Bill, you're needed in Maine

http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/view/columns/1322675.shtml

Someone post the text for him, since he won't click on the link.

 

Quoted from article:

"Wearing a helmet, first and foremost a safety issue, is an economic issue,
too. Helmets can help prevent deaths and serious head and neck injuries.
Meanwhile, most of the costs to treat riders who are in crashes are paid by
employers, insurers and taxpayer-funded programs, such as Medicaid and
Medicare."

You want economic issues? Required helmet use deters motorcycle use.
Motorcycles will cost more. Road repair will cost more. Insurance will cost
more. More pollution, longer traffic jams, more development to cater to more
cars taking away more natural resources. Less parking places. Less gas
available causing higher prices for everything causing higher inflation.

"Helmets can help prevent deaths and serious head and neck injuries" is
specious. The hospital beds of those who escape permanent brain injury in a
crash will be replaced by those that would have died had they been
helmetless only to survive with brain damage. The hospital costs of those
who escape permanent brain injury in a crash will be paid by those that
would have died had they been helmetless only to survive with brain damage.

There are much better ways to ensure crash fatalities are reduced. And more
cost effective. Training and driver awareness programs come to mind.
Stricter licensing requirements, stiffer penalties for causing accidents.

Say *NO* to safety nazis who think they should regulate your liberties.

 

I don't think it's a blog. I think it is a real small town newspaper.
Take it as commentary, cause it was hardly written as a news story (fair
and impartial.)

 

This is funny!

I'm going to remember this next time I see one of these many republican
bastards out here with his girlfriend knocked up and using medicaid to pay
for the medical services. I'm going to remember it next time I see/hear
about someone who's stuffing their face with BBQ and suffers a heart
condition and using their medical insurance to pay for treatment. I'm going
to remember this next time I hear about an employee who gets hurt at work
and wants their employer to pay for medical needs and time off.

This *has* to be a republican that wrote that trash!

 

Nope.. It's a democrat who's sponsoring the bill.....

"Rep. Walter A. Wheeler Sr., D-Kittery, is sponsoring the bill, which is
likely to draw objections from many motorcyclists and, therefore, from
lawmakers who want to please those constituents."

Rex S.

 

Well, that was a Democrat that introduced the helmet bill.

I have been on several Maine newspaper websites this morning. I have found
several Demos speaking against and for the proposed helmet bill. No mention
of any Repubs.at this time.

Have not found anything about which party the present and former Governors
belong to.

Wasn't ex-Tex Gov. Richards (Demo) a strong mandatory helmet law supporter??

 

Wasn't it Bill Clements (Repub) who signed the helmet bill into law?

Wasn't it George W. Bush (Repub) who it was said wouldn't sign the current
law without insurance restrictions?

I thought it was Ann Richards (Demo) who worked a deal with GM to keep the
thousands of jobs in Arlington?

 

Nah, the article wasn't written by him. The article was written as a
commentary.

 

Now you guys are dissin' one of my mom's pals!
It doesn't look that bad in person. She's been over to my folks house
before when I was there.

 

The helmet law that was passed by the Demo controlled legislature, he
probadly did.

And it wasn't Sputnik who decided to accept the helmet law with the
insurance restrictions??

And that is supposed to make up for her supporting the mandatory helmet
law??

 

Passing the buck back to the legislature? Who signed it into law?

Only with the caveats of the MSF course also being in place.

You don't know what you're talking about and it shows.

She didn't have anything to do with the helmet law. Which bill hit her desk
to repeal the helmet law, and which she vetoed? Please tell us!

 

And wasn't it AR who vetoed the CHL law at least 2 times when it reached
her desk?

 

She sure did.. Her objection to the CHL law was to keep nuts like you from
carrying a gun around..

 

It's been a while but I believe you are correct.
If the CHL had been passed when it crossed her
desk I wouldn't have been helping treat casualties
after that lunatic shot up Luby's. I was working
in DACH that day...
--
Keith Schiffner
History does not record anywhere at any time a
religion that has any rational basis. Religion is
a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up
to the unknown without help. But, like dandruff,
most people do have a religion and spend time and
money on it and seem to derive considerable
pleasure from fiddling with it.
Robert Heinlein

 

Actually, your timeline's a little bit off. Governor Richards didn't
veto the handgun proposal until after the Waco incident in 1993. By
the time she vetoed it, George Hennard and Luby's were already
eighteen months in the past. (Unless there was an earlier veto in her
first nine months of office that I'm forgetting - anyone have a firm
date on a CHL veto before October of 1991)?


That must have been rough, treating those victims. I remember being
shocked and horrified by the whole thing, and I was 150 miles away in
Arlington, not down in Killeen where it happened.


Scott Gardner

 

Don't concern yourself too much. Stevie Schiffner never knows what he's
talking about. According to *his* timeline, he should've been in Iraq at
that time...not treating wounded civilians in Killeen.

That just proved he's lying on two topics...one with his military service,
and two with regards to treating wounded civilians....not to mention lying
about Ann Richards.

 

Whoa whoa whoa...don't drag me into anything. First, I acknowledge
that there may have been an earlier than the one from 1993 that I
remembered. Second, we're talking about almost 15 years ago, so even
if there was only one veto, he may just be forgetting when it was. It
wouldn't change whether or not he was in Killeen at the time.

Scott Gardner

 

Sheesh - piss-poor proofreading on my part. The second sentence above
should say ...may have been an earlier veto than the one...

Scott Gardner

 

I don't have the time lines, but I think she got 2 chances and vetoed
them both.

--
Mark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX
http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org
"The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter,
taller, richer and remove the crabgrass from your lawn. The Republicans
are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get
elected and prove it." P.J. O'Rourke

 

I know there was one time where there was a push to put it on a
non-binding referendum out for a public vote. She nixed that attempt in
spite f being non-binding (IOW, let's just see what the public wants, we
can still ignore it). She didn't want to have everyone else know that
the majority of the public favored it while she blocked it at every step
along the way. Then there was at least 1 flat out veto when the bill hit
her desk. So either there were 2 vetoes and the veto of the referendum
or 1 and 1. Doesn't really matter in the big scheme of things it still
showed everyone her true colors.