another darwin candidate

[eagl]

Another Darwin award candidate.  Motorcycle rider in a protest against helmet laws falls off his bike, lands on his head, and dies.  State trooper calls the accident survivable if the rider had been wearing a helmet.

http://news.yahoo.com/ny-motorcyclist-helmet-protest-hits-head-dies-225710487.html

 

[CAP1]

Another Darwin award candidate.  Motorcycle rider in a protest against helmet laws falls off his bike, lands on his head, and dies.  State trooper calls the accident survivable if the rider had been wearing a helmet.

http://news.yahoo.com/ny-motorcyclist-helmet-protest-hits-head-dies-225710487.html

 

while i believe in wearing my helmet when i ride.......i do not believe anyone should have the right to tell me i must wear it. this rates right up there with seatbelts.

[Kazaa]

while i believe in wearing my helmet when i ride.......i do not believe anyone should have the right to tell me i must wear it. this rates right up there with seatbelts.

[Kazaa]

I personally would never get on my bike without full riding armour.



The pike-axe is optional.

[CAP1]

I personally would never get on my bike without full riding armour.

(Image removed from quote.)

The pike-axe is optional.

that's actually a pretty cool looking bike. and yes......the pike axe is a nice optional touch. 

[Reaper90]

while i believe in wearing my helmet when i ride.......i do not believe anyone should have the right to tell me i must wear it. this rates right up there with seatbelts.

Not directed at you CAP, and I do agree that no one person, group, or government should have the authority to tell me that I must do this, that, or anything such as wear a seatbelt or helmet, that only affects my personal safety and doesn't otherwise protect or endanger any other person....

That being said, the counterpoint to that "unlimited personal freedom" is that the moment that the insurance company finds out that the rider was not wearing a helmet (or seatbelt for driver), they may be allowed to immediately cancel all coverages and pay exactly ZERO for any claims what-so-ever, with no chance for appeal on the part of the rider or the rider's next of kin. In addition, medical personnel should be allowed to ask for payment up-front for emergency services once it becomes clear that this person was stupid enough to ride without a helmet or other protective equipment and get his/her coverages cancelled. The hospital should not have to absorb this financial loss, nor should other patients have to endure higher charges, in order to offset the loss.

We all have rights, and yes the right to be stupid is and should be one of them. However, the effects of that stupidity should be limited to the person who chooses to be stupid.

[eagl]

Not directed at you CAP, and I do agree that no one person, group, or government should have the authority to tell me that I must do this, that, or anything such as wear a seatbelt or helmet, that only affects my personal safety and doesn't otherwise protect or endanger any other person....

That being said, the counterpoint to that "unlimited personal freedom" is that the moment that the insurance company finds out that the rider was not wearing a helmet (or seatbelt for driver), they may be allowed to immediately cancel all coverages and pay exactly ZERO for any claims what-so-ever, with no chance for appeal on the part of the rider or the rider's next of kin. In addition, medical personnel should be allowed to ask for payment up-front for emergency services once it becomes clear that this person was stupid enough to ride without a helmet or other protective equipment and get his/her coverages cancelled. The hospital should not have to absorb this financial loss, nor should other patients have to endure higher charges, in order to offset the loss.

We all have rights, and yes the right to be stupid is and should be one of them. However, the effects of that stupidity should be limited to the person who chooses to be stupid.

+1 

[CAP1]

Not directed at you CAP, and I do agree that no one person, group, or government should have the authority to tell me that I must do this, that, or anything such as wear a seatbelt or helmet, that only affects my personal safety and doesn't otherwise protect or endanger any other person....

That being said, the counterpoint to that "unlimited personal freedom" is that the moment that the insurance company finds out that the rider was not wearing a helmet (or seatbelt for driver), they may be allowed to immediately cancel all coverages and pay exactly ZERO for any claims what-so-ever, with no chance for appeal on the part of the rider or the rider's next of kin. In addition, medical personnel should be allowed to ask for payment up-front for emergency services once it becomes clear that this person was stupid enough to ride without a helmet or other protective equipment and get his/her coverages cancelled. The hospital should not have to absorb this financial loss, nor should other patients have to endure higher charges, in order to offset the loss.

We all have rights, and yes the right to be stupid is and should be one of them. However, the effects of that stupidity should be limited to the person who chooses to be stupid.

 i kind of agree with you. the insurance thing, and next of kin......that;s where personal responisbility comes in. like i said...i don't think anyone has a right to tell me i have to wear it. i've ridden without my helmet back when i was younger, and a lot dumber. i've ridden with those POS things that resemble helmets...again when i was younger and dumber.
 my personal choice, regardless of law, is to wear a good helmet now....usually a full face.

 i think the insurance companies could only cancel coverage if the lack of helmet were in a place requiring them, or if it were stated in the policy that one must be worn.

as for emergency personnel.......and medical care......to the best of my knowledge...and i could be wrong here.......but i had always been under the understanding, that if you're cared for, and have no insurance, nor a way to pay immediately, i thought they billed you. then if you stopped paying, i thought they put liens on your property.

[The Jekyll]

I will always wear protective gear when riding, like the title, riders who don't are Darwin candidates. I will also support laws requiring their use. Like stated previously, insurance routinely denies payment which means we, the public have to pay for their stupid mistakes. Figure out a way to get rid of that caveat in some manner and I will support your decision to be stupid on the roads. I remember when the general public fought so hard to prevent laws requiring us to seat belt our children because no one has the right to tell us what to do. Well, actually I believe we the public do through our legislators. I will always support someone's right to be stupid right up to the point where that stupidity costs me money I worked hard for.

[cpxxx]

See Rule #14

[Puma44]

I'm acquainted with several emergency room nurses.  All say the same thing.  When they hear a motorcycle accident victim is inbound, it's refered to as "an organ donor" inbound.

Just a a couple of weeks ago, one of our city motorcycle officers was off duty riding home on his personal motorcycle......without a helmet.  A car pulled out in front of him at a T intersection.  Dead on arrival after sliding to the curb and stopping the slide with his head. 

Exercising his right to freedom.  And his family and friends are free to deal with the aftermath.

[guncrasher]

riding is not a right but a privilege.  you want to ride, you must follow the rules, and simon says wear a helmet.

semp

[CAP1]

well, if we wanna push it to these limits.....then there should be laws requiring that we all wear helmets while driving our cars too. i mean after all......even with airbags, and seatbelts, there is still a chance of hitting your head on the windshield. or on the door pillar. or the steering wheel. we can't have that, now can we?

 and kevlar driving suits too. 

[Maverick]

See Rule #14

[APDrone]

I will always wear protective gear when riding, like the title, riders who don't are Darwin candidates. I will also support laws requiring their use. Like stated previously, insurance routinely denies payment which means we, the public have to pay for their stupid mistakes. Figure out a way to get rid of that caveat in some manner and I will support your decision to be stupid on the roads. I remember when the general public fought so hard to prevent laws requiring us to seat belt our children because no one has the right to tell us what to do. Well, actually I believe we the public do through our legislators. I will always support someone's right to be stupid right up to the point where that stupidity costs me money I worked hard for.

Well, then by this argument, let's apply the same insurance practices and medical care withholding to all the drivers of vehicles that were stupid enough to pull into the path of 18 wheelers, trains, dump trucks... etc.   Stupidity is stupidity.... don't go discriminating one from another.

I agree that wearing a helmet is the smart thing to do.. but it shouldn't be mandated.. as seatbelts shouldn't be mandated, nor airbags, nor abs, nor crumple-zones, ...etc.  All safety equipment should be optional and purchased by those that wish them. 

Today, everybody is so convinced they're safe, they can just drive around and plow into anything ( sans 18-wheelers, trains, and dump-trucks ) and reasonably expect to survive.  So nobody spends a lot of time actually avoiding accidents.

My first car was a 66 VW beetle.  50 heart pounding horsepower, f/b weight ratio such that on wet pavement you may actually not be able to turn at the driveway you were expecting, and the only thing between you and meeting your maker ( i.e, the gas tank ) was the spare tire.    I learned to avoid hitting things.  It doesn't seem that way anymore.