.

In February, according to Kare 11 News, threats surfaced that these funds may be at risk. Bikers feared that as part of Governor Pawlenty’s 1.2 billion budget cut proposal, a portion of the Minnesota Motorcycle Safety Fund would be diverted to compensate for the state’s deficit.

However, bikers came together through American Bikers for Awareness, Training and Education (ABATE) of Minnesota to lobby legislators. ABATE of Minnesota works to maintain and defend the rights and freedoms of all motorcyclists in the state. Among other things, the organization advocates on behalf of motorcycle safety training programs and seeks to increase awareness of motorcyclists on Minnesota roads.

Ultimately, the organization had a successful lobbying day, with more than 500 motorcyclists turning out to make their voices heard. This is good news; motorcyclist safety should be a high priority for state legislators, and the fees bikers pay should be directed toward these efforts.

The Role of the Minnesota Motorcyclist Safety Center

After the MMSC was created, Minnesota initially experienced a dramatic reduction in motorcyclist deaths, but has since seen motorcyclist deaths increase. Seventy-two motorcyclists died in 2008 and 52 in 2009, compared to the all-time low of 24 in 1991 and a high of 121 before MMSC.

With motorcycle season just getting under way in Minnesota, the MMSC is urging bikers to enroll in bike safety training or brush-up courses. The message is a particularly salient one, as Minnesota has already recorded several biker crashes this year. Biker safety courses teach skills such as steering, swerving and stopping quickly in an emergency — skills that experts say are more difficult to perfect on motorcycles than when driving cars.

In addition to encouraging riders to take safety courses, MMSC has employed an advertising campaign to encourage bikers to dress conspicuously, in recognition of statistics showing that half of all motorcycles crashes involve motor vehicles. Too often motorists indicate that they did not see the motorcyclist until it was too late to prevent a crash. By wearing reflective gear and dressing in bright colors, rather than in dark colors as traditionally preferred by many riders, motorcyclists can improve their visibility and reduce the frequency of motorcycle accidents.

Although helmets are not required under Minnesota law, they can provide significant benefits for motorcycle riders. Clearly, they can provide protection in the event of a crash. Additionally, helmets can be used to increase visibility; the MMSC encourages those riders who choose to wear helmets to select white helmets, as they make it easier to see riders.

Furthermore, helmets are important because the lack of a helmet can be used against a motorcycle rider in the event of a crash. When an injured rider pursues a personal injury claim, if the rider was not wearing a helmet, the opposing attorney can introduce the rider’s lack of helmet. These attorneys will often argue that the injuries would have been less severe if the motorcyclist had been wearing a helmet.

Of course, the safety of motorcyclists is also dependent on the awareness of other drivers. Tragically, many car drivers don’t think to look for motorcycle riders, thereby causing motorcycle crashes. For those injured in motorcycle accidents and those who have lost loved ones in these crashes, it is important to work with a knowledgeable personal injury lawyer who understands the complexities of handling these cases.

Distracted Driving is Dangerous Up There and Down Here

Provided by McSweeney & Fay, P.L.L.P.; Minneapolis Personal Injury Lawyer

The dangers of distracted driving have been well publicized, but drivers all over Minnesota continue to use cell phones while behind the wheel. These distractions, however, are not limited to drivers on our roads. Recently, two airline pilots were the focus of national attention after they overshot the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport by 150 miles while flying distracted by their laptop computers.

Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar called the incident, "the ultimate case of distracted driving." Though it does represent an extreme example of the perils of distraction and the pilots were obviously irresponsible, it also represents the best case scenario: no one was injured or killed by their actions. Passengers were inconvenienced by the serious lapses in judgment, but everyone landed safely.

Distracted Driving Is a Proven Danger

Unfortunately, distracted drivers on the roads are often not so fortunate, nor are the victims of their carelessness. Traffic safety experts say that distracted driving is a factor in upwards of 25 percent of all crashes.

In a recent report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration stated that there were 34,017 fatal car crashes in 2008; distracted driving was a factor in 16 percent, or over 5,400 fatal crashes.

The NHTSA said approximately 2,346,000 people suffered personal injuries in motor vehicle crashes in 2008, of which an estimated 22 percent — or more than a half-million injuries — involved distracted drivers.

Ninety Feet Per Second

The biggest danger in distracted driving is the most obvious one: it takes a driver’s attention off of the road. When traveling at 55 miles per hour, a vehicle covers 90 feet per second. The average time to compose and send a text message is five seconds, meaning the driver is distracted while traveling more than the length of a football field.

Texting drivers are 43 times more likely to be in a crash or near-crash; a person talking on their cellphone while driving is four times more likely to be in a crash or near-crash.

Here in Minnesota, it is illegal for all drivers to text while driving. It is also illegal for school bus drivers, drivers with learner’s permits or those with provisional licenses to use cell phones while driving. McSweeney and Fay helps injured victims of distracted drivers.

Shoulder Pain Pump Injuries

Provided by McSweeney & Fay, P.L.L.P.; Minneapolis Personal Injury Lawyer

Scientific evidence now suggests that shoulder pain pumps temporarily implanted in the joint during surgery may be linked to serious shoulder injuries. The painful resulting condition is known as Postarthroscopic Glenohumeral Chondrolysis (PAGCL).

These pain pumps are small, portable devices that inject pain relief medication through a catheter in the area where the surgery was performed. Unfortunately, when the catheter is inserted in the joint space instead of muscle tissue, it can kill cartilage crucial to keeping bones in the shoulder separate. The result is cartilage destruction resulting in painful bone-on-bone contact.

A study in the American Journal of Sports Medicine states that there is a high correlation between the use of intra-articular pain pump catheters (catheters inserted into the joint) and the development of PAGCL. The study showed that 63 percent of shoulder surgery patients treated with a pain pump administering bupivacaine and epinephrine into the shoulder joint developed PAGCL.

PAGCL is a disabling, painful condition that is irreversible and permanent, often requiring further shoulder surgery. It is often diagnosed months after the initial surgery.

PAGCL treatment may include pain medication, physical therapy and cortisone injections. In severe cases, it may require surgery for partial or complete shoulder joint replacements. Even with medication and surgery, many PAGCL patients continue to experience pain and decreased mobility.

Critics of the pain pumps allege that manufacturers of the devices failed to inform orthopedic surgeons that the federal Food and Drug Administration denied approval of the pumps for intra-articular use. These manufacturers include Stryker, I-Flow Corp., DJO Inc., DePuy, Inc. and Smith & Nephew, Inc. Lawsuits against shoulder pain pump manufacturers are moving forward across the nation.