Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NY Motorcyclist Dies On Ride Protesting Helmet Law  
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8711 posts, RR: 24
Posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3424 times:

Quote:
State troopers tell The Post-Standard of Syracuse that 55-year-old Philip A. Contos of Parish, N.Y., was driving a 1983 Harley Davidson with a group of bikers who were protesting helmet laws by not wearing helmets.

Troopers say Contos hit his brakes and the motorcycle fishtailed. The bike spun out of control, and Contos toppled over the handlebars. He was pronounced dead at a hospital.

Troopers say Contos would have likely survived if he had been wearing a helmet.
http://beta.news.yahoo.com/ny-motorc...W50fG11c2ljBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25z;_ylv=3

Irony's a bitch. I suppose more than a few of his companions probably changed their minds on the spot.


Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
158 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21092 posts, RR: 56
Reply 1, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3369 times:

Coming in for a landing:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Diego Ruiz de Vargas - Iberian Spotters



Every time I see a motorcyclist without a helmet (and I lived in Florida for a few years, so I saw a LOT of them). I think "there's someone who does not value their life". Why someone would do something so stupid is beyond me.

Quoting Dreadnought (Thread starter):
I suppose more than a few of his companions probably changed their minds on the spot.

I'd hope so. Shame that it would take something so serious to teach a lesson that should be pretty simple.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineLonghornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3244 posts, RR: 45
Reply 2, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3358 times:

Condolences to the guy's family, but he's a f***ing idiot.

Irony is, as Dreadnaught said, a raging bitch.

Cheers,
Cameron


User currently offlinefuturepilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2035 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3352 times:

RIP....another nominee for the Darwin award indeed.   

[Edited 2011-07-03 22:17:42]


"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5429 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3285 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 1):
Why someone would do something so stupid is beyond me.

It is, quite simply (and as alluded to in the "Darwin awards") natural selection.

Not everyone is born with the same traits, and nature will weed out the weaker ones over time. Yes, this includes those who are not strong enough to survive such a blow to the head, and at the same time aren't intelligent enough to wear a helmet.

The only thing helmet laws do is keep the mildly stupid around (for they will follow the law, not because it's smart to wear a helmet), and eliminate the worst who would flout laws anyways.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinesan747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4939 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3260 times:

I don't believe in God, but if I did, this would a clear situation of God saying, "Dude, you are wrong."


Scotty doesn't know...
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9399 posts, RR: 27
Reply 6, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3249 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I read about this one earlier today. God I hope that the rest of the riders who were protesting get a clue after that.

Quoting Mir (Reply 1):
Coming in for a landing:

  

Never seen that one before!

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 3):
another nominee for the Darwin award indeed.

Yup - I'd say a very deserving one.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3236 times:

So far, no one has addressed the real question...........should we have a "law" that forces people to wear helmets while riding a motorcycle ?

I'm not asking if it's a "good idea" to wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle, I'm asking if it should be a law ?
There's a very big difference !

From my personal experience riding motorcycles, I can tell you this much: if for any reason you "leave" the MC at any speed much above 5 mph, you are likely to be "better off" if you ARE wearing a helmet, ( most of the time, but not necessarily always )

Will wearing a helmet keep you from getting killed if you have a crash ? Sometimes yes, but sometimes no.

Will not wearing a helmet ( in states with "helmet laws" ) get you a "ticket" from every "hick" cop who sees you ? You betcha !

Are "helmet laws" always a "good idea" ? No they are not.

There are much better ways of keeping your "brains intact" while riding a mc than having some law tell you what you have to wear; Look at it this way....................

Let's say you are fond of hiking in the "country"; everyone knows there are sometimes bears in the country........so we better have a "law".........anyone hiking in the country MUST have a "30.06" bear gun in case you meet a bear..........

Like to swim in the ocean ? better have a "law"........MUST have a "yet- to- be- invented" shark "weapon" in case a shark tries to eat you !

Do you like to fly your Cessna 172 ? A lot of people have been killed in light planes because the engines sometimes quit running........so therefore, you MUST have your Cessna equipped with a "ballistic parachute", ( which are not cheap, but they do work ! )

Fact: there are many "activities" that have the "potential" to get you killed; very few have a "law" which purports to "take away the risk" of the activity. What we DON"T need is more laws trying to "protect" people; what we DO need is more people with common sense !

I happen to have the need of using a chain saw a lot; if you look through all of the hospital emergency room statistics, you will quickly learn that chain saws are by far the leading cause of people coming in with serious injuries to ER's; yet there is no law in any state, requiring people using chain saws to wear protective chain saw "chapps"; are "chapps" a good idea, and do they really "work" ? yes, they are a VERY good idea, and yes, they really DO work; I have a pair I wear ( sometimes ) But just having a pair of chapps on isn't going to "keep you safe" while using a chain saw; that only comes from long experience using them, and having a thorough knowledge of operation, plus some common sense.
I might add, I bought my chapps only after having an "incident" that sawed clear through my left knee-cap, and knicked the cartiledge on the knee joint. That "incident" was the direct result of a complete lack of experience and of using common sense at the time.

Let's face it folks.........you can't legislate safety ! But you can "train" intelligent, reasonable people to do things safely.

Overall, wearing seat belts while driving an automobile has obviously saved a lot of people's lives, but in spite of all the seat belt laws, the speeding laws, and all the other laws, there are still just as many people getting killed every year in car crashes as there ever has been; the reasons behind this are a little more "complex", but if "government" really wanted to ever became really "serious" about this problem, the fatality rate in cars could be cut by 90 % ; but don't hold your breath until "government" takes the "necessary steps" to alleviate the problem; because "government" just doesn't have the "will" to take the necessary steps.

Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5429 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3214 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):

Let's say you are fond of hiking in the "country"; everyone knows there are sometimes bears in the country........so we better have a "law".........anyone hiking in the country MUST have a "30.06" bear gun in case you meet a bear..........

How many people are attacked by bears in the US every year? I bet it's a miniscule amount, without even mentioning the number of motorcycle accidents.

Oh, and if you ever go to Svalbard and wander outside the city, you ARE required to carry a gun in case of bear attacks.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):

Like to swim in the ocean ? better have a "law"........MUST have a "yet- to- be- invented" shark "weapon" in case a shark tries to eat you !

How many people get eaten by sharks in the US every year?

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):

Do you like to fly your Cessna 172 ? A lot of people have been killed in light planes because the engines sometimes quit running........so therefore, you MUST have your Cessna equipped with a "ballistic parachute", ( which are not cheap, but they do work ! )

The weight penalty alone makes it unreasonable at cost, and honestly far less people die in plane crashes than motorcycle crashes.... and most of those are pilot error anyways. The airplane doesn't fall out of the sky when the engine stops unless someone screwed something else up.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
What we DON"T need is more laws trying to "protect" people; what we DO need is more people with common sense !

You can't legislate "common sense", so you do the next best thing.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
if you look through all of the hospital emergency room statistics, you will quickly learn that chain saws are by far the leading cause of people coming in with serious injuries to ER's;

Um, no. I can categorically state that car accidents are the leading cause of injuries in the ER. I believe auto accidents in general are the third leading cause of death behind heart disease and cancer.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinejpetekYXMD80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4355 posts, RR: 27
Reply 9, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3208 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):

I happen to have the need of using a chain saw a lot; if you look through all of the hospital emergency room statistics, you will quickly learn that chain saws are by far the leading cause of people coming in with serious injuries to ER's

Uh.....

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
there are still just as many people getting killed every year in car crashes as there ever has been

Wrong. Particularly by rate. Since the late 70s there are half as many motor vehicle deaths, going by rate.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
but if "government" really wanted to ever became really "serious" about this problem, the fatality rate in cars could be cut by 90 % ; but don't hold your breath until "government" takes the "necessary steps" to alleviate the problem; because "government" just doesn't have the "will" to take the necessary steps.

What are you "talking" about the "government" not "doing"?



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineracko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4856 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3176 times:

Helmet laws are there to protect society from idiots.

1. Taking care of the vegetables that would regularly result from accidents is very expensive.
2. If another driver causes an accident that results in the death of another human being it's a huge mental burden for the rest of his life.

Fatalities per kilometer driven have been going way, way down since the 70s, around the globe.


User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3110 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Thread starter):
Troopers say Contos would have likely survived if he had been wearing a helmet.

So you have to be a forensic pathologist to be a State Trooper in New York?

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 9):
The weight penalty alone makes it unreasonable at cost, and honestly far less people die in plane crashes than motorcycle crashes....

Are we just talking numbers then? Not percentages? If it saves one life, as is the proponents of helmet laws claim, isn't it worth it?

As someone said, you can't legislate common sense. Why not also legislate a heavy jacket with armor, leather pants, heavy boots, and armored gloves while at it? I've been very lucky in my 32 years of riding to have only been involved in one accident, which resulted in a broken foot. 3 decades of riding has taught me that with the exception of very slow speed crashes, as in the case of Gary Busse, a helmet will only keep your brain contained and your chances of suffering fatal injuries from hitting a non moving object or trauma from hitting the ground, several times, are much more likely to kill you than a head injury. All you have to do is go to the paper in the link and search fatal motorcycle crashes to get the idea.


User currently offlinefuturepilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2035 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3100 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
Will wearing a helmet keep you from getting killed if you have a crash ? Sometimes yes, but sometimes no.

Will not wearing a helmet ( in states with "helmet laws" ) get you a "ticket" from every "hick" cop who sees you ? You betcha !

Are "helmet laws" always a "good idea" ? No they are not.

There are much better ways of keeping your "brains intact" while riding a mc than having some law tell you what you have to wear; Look at it this way....................

Let's say you are fond of hiking in the "country"; everyone knows there are sometimes bears in the country........so we better have a "law".........anyone hiking in the country MUST have a "30.06" bear gun in case you meet a bear..........

Like to swim in the ocean ? better have a "law"........MUST have a "yet- to- be- invented" shark "weapon" in case a shark tries to eat you !

Do you like to fly your Cessna 172 ? A lot of people have been killed in light planes because the engines sometimes quit running........so therefore, you MUST have your Cessna equipped with a "ballistic parachute", ( which are not cheap, but they do work ! )

Please stop    . Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is the equivalent of driving a car without a seat belt...nuff said. The last time I checked, it was against the law to be in a car without having a seat belt on. All those other activities are completely different than riding a motorcycle and wearing seat belts.



"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12879 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3095 times:

I am quite sure there are plenty of stats to prove that wearing a helmet when operating a motorcycle on or off road will significantly reduce head injuries or death from head injuries in a crash. That is why most USA states as well as most counties require them to be used on the public roads. I know there are issues as to wearing a helmet from being hot, to limiting the ability to fully see and hear around yourself or just the lack of the air breezing through your hair but those issues are overwhelmingly balanced by the common sense that with no other protection when on a mc, you have to use some common sense. Let us also not forget that many mc accidents are not the fault of the rider themselves, but due to the lack of respect of other motorists as to them so one must protect themselves from them too.

User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11929 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 1):
Every time I see a motorcyclist without a helmet (and I lived in Florida for a few years, so I saw a LOT of them). I think "there's someone who does not value their life". Why someone would do something so stupid is beyond me.

Indeed. I even wear an approved helmet when riding my bicycle down the street. There are countless cases in the bicycling community where people who've had a serious injury without a helmet would have had no problems if they were wearing a helmet.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
So far, no one has addressed the real question...........should we have a "law" that forces people to wear helmets while riding a motorcycle ?

Because:

Quoting Dreadnought (Thread starter):
Troopers say Contos hit his brakes and the motorcycle fishtailed. The bike spun out of control, and Contos toppled over the handlebars. He was pronounced dead at a hospital.

Troopers say Contos would have likely survived if he had been wearing a helmet.

We the taxpayers are paying for the troopers who had the unfortunate duty of responding to Mr. Contos's fatality, and who were probably were tasked with telling his family.

We're also the ones who built the road that Mr. Contos was driving on.

So, "we the people", through our elected officials, do have a big say on what Mr. Contos can or cannot do on "our" roads.

If he and his friends really need to feel the wind blowing through their hair, they can go buy some acerage and build themselves some roads to run around on.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
Overall, wearing seat belts while driving an automobile has obviously saved a lot of people's lives, but in spite of all the seat belt laws, the speeding laws, and all the other laws, there are still just as many people getting killed every year in car crashes as there ever has been;

Absolutely false.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineAndz From South Africa, joined Feb 2004, 8416 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2963 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hell, why stop with helmet laws, ban the motorcycle altogether!

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/citylink...otorcycle-20110613,0,4414821.story

Check the follow up article in the related link "It's still time to ban the motorcycle"

And yes, I am a helmet-wearing biker.



After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
User currently offline4holer From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2979 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2930 times:

If bikers agree to:

Notify their insurance company of their decision to go helmet free and pay whatever difference or other consequence that decision merits, and

Sign a legal waiver that prohibits lawsuits by them or their surviving relatives/estate against the other party involved in the crash, the state which maintains the road, motorcycle manufacturer, etc..., and

Have the Spouse/surviving relatives/estate sign as well, and

Affix a sticker on their licence plate issued by the state which signifies compliance with the above so law enforcement can easily see that the helmetless rider is not "cheating"



If they do that, and themselves assume all responsibility for consequences relating to that decision, then have at it. Enjoy that wind thru your hair. If you are willing to have your family alone bear the brunt of what happens after a brain injury, then that is indeed your right.



Ghosts appear and fade away.....................
User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3592 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2922 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):

If I am involved in a car accident where a biker dies just because he was not smart enough to wear a helmet, I will have to live with killing someone for the rest of my life and, depending on the circumstances, I may have to be punished by the law as well. So, what you are saying up there is irrelevant, nobody told anyone NOT to drive a bike, but please, obey the law!


User currently offlinelowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2879 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
should we have a "law" that forces people to wear helmets while riding a motorcycle ?

No

Quoting 4holer (Reply 17):
If bikers agree to:

Notify their insurance company of their decision to go helmet free and pay whatever difference or other consequence that decision merits, and

I think this is the sensible way to do it. Let people choose and pay the consequences. I have no idea if my state has a helmet law or not, but I would wear mine regardless. It is not only the chance of an accident, but also gravel and debris kicked up from the road, and even large bugs that be somewhat distracting if they hit you in the face at 60 mph. I understand the attraction of not wearing one, but for me the risks outweigh the merits.



Proud OOTSK member
User currently offlinetootallsd From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 553 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2830 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting lowrider (Reply 19):
Notify their insurance company of their decision to go helmet free and pay whatever difference or other consequence that decision merits, and

I think this is the sensible way to do it. Let people choose and pay the consequences. I have no idea if my state has a helmet law or not, but I would wear mine regardless. It is not only the chance of an accident, but also gravel and debris kicked up from the road, and even large bugs that be somewhat distracting if they hit you in the face at 60 mph. I understand the attraction of not wearing one, but for me the risks outweigh the merits.

No this is not sensible at all. The cost of maintaining a life with a significant head trauma will run into the 100s of thousands.

My neighbor's son, a Navy fighter pilot, bought a Harley while overseas. Eventually it shows up and he needs to turn it around to put in the garage. So he puts down the round to do a u-turn in a cul-de-sac. Being a new rider, he goes down. Hits his head at very low speed. Into a coma he goes. Out about one week later. End of Navy career. Multi-million? dollar taxpayer investment wiped out in seconds. Significant likely reduction in life earning potential. Sad but true.


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 16939 posts, RR: 48
Reply 20, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2755 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
So far, no one has addressed the real question...........should we have a "law" that forces people to wear helmets while riding a motorcycle ?

I'm all for motorcyclists not wearing helmets, particularly the ones that ride the obnoxious noismakers around the neighborhood.

Quoting lowrider (Reply 19):
Let people choose and pay the consequences.

   I never understand why someone wouldn't want to wear a helmet or a seatbelt

Quoting 4holer (Reply 17):
Notify their insurance company of their decision to go helmet free and pay whatever difference or other consequence that decision merits, and

Sign a legal waiver that prohibits lawsuits by them or their surviving relatives/estate against the other party involved in the crash, the state which maintains the road, motorcycle manufacturer, etc..., and

Have the Spouse/surviving relatives/estate sign as well, and

Affix a sticker on their licence plate issued by the state which signifies compliance with the above so law enforcement can easily see that the helmetless rider is not "cheating"

  



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinelowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2715 times:

Quoting tootallsd (Reply 20):
Into a coma he goes. Out about one week later. End of Navy career. Multi-million? dollar taxpayer investment wiped out in seconds. Significant likely reduction in life earning potential. Sad but true.

The loss of earning potential is part of the price he will pay. The rest is just that troublesome nuisance of people being allowed to choose activities that are not perfectly safe.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 21):
I never understand why someone wouldn't want to wear a helmet or a seatbelt

I don't either, having witnessed the effects of high speed trauma first hand, but it is not for me to understand someone else's motives. The freedom to choose includes the poor choices.



Proud OOTSK member
User currently offlinesan747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4939 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2711 times:

Quoting lowrider (Reply 22):

I don't either, having witnessed the effects of high speed trauma first hand, but it is not for me to understand someone else's motives. The freedom to choose includes the poor choices.

I'd be dead at least twice over if it wasn't for a seat belt, and at least once as a kid when I had a major accident on a skateboard (not doing tricks, just riding down a hill) and the helmet prevented me from hitting my head on the asphalt, which almost surely would have knocked me out or worse.

It's not a question of "freedom" to me, it's a question of being stupid to prove a really stupid point. Sorry to all of you who don't believe you should be required to wear one, but it's how I feel.



Scotty doesn't know...
User currently offlinelowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2704 times:

Quoting san747 (Reply 23):
Sorry to all of you who don't believe you should be required to wear one, but it's how I feel.

How you "feel" is utterly irrelevant. No one is saying you can't wear a seat belt or a helmet, or both if you wish. Legislation based on such feelings is a path to tyranny.



Proud OOTSK member
User currently offlinesan747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4939 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2717 times:

Quoting lowrider (Reply 24):

How you "feel" is utterly irrelevant. No one is saying you can't wear a seat belt or a helmet, or both if you wish. Legislation based on such feelings is a path to tyranny.

Oh of course I know it's irrelevant, and I know it's emotional. But I just think that rebelling against a clear common sense safety precaution in the name of "freedom" is investing energy trying to prove a really dumb point, which was even more obviously shown by this man's unfortunate and unnecessary death.

If you want to fight incursions of your civil liberties, I encourage it. But fight against REAL injustices, not a helmet law. You're wasting your time and looking really stupid to everyone else for it, which ultimately just undermines your (I believe worthy) message.



Scotty doesn't know...
25 lowrider : I don't waste time worrying about helmet laws, but if other folks want to, that is fine. There are enough "crusades" to go around, be it helmets, tre
26 san747 : Very true, and let the record show I have no issue with the people actually protesting. That is a very important right we have as Americans. I just t
27 Post contains links and images dxing : I think most States have laws that during the first year of your motorcycle license you have to wear a helmet and some even restrict having passenger
28 luv2fly : I think helmet laws stir up debate like gun control laws. Myself I think a helmet law is a good thing and I don't ride or own a bike, just my opinion.
29 Revelation : Tyranny? Sheesh... Are laws on baby car seats also the path to tyranny? Just think of how we're resticting the freedom of movement of that child, rig
30 EDICHC : Not forgetting Emergency Dept staff who have to patch-up those stupid enough to venture onto today's roads on a motor-cycle without a helmet. I wish
31 dxing : Agreed, but my point was, and remains, at highway speed, helmet or no, a persons body is more than likely going to suffer life ending injuries. This
32 lowrider : When you find me a toddler that can speak up and reason for itself that it would really rather be in a car seat for its own safety, then you might ha
33 dxing : It's funny how I can't think of a single child in my neighborhood when I was growing up, and there were plenty of them, that died or was seriously in
34 4holer : Of course it's sensible! You maintain your right to do what you want while not doing so on MY wallet! Your decision incurs risk of a very expensive r
35 EDICHC : In my experience the biggest single cause of death, by far, for motorcyclists involved in MVAs is head trauma.
36 Revelation : Unfortunately most things we think are have no bearing on others really do. This motorcycle crash victim impacted the lives of the troopers, the ambu
37 dxing : With or without a helmet? Just curious. I won't argue your experience in your country, but my experience in 30 years of riding, and having lost sever
38 EDICHC : My experience in ED is not in NZ, it was in the UK which has much higher speed limits and traffic density that NZ. Notably the speed limits in the UK
39 Pyrex : I heard someone say the other day that helmet laws are a bit ridiculous, in that why is the government spending time and effort trying to protect a br
40 EDICHC : Yeah but please don't forget us healthcare workers who have a duty of care to try and save these folks, regardless of their wilful neglect of their o
41 Post contains links Revelation : Not a statistically valid sample size. Some more significant data: Ref: http://injurylaw.reganfirm.com/2009/...-needlessly-killed-in-car-crashes/ Yes
42 dxing : Because that keeps everything moving in unison and provides some order between vehicles. But traffic is not affected one way or the other if someone
43 EDICHC : No and likewise I am not advocating the outlawing of motorcycles. I do advocate the compulsory use of seatbelts though. Just as I advocate for the co
44 dxing : Out of a total of how many? How many children drown in pools each year? Should we outlaw owning a pool? Since neiher can affect the flow of traffic t
45 Revelation : Since you are resorting to "reductio ad absurdium", I might as well go there with you. Sure it is, if they hit the brakes, they fishtail, their head h
46 EDICHC : And if a helmet may have saved them from fatal head injuiries????? I am making no statement about traffic flow, you raised that issue. I am solely ta
47 AGM100 : Or less people without common sense ... dear old Darwin had it right but the government passes laws to protect . Its common sense to ware a helmet...
48 Mir : If I'm not mistaken, convertibles are required to be designed so that in the event it does roll over, the heads of the passengers will not contact th
49 gatorfan : You guys are all missing the point. Motorcyclist who ride without a helmet perform a vital role in society - ORGAN DONATION. Where else would we find
50 casinterest : So then should we rewrite laws to make them mandatory organ doners?
51 dxing : Not at all, but a car accident will tie up a road just as badly. We insist on child safety seats yet guess what leads toddler deaths even though thei
52 Geezer : Obviously, there are as many opinions about helmet laws as there are people on A.net ! I have attempted to point out that I am NOT against wearing hel
53 dxing : Agreed. If you want to, wear it. If you don't, don't.
54 Post contains links Revelation : We went from you saying "traffic is not affected one way or the other if someone is not wearing a helmet" which I proved was false, and your counter i
55 airportugal310 : You clearly missed the obvious point that the legislation was ALREADY PASSED for that. Therefore, that is simply just a violation of maritime law and
56 san747 : Aren't you being a little dramatic here? Actually, why am I asking this, of course you don't think so. We agree on this, but come to different conclu
57 dxing : I did not state it had to be a fatal car accident. A car accident, assuming two cars, can tie up a road just as badly as a motorcycle accident so I d
58 san747 : It's a question of responsibility, but not in the way you interpret it. It's kind of frightening that you would treat your life in such a cavalier ma
59 Revelation : In my neck of the woods, non-fatal accidents (cars or bikes or both) end up getting pushed to the side of the road immediately. When there is a fatal
60 dxing : That's just it though, it is my life. I think people who rock climb are taking a big chance. I think people who dive are as well. People flying ultra
61 Geezer : Here we finally have a law requiring something that make sense ! mainly because little children are too young to realize the potential risks involved
62 Post contains images DeltaMD90 : How about the people that think gay marriage is harmful to society? Should we ban that too? It's hard to pick and choose! If someone wants to be dumb
63 jcs17 : Fixed. I don't get it. Motorcycles are loud, uncomfortable, and dangerous. Three things together, even at the young age of 28, I prefer not to associ
64 dxing : Is there a thread that somehow doesn't attempt to get corrupted to this subject? My motorcycle is loud, but it is not uncomfortable or dangerous. I c
65 Post contains images DeltaMD90 : Was not addressing you good sir. I was comparing it to a liberty many people hold dearly. I should have put a break between the checkmarks and the ne
66 EDICHC : Agree with points one and two but not point 3. Motorcycles are by their very nature dangerous. Regardless of how careful you may be you are only as s
67 san747 : Great. And every single one of those people who partake of those activities take basic safety precautions to avoid unnecessary injury or death. I don
68 Geezer : Well, I can definitely see that my "suspicions" that all of the "advocates" of the MC helmet laws are indeed liberals ! You can present them with fact
69 Springbok747 : So these idiots don't want to wear a helmet, fine. But they must make their own arrangements to pay for the consequences..including scraping their bra
70 jpetekYXMD80 : Then clearly you are uninformed. Just look at helmet laws by state. Places like Illinois, Iowa, New Hampshire.. completely free from any helmet laws.
71 lowrider : The first 3 signed up to be impacted when they chose those professions. Someone who signs up to work EMS and thinks they will never see trauma is pro
72 Revelation : And thus trying to apply the slippery slope falacy, instead of trying to stay on-topic. That's what happens when a point of view can't be supported o
73 Post contains images Mudboy : I say no, there are thousands of good people waiting on Livers, Kidneys, Hearts etc. that die every day, if these morons want to test fate, let them
74 SKYSERVICE_330 : Without getting into specifics - serious injury and death have huge ripple effects. Family's destroyed, friendships ruined, community's changed for th
75 andz : Typical. Guns are loud and dangerous in the wrong hands, bikes are the same. Mine is neither loud, uncomfortable nor dangerous. These posters touting
76 Post contains images san747 : I'm liberal and I think that's a great idea. Happy? Considering how many lives have been saved by helmet and seat belt laws, including my own at leas
77 Geezer : This thread has sure been an "eye opener" as to how different people tend to think ! I don't care how many times you point out why certain kinds of "a
78 DeltaMD90 : Nah, if we strictly took the the topic, it would be me and you saying the same things back and forth. I say personal freedom. You say good for societ
79 Springbok747 : I didn't read your whole rambling post but yes. ..most people ARE TOO STUPID to do things for themselves. The problem is, these idiots who are protes
80 Post contains links and images dxing : Using that logic we should all be driving SUV's as they are inherintly safer in an auto on auto crash. Nothing stopping you from looking today. http:
81 Post contains images Springbok747 : Did I say that? We see tons of crashes every month..90% of people involved are fine..with no long term effects. The patient involved in the bike cras
82 Post contains links dxing : Unless you are doing follow ups on them years into the future you can't make this statement accurately. In addition, if you want to use the word "mos
83 Post contains links Revelation : Since you have an aversion to laws, then why have traffic laws at all? All those other drivers are infringing on my personal liberty to turn whenever
84 DocLightning : I agree. I also oppose mandatory seatbelt laws. That doesn't mean that I think that people who ride without helmets or seatbelts are not flaming idio
85 Post contains images san747 : Touche friend. Though notice what happened to that last guy! Interesting. You are not always predictable, Doc.
86 Post contains links Revelation : Thanks for the interesting example of double negatives. I'm finding the analysis of people's posting styles pretty interesting because people are goi
87 DocLightning : I'm very predictable. I believe that for the adult making a decision which DIRECTLY affects him and him alone, there should be education and encourag
88 Post contains links tugger : Just out of curiosity then, would you support a law that requires children learn to swim? Or that anytime children are around water (even at home in
89 san747 : Agreed that there should be education and encouragement to make good decisions, but when common sense is willfully ignored just to prove a dumb point
90 DeltaMD90 : IT DOES MAKE SENSE. I will always wear a seatbelt even if it isn't a law. My question is why should I HAVE to do something YOU or society thinks is "
91 Springbok747 : But not wearing a seatbelt can affect others as well. I mean..if I'm sitting at the back, not wearing a seatbelt, and there's an accident..then I'll
92 dxing : You can't post this and then follow with this: since requiring helmets falls in the same catagory. Wearing a helmet while riding makes sense. Passing
93 Springbok747 : Um..no it isn't. Fine. Have your personal freedoms..but don't expect the taxpayer to bear the cost of your stupidity. Like I said before..if someone
94 dxing : Yet we are supposed to bear the cost of stupidity for universal care which would include cancer treatment for smokers, liver transplants for alcoholi
95 DeltaMD90 : HMMMMM UMMMM: Didn't see that line I guess? *I agree* Why don't you reread my post, you have what I'm saying allllll wrong
96 Revelation : As you mention, we've already seen postings of how in this particular case what you do DOES affect others. For instance, we've had EDICHC post how it
97 Post contains images EDICHC : So that is why then when the body goes into it's own self protection mode it shuts down the blood supply progressively to preserve the supply to the
98 dxing : Sure I've heard of CPR, and I've also heard of it not working. Correct me if I'm wrong but the survival rate outside of a hospital is on the order of
99 LMP737 : When I see someone riding without a helmet I see a selfish jerk. A person who does not care the pain their friends and family will have to endure if t
100 EDICHC : The fee is to cover the costs of the inspection, the purpose of the inspection is to certify the road worthiness of a vehicle at a regular interval.
101 Post contains images Revelation : So then you'd be OK with the state mandating that a motorcycle must have the same stability as a four wheel vehicle and thus must have training wheel
102 DeltaMD90 : I guess we have to agree to disagree. Funny considering I always wear a seatbelt and plan on getting a motorcycle soon while always wearing a helmet.
103 dxing : Then every State would require an inspection and many do not. It is about collecting a tax. Which is not the States job to do. You and several others
104 Revelation : Ok, so you are OK with the state regulating the amount of tire grip required, but not OK with the state regulating the amount of stability required?
105 EDICHC : Incorrect, you have taken the first sentence of that paragraph in isolation and ignored the rest which clearly qualified my position in this matter.
106 dxing : It completely consistent. The State also regulates how much weight per axle/tire a vehicle may carry. It does not regulate stability of a vehicle oth
107 EDICHC : That 'strange' reason, as you put it is that it has been proven to save lives and minimise injuries. Nothing strange about it at all. Drivers of cars
108 Revelation : The postulation is that no one is affected at all, not that they are being affected in a different way. As I'm pointing out, admitting that other peo
109 dxing : The strange reason is that it should be a personal choice. Many things, as has been noted, can be done to save lives and yet aren't. Yet as with moto
110 DeltaMD90 : Good point! I am not gonna touch the 3rd one with a 10 foot pole, that's for another thread, but you can't really argue that smoking is completely un
111 EDICHC : I never said a vehicle has 'rights" please stop misquoting me. I was suggesting that in comparison to your argument where you consider a helmet law i
112 Revelation : Agreed, but agreeing to deal with the nasty parts of the job does not mean they are not affected by the nasty parts of the job, and others being ffec
113 dxing : I never said you did. My point is that the State has a right to set standards via regulation for motor vehicles as those vehicles have no "rights" as
114 PPVRA : For you to legislate something like this you must be willing to actually cause harm to another person that violates your ideal. Such is the nature of
115 Post contains links EDICHC : Well the democratic process has ruled that your feelings on this matter are oversensitive. The majority do not see any such infringement. You are in
116 dxing : The "majority" never voted on it since it was decided in the legislature. If there were a State wide referendum it would be interesting to see the re
117 EDICHC : We don't pick and choose, if you knew anything about my profession you would realise that the code of ethics forbids us from being judgemental in our
118 dxing : I never said that they did, I said quite the opposite. It was another poster who suggested that somehow an ER worker's personal liberties were impact
119 EDICHC : Explain these comments.... ...where you quite clearly suggest that this may happen. Source to back up this claim? No grasping from me, the legislatio
120 Post contains images par13del : At least it was his choice, in professional sports for example, owners are denying personal freedoms as a price to play sports and be paid for it, an
121 Revelation : The postulation is that no one is affected at all by a preventable death. I've never said that a first responder would not be impacted by other types
122 PPVRA : The part about supporting such legislation implicitly requires carrying through with forceful action (and therefore harmful) against those individual
123 dxing : Please point out where I suggest that since I clearly don't. You stated the "majority" voted for it which is not technically true. The legislature vo
124 EDICHC : I did, you chose to exclude that line from your quote. But I shall repeat it. By this comment you are suggesting that this may happen, goodness I hav
125 dxing : Wow, and you complain about cherry picking quotes? Although i hate the very idea of wasting time having to explain the obvious I can see in this case
126 EDICHC : I am not grasping. You made a statement... ...that is unverifiable (as you admit yourself) as you cannot possibly presume to know voters opinions and
127 MoltenRock : Agreed. When I was young (19 - 20 years) I had a motorcycle. I ALWAYS wore a helmet, jeans, shoes, and long sleeve shirts, at a minimum! It never cea
128 EDICHC : While our opinions may differ on this law, please refrain from suggesting that those governments that do implement this law are treating their citize
129 MoltenRock : Very true! Or the government actually needs to impose limitations because the very people whining about it are childish. I have yet to meet a pro-san
130 dxing : Ummm...we have 50 States and out of the top ten in population 5 don't have helmet laws for adult riders. Which, as it relates to personal liberties s
131 MoltenRock : So you ride regularly without a helmet do you?
132 Post contains images dxing : No, as I've said numerous times in this thread I wear a helmet. But I support a persons right not to wear one if they so choose to. I wear my seatbel
133 EDICHC : And if that someone comes off their bike, have a serious head injury and require a high level of nursing for the rest of their natural, who do you th
134 Post contains images dxing : The insurance company will be obligated by contract law to take care of the person. If someone else is at fault their insurance company will be respo
135 MoltenRock : Sorry, that's not "pro-sans helmet" at all, but merely accepting of the fact that others might choose to do so. If someone wants to ride their motorc
136 andz : Hands up those posting in this thread who actually ride a motorcycle. Okay there is no hands up avatar so..... me.
137 dxing : Nothing in the Constitution speaks to helmet laws so that right is reserved to the people or the State. 30 States have deemed it is a right for a per
138 Post contains links EDICHC : I suggest you read the small print, my mother just retired after 45 years as an insurance actuary (for a multi-national). Many (not all) insurance un
139 dxing : Have, as any person should do before they purchase the policy. If I decided to ride without a helmet I would still be covered. Both under the primary
140 Post contains images EDICHC : While ACC is governement owned (there is currently debate in parliament to open ACC up to private sector competition) it is a separate corporation un
141 dxing : So it is a government entitiy in all but name only. Levy=tax by another name. Let's make it easy for everyone shall we? Click on the link. On the pag
142 EDICHC : A tax, only applicable to certain very restictive services? No, as indicated by the term under INDEPENDENT management. There are no 'government' memb
143 dxing : Still a tax by any other name even if it is only restricted to certain members of society. But still owned by the government, as you stated earlier..
144 EDICHC : Well as this was posted on a site concerning Helmet laws, the interpretation is that the wearing of a helmet is a mandatory requirement for motorcycl
145 dxing : The wearing of a helmet is not mandatory for motorcycle insurance. Insurance that covers your medical costs is required to obtain a registration to o
146 EDICHC : That is not what I asked, I asked you, as you appear to share the same vies as this pressure group, why would they suggest that a helmet is mandatory
147 dxing : You can ask the wrong question all day and I'll give you the same true answer. The only requirements to ride without a helmet in the State of Texas a
148 EDICHC : So motor insurance premiums in the UK are a tax then? They are by your argument as motor insurance in the UK is compulsory, indeed if stopped by poli
149 dxing : And I have agreed that a helmet does reduce the risk, but I disagree that a person should not be able to assess the risk on their own and decide whet
150 EDICHC : In your opinion, it is debatable if anything other than a small minority will see such a need. I for one applaud the State of NY for implementing it.
151 dxing : Well we were told it would be closed immediately after the past Presidential election. So much for another campaign promise. Again, the rest of the w
152 EDICHC : Good for you, as you will by a small degree, increase your chances of staying in the gene pool. And you do not insult when implying here... ...that t
153 PPVRA : A little over five years ago, I lost two good friends to a motorcycle accident. While this has shaped my opinion on whether one should 1. Ever consid
154 PPVRA : Wow, really screwed THAT one up. . . that's what happens when you're trying to skeak in a quick post. IMO, driving without a helmet is dangerous. But
155 dxing : No, that is a statement of fact, unlike: What is "good" for them? Who made you that judge? It's insulting in its very nature. As is: My personal free
156 EDICHC : No, it is merely your opinion, and is branding adult citizens of many nations as children, questioning their maturity without due cause. It is not ba
157 dxing : ???? It is a fact that 30 States in this country do not have mandatory helmet laws. Which means an adult can choose to wear one or not. What part of
158 Post contains images EDICHC : Which is in a gradual process of being outlawed by progressive restriction. I presume you mean alcohol, which is only harmful when taken in excess, a
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Scottish Footballer Dies On Pitch posted Sat Dec 29 2007 15:10:33 by Gkirk
Helmet Law: Yay Or Nay? posted Thu Jul 19 2007 16:37:31 by Checkraiser
Sid Vicious Dies On This Day 1979. posted Fri Feb 2 2007 10:36:38 by Cumulus
Crewman Attacked (and Dies) On The Queen Mary 2 posted Sat May 13 2006 18:28:02 by BMIFlyer
NY Times Editorial On The Left Behind Series posted Tue Jul 20 2004 16:08:57 by Garnetpalmetto
Cameroon Footballer Foé Dies On Pitch posted Thu Jun 26 2003 21:10:20 by David_itl
Advice Needed: Visiting Niagara Falls, NY & On posted Sat Jul 24 2010 20:34:10 by StarAlliance38
On The Right Path: Next AZ Immigration Law posted Fri Jun 11 2010 13:46:22 by ATCtower
NY Gov. Paterson Broke Law Taking Yankee Tkts posted Thu Mar 4 2010 00:18:58 by Zentraedi
Man Dies After Urinating On Power Line posted Wed Mar 3 2010 13:09:06 by KaiGywer