Stop Helmet Laws Now...

Autobahn?
R, UB

 

We do care about safety but it does not have free reign. It is balanced by
inconvenience.

Ben

http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/rockland_mc_riders

 

Andy Burnett replied:

No I'm not. (besides, isn't that comment a little bit... hum... "dippy" at
least coming from you, Andy..?) Btw, what are you doing up so late at
night -- that second child keeping you up? ;^)



Andy Burnett replied:

Yes, to me this is really true. And I can see that in other things as
well. For instance, I always get a blast out of riding rollercoasters,
which I know are completely safe. But if there somehow was a
rollercoaster without any safety harness, on which I had to cling onto by
myself, then the fun-factor would significantly drop. Maybe not for you,
but it sure would for me. So yes, if riding my bike was completely safe,
I would love it even more.

-- peer

 

Pretty astounding comparison. Does he rate it?

Looking at some of the reactions here, it's clear he's got a history.

I don't think it's usually so cut and dried, but that's just me. Anyway, I
initially replied in this thread because the response to Hansteen's remark
was way out of whack with what was going on in the thread at that moment.
The guy who jumped on him wasn't really replying to this thread, but to
something else. His choice, but it always bugs me to see people arguing
about something that isn't happening.

Almost none. Hansteen doesn't seem to post much in AMS and I never read
reeky.

ab

 

Andy Burnett blithered:

Peer Landa replied:

I didn't think it was so dippy. That's me worrying that if we endorse
legislation intended to limit the choices people can make about their
*personal* safety in the name of cost-to-society arguments, we may be
hastening the eventual demise of our sport. It may not happen in our
lifetime, but it seems to me that as time creeps by, we accumulate new
laws without leaving many outmoded ones behind. Overall, the list of
things thou shalt not do gets longer.

Yes, the second baby *is* keeping me up. Pretty cool though.

Your rollercoaster analogy is interesting and I see your point. Still,
there are possible consequences to riding a rollercoaster, like barfing
on yourself. Or your date. That doesn't strike me as perfectly safe!


What is it about rollercoasters that is so amusing? Good ones are a
"rush," which is another way of saying they scare people, whether there
is much probability of danger or not. Is your heart rate not a little
elevated when you get off the ride? If it is, what would cause this?

ab

 

LOL Wasn't meant as an insult. I just couldn't resist after the ration
he gave you.
Mag

 

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 07:37:37 GMT, Andy Burnett

[...]

Timberwolf is responsible for creating the reccy FAQ which has
actually turned out to be a pretty good document, particularly for new
riders. It used to be limited to his own bike experiences (CB-1 &
BMWGS) but last I looked it had a broader scope.

http://www.timberwoof.com/motorcycle/index.html
http://www.timberwoof.com/motorcycle/faq.shtml

Henry has a Honda Blackbird but you'll only see his posts in AMS or
ba.moto as a result of a cross post from rec.moto. He can be quite
reasonable at times.


Bob Nixon
Phoenix AZ
01 Sprint ST "RED"
03 Suzuki ST "SILVER"

 

Yes, but it's already legal so in my mind I was using it as a base.

 

I've only heard of 5 point.

But I guess most racers aren't as "gifted" as yourself.

 

At the very least, you leave yourself intellectually defenseless should
a majority come to favor banning motorcycles due to the higher medical
costs incurred by riders compared to drivers. They could use exactly
the same argumentation but applied to all motorcyclists, not just
unhelmeted ones.

More realistically, suppose the ban on "bullet bikes" that was proposed
(but failed) in the late 1980s were to resurface. Recent news stories
about sportbike crashes--mostly urban and suburban incidents, some of
which have killed innocent bystanders--comprise a damning litany that a
fear-mongering politician might use to win support for a ban on powerful
machines. "Higher insurance premiums and tax dollars to care for the
uninsured: These costs come out of our pockets to pay for their 'right'
to ride insanely overpowered motorcycles." If you've already conceded
that the government can use its power to keep medical costs down by
regulating risky behavior, the only defense left is to counter the
claims of cost reduction.

 

Tim,

In theory, if we lived in an amoral, idealistic and conceptually pure society I
too would not believe in helmet or seat belt laws. But we don't live there, nor
do we function in "ivory towers" where theory rules and the reality of the
world is deferred because it doesn't match the desired model.

Ben

Ben

http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/rockland_mc_riders

 

They have an interesting concept, with poor brand management in the
US. It's almost as though failure is the stated goal The die cast
engine is nice, but I don't know WTF they were thinking with the fat
girl's ass tailsection.

 

There is apparently a lot of free reign in that comment. Who gets to
do the balancing and more importantly where do we draw the line?

Just as easily as you argue driving 30 mph is stupid, even if it would
result in a net savings of life one could easily argue that mandatory
helmet usage under all circumstances is arbitrarily inane.

 

He made these points? How were they originial to him? Note how all
those things are directly attributable to others.

 

I'll tell you the #1 safety item found in most race cars that we'd be better
off if it were required in passenger cars: extensively trained and highly
skilled drivers.

What if we stopped handing out driver's licenses like candy and instead made
people demonstrate the ability to drive WELL? What if we had mandatory
retesting every 15 years? What if difficult to navigate vehicles (monster
SUVs, e.g.) required further training and testing, and a license endorsement
similar to motorcycles?

If we emphasized the "responsibility" side of the equation by encouraging
and even requiring more rigorous training and testing for driver/rider
skills, we could see a lot of good things come to pass: decreased accident
and fatality rates, higher speed limits, lower insurance rates, reduced
traffic delays, better fuel economy... the list goes on.

Sorry for the personal rant, but every single time I'm on the road, I'm
struck by the lack of skill and good judgment of other drivers. Most of them
just dutifully follow the taillights ahead of them, and would drive off a
cliff before noticing something was amiss. Short sighted, panicky, and prone
to over-reaction ‹ that's the nature of drivers in the US. Hopefully not
forever, though.

 

"The beer was flat, the bratwurst was undercooked, and the band sucked."

 

ITYM did "oral" exams.
Mag

 

We can count you as one simple minded fool who's living in a
childish fantasy world, yeah. With half of your already seriously
limited supply of gray matter oozing out of your thick and split
skull, you'd be even less capable of making a rational decision
than you are now. Your useless carcass would be picked up off the
road out of pity, and become a burden on the local hospital staff
regardless of your laughable usenet post to the contrary.
You seem to be somewhat of a simple minded idiot - no offense,
just an observation.


--

http://911truth.org/
http://globalresearch.ca/

"I think this is the worst government the US has ever
had in its more than 200 years of history. It has
engaged in extraordinarily irresponsible policies not
only in foreign policy and economics but also in social
and environmental policy.....This is not normal government
policy. Now is the time for people to engage in civil
disobedience. I think it's time to protest - as much as
possible....What we have here is a form of looting."
- George A. Akerlof, 2001 Nobel prize laureate economist


Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...

 

V65 Magna, too.

http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/hhh3/motorcycle.html

He's always reasonable unless he encounters a hysterical little
nut case like Mikey Testi. In that case, he may adjust the level
of discourse... ;-)

--

http://911truth.org/
http://globalresearch.ca/


"One of the things we don't want to do is destroy the
infrastructure in Iraq because in a few days we're going
to own that country," - Tom Brokaw

Cost of probing Bill Clinton's sex life: $65 million.
Cost of probing the Columbia shuttle disaster: $50 million.
Funds assigned to independent Sept. 11 panel: $3 million.

Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...

 

That would be great, as would better roads, but with the bu$h
regime's tax cuts for billionaires, corporate welfare handouts,
insane spending on weapons of mass destruction, and its obscenely
expensive terror attacks and military occupations, it won't happen.
Local budgets are in the worst shape since the Great Depression.
Until the gullible voters see through the lies, and start electing
leaders who care about something other than their own personal power
and wealth, few of our tax dollars be spent in areas that benefit
the people who actually earned them.

--

http://911truth.org/
http://globalresearch.ca/
http://regulareverydaypeople.com/

Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...