Author Topic: Motorcycle helmet law? (Read 3693 times)

john9001 · « **Reply #105 on:** August 10, 2006, 08:16:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by cpxxx
Whatever the arguments for or against helmet laws. If I hadn't been wearing one the day my head smacked a curb. I would be dead for 15 years now. I'd give up a little loss of freedom for 15 years of life.

do you mean that you would not have been wearing the helmet if it had not been required by law? Do you need a law to make you wear a helmet?

as i said before i was buying seat belt kits and mounting them in my cars in 1960, i don need no stinkn law to tell me what to do.

lazs2 · « **Reply #106 on:** August 10, 2006, 08:25:36 AM »

cpxx.. you are welcome to wear a helmet as far as I am concerned. It is none of my business.

dago.... you are talking a very small increase for a very large increase in riders... Did you also know that most motorcycle fatalities happen within the first 6 months of getting a motorcycle?

course.... your "source" is the insurance institute tho isn't it?

My point is that even if there is a small decrease... It is not the business of the government to protect adults from themselves.

If the stats had said that there was a small increase.. it would not be their business to make people stop wearing helmets.

I have no problem with insurance companies making a profit. They are welcome to charge more for not wearing a helmet or seatbelt. But... that wouldn't stop your outrage about people having free will now would it?

lazs

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #107 on:** August 10, 2006, 08:44:15 AM »

beside the protection, i wanna see someone drive a bike at 120mph
without a helmet *lol*
I once lost the windshield at my helmet, i can tell you your eyes are
done very fast even at 60 mph and with a little luck you will pick up
a flying bug too! 8D

cpxxx · « **Reply #108 on:** August 10, 2006, 08:45:15 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
do you mean that you would not have been wearing the helmet if it had not been required by law? Do you need a law to make you wear a helmet?

Possibly, there have been times when not wearing a helmet would have been convenient. I would generally wear a helmet but who is to say that on that particular day I had decided that the helmet was uneccessary or too hot or I forgot it. Same goes for seatbelts. The law removed that possibility.

Like it or not though, those laws exist for reason. Despite the notional or perceived loss of freedom. People are alive today because of them, possibly including me. No amount of sophistry can deny that reality.

Freedom is an important thing but not all freedoms are created equal.

lazs2 · « **Reply #109 on:** August 10, 2006, 08:56:12 AM »

LOL we used to ride with sunglasses.. they work fine at speed... if you turn your head just put a finger on the nose piece.

cpx... are you saying that you are happy there are such laws because... without being forced... you would be reckless and anti social?

fast food kills people and costs us billions... booze costs even more... Lack of exercise probly kills 100 times more people a year than riding without a helmet or driving wihout a seatbelt.... perhaps a federal agent at your home or work making you exercise would be a good idea?

Perhaps a ban on swimming or rock climbing or parachuting or whatever would be a good idea?

Where would you draw the line? at what point is freedom of choice worth some risk and expence? Perhaps freedom of choice is only worth it if it is somthing you like to do?

Perhaps other peoples freedom is worthless when it is somthing that you don't care about?

lazs

cpxxx · « **Reply #110 on:** August 10, 2006, 11:52:06 AM »

I could be reckless and anti social. It is a rare person indeed who could honestly deny they were once reckless and anti social.

As for freedom, well we all have our own boundaries. Yours is different to mine. My line includes seatbelt and helmet laws because they have demonstrably led to fewer deaths. It is a subjective view. My line does not include compulsory helmets for bicycles and I believe like you to some extent that excessive gun control does not work.

In a free society or the compromise free society we live in we accept some limitations. My Father once said that the only rights we have are those other people allow us. That may be an anathema to you but it is the reality we find ourselves in.

Absolute freedom would never work. So we accept a compromise. My compromise includes helmet laws. I wouldn't want a ban on swimming or rock climbing or parachuting or indeed motorcycling. All of them are potentially dangerous and require safety equipment and training. Most risky pursuits are regulated to some extent whether govermentally or locally.

I don't want to restrict other people's freedoms or have them restrict mine. But as I said I can let some freedoms go for the greater good. It's my compromise.

lukster · « **Reply #111 on:** August 10, 2006, 12:04:05 PM »

I like freedom. I don't want the state telling me what I can and can't do. However, when I was 15 I had a motorcyle accident and have little doubt that wearing a helmet, which I sorely despised, saved my life. I'm glad the law required it at the time, how can I not be? The argument for an age requirement to forgo the helmet makes sense except that it will be tough to enforce and no dobut be violated by many.

On principle I'm for choice, by conscience I want youth to wear them.

Chairboy · « **Reply #112 on:** August 10, 2006, 02:27:53 PM »

Ok, we seem to have a basic misunderstanding in this thread:

Group A: Feels that those of us who object to helmets(Group B) THINK THAT HELMETS DON'T WORK.

This is incorrect.

Group B _DOES KNOW_ that helmets SAVE LIVES, but it should be OUR DECISION about whether or not we wear them.

I hope that my use of caps will help clarify the situation.

lazs2 · « **Reply #113 on:** August 10, 2006, 02:36:07 PM »

cpx... fair enough.. but.. We are talking about personal freedom vs cost in dollars to society and the saving of the life of the person making the choice.

That is the line to me. cost can't be the reason. saving one from oneself can't be the reason.

An example would be all the people who drown. Would you favor a law that made all people wear lifejackets in any pool or waterway?

another would be not exercising... would you favor a law that made us all exercise? certainly those would be for our own good and save everyone countless billions of dollars.

luckster... I am talking about adults. whatever the age a person becomes an adult is the cutoff point. Pick a year.

fast food and obesity kill and cost more than any amount of deaths from the lack of a seatbelt or helmet.

Allowing laws to be made on seatbelts and helmets are abhorrant and against all human rights.

I would have no problem with a law that said that seatbelts needed to be provided or helmets needed to be available to passengers.... I would have no problem with insurance companies giveing a discount to people who wore helmets and seatbelts. I have no problem with kids being made to wear both..

I do have a problem with the government telling me I have to wear em for my own good.

Do you see the difference?

lazs

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #114 on:** August 10, 2006, 06:43:23 PM »

lazs2 since you compare swimming with riding a motorcyle
or a rock climber with parachuter, and the government should
not telling you what to wear while doing this different things.

Why the government telling you that you need a driving licence
before you can drive alone?

Why do you need to make a flying license before you can
fly alone?

I tell you something, people make expirience bad and good while
they live. With this knowledge over the years they build rules & laws.
I have the feeling you and some other in this thread just dont care
on the expirience others made. i.e. your government or a flightschool.
Why do the millitary have strictly rules?? you know it where it would
end without it.

But you are free to invent the wheel new...

Dago · « **Reply #115 on:** August 10, 2006, 11:02:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
dago.... you are talking a very small increase for a very large increase in riders... Did you also know that most motorcycle fatalities happen within the first 6 months of getting a motorcycle?

Are you actually trying to tell me that a large increase in riders just happened to coincide with the rescinding of helmet laws? Because that was what the statistics I posted was about. Amazing coincidence. Ridership increased over years, I belive that stats I posted were for a 12 month periods in most instances. So, ridership increase was minor compared to the increase in injuries quoted.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #116 on:** August 10, 2006, 11:15:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by cpxxx
Freedom is an important thing but not all freedoms are created equal.

[SIZE=8]WRONG![/SIZE]

This is the crux of socialism people. No matter what you tell yourself or which kind of feather you like to tickle yourself with, that does not change the fact that this IS SOCIALISM.

You should not legislate personal choice! YOU SHOULD NEVER LEGISLATE PERSONAL CHOICE!

Now I want you people to try something for me. Repeat this following line. Repeat it infront of someone else for best affect, like a good friend.

"I am a socialist."

Either you'll realize the folly of your ways, or you'll try to legislate more choice away from people.

Sandman · « **Reply #117 on:** August 11, 2006, 12:41:59 AM »

Christ this "you're a socialist" **** gets old.

cpxxx · « **Reply #118 on:** August 11, 2006, 01:20:12 AM »

At least he didn't call me a [SIZE=10]LIBERAL[/SIZE]

Sandman · « **Reply #119 on:** August 11, 2006, 01:23:10 AM »

I hope recess gets over soon. I want to go back inside and eat some paste.