fbpx
Advertisements

Should every bicyclist have to wear a helmet?

This topic contains 50 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Bainc 4 years, 9 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #175602

    EGL Admin
    Member
    • Topics - 3,082
    • Replies - 21,888
    • Total Posts - 24,970

    There is a bill coming through the state legislature that will make it mandatory that every biker wear a helmet. I don’t know why anyone wouldn’t want to wear one, but not sure they should have to. The serious bicyclists wear them and probably quite a few have suffered crashes and were happy they had them on. You can’t legislate or fix stupid and the ones who don’t want to wear them aren’t going to.

    The proposed bill will bring a $25 fine for anyone caught not using a helmet.

    http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article10170995.html

  • #275813

    loonyman
    Participant
    • Topics - 2
    • Replies - 160
    • Total Posts - 162

    No, because some day I or a loved one may need an organ donated to them and if you make everyone wear a helmet this will reduce the number of potential donors. Don’t mess with Darwin!

    On a related note, if you do ride a bicycle without a helmet, make sure you are an organ donor and keep an emergency contact note with you at all times. Just in case.

  • #275807

    SteveB6509
    Participant
    • Topics - 36
    • Replies - 1,460
    • Total Posts - 1,496

    If I am going on a recreational, I don’t wear a helmet. Yes, I enjoy the freedom of having the open air and I realize I am taking a chance. If I am going on a cycling workout, I wear a helmet because I realize I am taking more chances.

  • #275799

    tomwaltman
    Member
    • Topics - 96
    • Replies - 6,770
    • Total Posts - 6,866

    Put on a GD helmet you wannabe anti-vaxxers!

  • #275775

    EGL Admin
    Member
    • Topics - 3,082
    • Replies - 21,888
    • Total Posts - 24,970

    @steveb6509 105448 wrote:

    If I am going on a recreational, I don’t wear a helmet. Yes, I enjoy the freedom of having the open air and I realize I am taking a chance. If I am going on a cycling workout, I wear a helmet because I realize I am taking more chances.

    You can have an accident any time and all it takes is hitting your head even a little and it could be fatal.

    I always wear one. Last year we were riding with the kids and my son cut over and clipped my back tire and down I went. Didn’t hit my head but skinned my elbow and jammed my shoulder.

  • #275809

    ActionEmotion
    Member
    • Topics - 130
    • Replies - 1,822
    • Total Posts - 1,952

    More laws, more regulations, more government interference = less liberty and freedom.

  • #275800

    tomwaltman
    Member
    • Topics - 96
    • Replies - 6,770
    • Total Posts - 6,866

    And less traumatic brain injuries…

  • #275776

    EGL Admin
    Member
    • Topics - 3,082
    • Replies - 21,888
    • Total Posts - 24,970

    I kind of see both sides here. People are adults and should be able to do what they want within reason if it only hurts themselves. At the same time people are not aware of the studies and the dangers. They think it won’t happen to them. I think in the story above it said that 90% of people who dies in bike accidents weren’t wearing helmets. That can be misleading because I don’t know if they died of just head injuries. You get hit by a car, I don’t know if the helmet makes that much difference. Like loonyman said, make sure you have an organ donor card if you don’t wear a helmet.

  • #275810

    ActionEmotion
    Member
    • Topics - 130
    • Replies - 1,822
    • Total Posts - 1,952

    @tomwaltman 105465 wrote:

    And less traumatic brain injuries…

    sigh, life is dangerous, intelligent people will take precautions, fools will not. That’s freedom. Either support freedom or the nanny state, your choice.

  • #275777

    EGL Admin
    Member
    • Topics - 3,082
    • Replies - 21,888
    • Total Posts - 24,970

    I don’t think it’s an either/or. I think you can pick and choose. in this case, I think adults should be able to do what they want. In other cases, that’s not always true. Seat belts, I don’t think it should be a choice. You can still choose not to wear them and get a ticket. I think a couple of years ago there was talk of making car dealers install safety devices on car windows so they won’t close and kill a child and at that some people thought that was a bad idea. In some cases I think it is necessary to try and protect people. Intelligent people don’t always take precautions though, so that’s a misconception. I don’t think SteveB is a fool by any means and he knows it’s safer but chooses to not use a helmet sometimes. I think the term “nanny state” is becoming the hot new term that people used to discredit something just like PC is used for the same purpose.

  • #275823

    Bainc
    Member
    • Topics - 9
    • Replies - 892
    • Total Posts - 901

    Every time I see an adult riding without a helmet I just shake my head in disbelief. Thankfully it’s not very common. Helmets seem to be widely used by most groups. Even if seat belts weren’t required in vehicles I suspect most people are smart enough to realize it will save your life and use them.

  • #275804

    violarose
    Member
    • Topics - 106
    • Replies - 2,959
    • Total Posts - 3,065

    I never want to wear my helmet. Wait I can’t. I dont own one. My girls dont want to ride a bike because of the helmet laws. So they dont ride their bikes. I know the risk and I am ok with it/

  • #275801

    tomwaltman
    Member
    • Topics - 96
    • Replies - 6,770
    • Total Posts - 6,866

    My son has a helmet with a shark fin on top. I like to wear it occasionally.��

  • #275805

    lizzie
    Member
    • Topics - 17
    • Replies - 650
    • Total Posts - 667

    My sons are really good about wearing helmets. If an adult has children you owe it to your family to wear a helmet. Wearing a helmet will help prevent brain injuries. Brain injuries are expensive to cover.

    On the other hand we will have less organ donors.

  • #275814

    loonyman
    Participant
    • Topics - 2
    • Replies - 160
    • Total Posts - 162

    @lizzie 105502 wrote:

    My sons are really good about wearing helmets. If an adult has children you owe it to your family to wear a helmet. Wearing a helmet will help prevent brain injuries. Brain injuries are expensive to cover.

    On the other hand we will have less organ donors.

    I think someone may have mentioned that already.

    I agree, if you have children and they wear a helmet, why would you not? What do you think will happen to your child if you crash and suffer a dibilitating injury?

  • #275822

    gearshark23
    Member
    • Topics - 23
    • Replies - 1,226
    • Total Posts - 1,249

    I’ve seen people walking with helmets on.

  • #275816

    Anonymous
    • Topics - 18
    • Replies - 1,250
    • Total Posts - 1,268

    I don’t ride my bike often, but when I do it is on trails and rarely near any traffic or cars. Mostly I bike while camping or just around my neighborhood. AND I NEVER WEAR A HELMET. I have yet to fall. And I haven’t been close to “donating my organs” to anyone because of an accident.

    I’ve had worse slip and falls in my bathtub than I have with a bike.

    Now there is no need to post articles or stats about helmets and safety… I get that a car can really cause damage if you are on a bike. But I am more about personal freedoms. And to me, this is the government stepping into my personal life

  • #275798

    newmom
    Participant
    • Topics - 206
    • Replies - 6,205
    • Total Posts - 6,411

    All of you who oppose helmet on bikes, how do you feel about mandatory helmets for motorcyclists?

    Don’t you think that a far larger percentage of the population rides bicycles than rides motorcycles?

  • #275793

    doclaguna
    Member
    • Topics - 216
    • Replies - 5,943
    • Total Posts - 6,159

    Anyone who chooses not to wear a helmet and has a traumatic brain injury should have to foot the bill for their own medical care. If they can’t, a pillow should be provided for a family member to assist with suicide. In addition, if you have dependents and suffer a traumatic brain injury because you didn’t have a helmet on, your family should banned from public assistance. The problem Stephen is that it’s not really freedom, when the taxpayer has to bail you out for your stupidity. Freedom means if you **** yourself up because you want to ride without a helmet YOU and not society should pick up the cost.

  • #275783

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    @Action>Emotion 105453 wrote:

    More laws, more regulations, more government interference = less liberty and freedom.

    Yah, but this is one of those situations where I’m morally obligated to intervene and save your life. Inaction can be an evil thing when you KNOW what will happen.

    I came off my bike in ’87 while I was living in Davis. I smacked into the ground face first with no helmet. I actually owned one, but it was sitting at home on my desk where it couldn’t save me. I lost all memory of that day, couldn’t do much of anything that a mature adult should be doing for the next six months, and didn’t get back to my grad studies for a full year. Brain injuries suck both for the person suffering them and for those who love them.

    I get kind of preachy on this subject.
    Don’t do what I did.
    Wear the damn helmet.

  • #275778

    EGL Admin
    Member
    • Topics - 3,082
    • Replies - 21,888
    • Total Posts - 24,970

    @doclaguna 105532 wrote:

    Anyone who chooses not to wear a helmet and has a traumatic brain injury should have to foot the bill for their own medical care. If they can’t, a pillow should be provided for a family member to assist with suicide. In addition, if you have dependents and suffer a traumatic brain injury because you didn’t have a helmet on, your family should banned from public assistance. The problem Stephen is that it’s not really freedom, when the taxpayer has to bail you out for your stupidity. Freedom means if you **** yourself up because you want to ride without a helmet YOU and not society should pick up the cost.

    Boom. That’s been my point and that’s what I’ve said on other threads about this. I personally don’t care if a person wears a helmet or spills their brains out. Just don’t make me pay for it. That’s the only issue. As you said, the taxpayers end up paying for this and that’s why it’s non nanny government in my opinion.

  • #275797

    LC
    Participant
    • Topics - 640
    • Replies - 7,150
    • Total Posts - 7,790

    Same argument for smoking. If your actions could cost the taxpayers money, then usually I have little to no problem with the codification.

  • #275784

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    If it was just about the money, a reasonable counter-argument could be made for changing the law so the public doesn’t incur the costs. Try that, though, and you’ll run into a ethical minefield associated with our moral obligations to protect people who need it. Most of us can agree to protect children from their own ignorance, but we are divided when it comes to ignorant adults.

  • #275811

    ActionEmotion
    Member
    • Topics - 130
    • Replies - 1,822
    • Total Posts - 1,952

    What I am reading here is a lot of socialist ideology based on taxpayers footing the bill for others. So lets expand this shall we? Ban swimming pools, driving motor vehicles without helmets, smoking, regulate what people eat, drink and how long they sit in one place. Lets make sure that anything bad that can happen to a human being is strictly regulated by the government in case someone without health insurance gets sick or injured and the taxpayer has to foot the bill. That is exactly what you are promoting with laws that nanny the populace into submission to obey or be fined. It strips us of freedom, the right to make bad decisions and the liberty to take risks. Men free climb El Capitan? Not with this approach. That is strictly forbidden as is skate boarding, parkour, gymnastics without helmets and knee pads, ice skating without protective gear, choosing what you want to eat without government intervention. I’m sorry Mr X, your BMI is above government regulations which means you are forbidden to buy this candy bar. Come on, get your brains past the me me me I don’t want to pay for some self inflicted injury of someone else mindset and look at the big picture. Encroaching government is dangerous. The more regulation and laws the worse life becomes.

  • #275815

    loonyman
    Participant
    • Topics - 2
    • Replies - 160
    • Total Posts - 162

    @doclaguna 105532 wrote:

    Anyone who chooses not to wear a helmet and has a traumatic brain injury should have to foot the bill for their own medical care. If they can’t, a pillow should be provided for a family member to assist with suicide. In addition, if you have dependents and suffer a traumatic brain injury because you didn’t have a helmet on, your family should banned from public assistance. The problem Stephen is that it’s not really freedom, when the taxpayer has to bail you out for your stupidity. Freedom means if you **** yourself up because you want to ride without a helmet YOU and not society should pick up the cost.

    This. And the donor card.

  • #275779

    EGL Admin
    Member
    • Topics - 3,082
    • Replies - 21,888
    • Total Posts - 24,970

    To me it’s less about protecting people from themselves and protecting everyone else from footing the ill from their mistakes.

    Action mentioned people climbing El Capitan. Let them do that. If they get stuck up there make them pay to be rescued.

  • #275817

    Anonymous
    • Topics - 18
    • Replies - 1,250
    • Total Posts - 1,268

    @Action>Emotion 105554 wrote:

    What I am reading here is a lot of socialist ideology based on taxpayers footing the bill for others. So lets expand this shall we? Ban swimming pools, driving motor vehicles without helmets, smoking, regulate what people eat, drink and how long they sit in one place. Lets make sure that anything bad that can happen to a human being is strictly regulated by the government in case someone without health insurance gets sick or injured and the taxpayer has to foot the bill. That is exactly what you are promoting with laws that nanny the populace into submission to obey or be fined. It strips us of freedom, the right to make bad decisions and the liberty to take risks. Men free climb El Capitan? Not with this approach. That is strictly forbidden as is skate boarding, parkour, gymnastics without helmets and knee pads, ice skating without protective gear, choosing what you want to eat without government intervention. I’m sorry Mr X, your BMI is above government regulations which means you are forbidden to buy this candy bar. Come on, get your brains past the me me me I don’t want to pay for some self inflicted injury of someone else mindset and look at the big picture. Encroaching government is dangerous. The more regulation and laws the worse life becomes.

    You are right. No skateboarding, roller blading, biking, using a scooter, or even walking the streets without knee pads, helmets, mouth gaurd, and helmet. You never know when you might get hit by a car or trip. No swimming in your pool or sitting in your hot tub without a life jacket. Whenever you take your dog for a walk, must have a helmet on yourself and the dog. Crossing the street at night. Flashing lights, both with red and orange lights.
    We must protect everyone from themselves…..

  • #275818

    Anonymous
    • Topics - 18
    • Replies - 1,250
    • Total Posts - 1,268

    @EGL Admin 105561 wrote:

    To me it’s less about protecting people from themselves and protecting everyone else from footing the ill from their mistakes.

    Action mentioned people climbing El Capitan. Let them do that. If they get stuck up there make them pay to be rescued.

    But if they fall and hurt themselves they are going to get a fancy ride to the hospital and YOU are paying the bill.

    Lets just close Yosemite. I was hiking there last summer and got a blister… HELP ME!!!!!!!

  • #275785

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    Heh. If they get stuck up there and die, does that make us partially complicit in their death? Choosing not to act is an action.

    I’m not defending every possible intervention that A>E points to on his slippery slope. I accept as obvious the notion that we can carry interventions too far. It’s just that the cost of the bill doesn’t factor into the moral decision. Some prices are inelastic and excellent examples are easy to find when life-and-death decisions are to be made.

    Some people won’t tolerate inaction here anymore than others tolerate inaction regarding abortion.
    The moral choice matters far more than the costs associated with the consequences of the action.

    (Yes… I recognize the potential for conflicting positions within the same person here.)

  • #275802

    tomwaltman
    Member
    • Topics - 96
    • Replies - 6,770
    • Total Posts - 6,866

    Al, no. I do not feel I am complicit in the least regarding stupid choices others make. If you choose to play Russian Roulette with a semi-auto, feel free. If you want to jump out of airplanes without a parachute, heck, I will fly the plane! I support helmets for bike riders for the simple fact that you likely won’t die, and you will end up suing the state or some poor homeowner whose home was closest to your lack of bicycling skills. Until we can perfect the removal of liability, or kill all the lawyers, I will infringe on your liberty to do stupid things when the infringement doesn’t infringe on your freedom to act. A helmet doesn’t infringe on anything more that ability to be a dumba$$.

  • #275780

    EGL Admin
    Member
    • Topics - 3,082
    • Replies - 21,888
    • Total Posts - 24,970

    Liability is the key. If someone falls and gets hurt, they are going to for someone to sue. I agree with Tom, it’s it cutting into anyone’s freedoms really.

  • #275794

    doclaguna
    Member
    • Topics - 216
    • Replies - 5,943
    • Total Posts - 6,159

    @Action>Emotion 105554 wrote:

    What I am reading here is a lot of socialist ideology based on taxpayers footing the bill for others. So lets expand this shall we? Ban swimming pools, driving motor vehicles without helmets, smoking, regulate what people eat, drink and how long they sit in one place. Lets make sure that anything bad that can happen to a human being is strictly regulated by the government in case someone without health insurance gets sick or injured and the taxpayer has to foot the bill. That is exactly what you are promoting with laws that nanny the populace into submission to obey or be fined. It strips us of freedom, the right to make bad decisions and the liberty to take risks. Men free climb El Capitan? Not with this approach. That is strictly forbidden as is skate boarding, parkour, gymnastics without helmets and knee pads, ice skating without protective gear, choosing what you want to eat without government intervention. I’m sorry Mr X, your BMI is above government regulations which means you are forbidden to buy this candy bar. Come on, get your brains past the me me me I don’t want to pay for some self inflicted injury of someone else mindset and look at the big picture. Encroaching government is dangerous. The more regulation and laws the worse life becomes.

    Huh? Socialist? What?
    The reality that most of us see is that we are not going to abandon head trauma patients. Not going to happen. If you go out and spill your brains and end up a vegetable Action, I’m on the hook for your care, boarding, meds, adult diapers, etc. for the rest of your life as a taxpayer. So given that reality, I have no problem, as a libertarian, not a socialist, with safety laws. As long as I’m on the hook for people’s risky behavior, I’ll be for reduction in that behavior. If I’m off the hook feel free to ride on I5 naked on a unicycle.

  • #275812

    ActionEmotion
    Member
    • Topics - 130
    • Replies - 1,822
    • Total Posts - 1,952

    My wife was a head trauma patient, not one penny of taxpayer money went into her care. NOT ONE! So because other people need help you would rather make laws and regulations to take the danger out of living life because you don’t want to pay? This is such an over reach over an over reaction. You should be so worked up about 5 million illegals or the money we as a nation send to countries that want us dead, or taxes that Obamacare is creating or the taxes on gasoline to pay for the stupid bullet train. This is all government in your life screwing with your money and you want to give them more power for the oft individual who gets a head injury that doesn’t have health care? Please.

  • #275781

    EGL Admin
    Member
    • Topics - 3,082
    • Replies - 21,888
    • Total Posts - 24,970

    My wife was a head trauma patient, not one penny of taxpayer money went into her care. NOT ONE!

    But that’s not always the case. What about the others that the taxpayers do end up paying for? Are you okay with that? That’s kind of what this topic is about. Should we be responsible for the stupidity of others? If the answer is yes, then we have a right to limit how much their stupidity will cost us. You see Nanny State and a lot of people don’t see it that. Like I said earlier “nanny state” is the equivalent of playing the race card or claiming something is offensive.

    So because other people need help you would rather make laws and regulations to take the danger out of living life because you don’t want to pay? This is such an over reach over an over reaction. You should be so worked up about 5 million illegals or the money we as a nation send to countries that want us dead, or taxes that Obamacare is creating or the taxes on gasoline to pay for the stupid bullet train. This is all government in your life screwing with your money and you want to give them more power for the oft individual who gets a head injury that doesn’t have health care? Please.

    I think you’re comparing apples and oranges. I don’t think a lot of people are in favor of illegal aliens being here or giving money to countries that want us dead, the bullet train or Obamacare. Those are all separate issues. Being in favor of mandatory bike helmets has nothing to do with the other issues. We are talking about a specific piece of legislation and you’re talking about on the one hand losing rights and freedoms and then now bringing up all these other red herrings.

  • #275786

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    @tomwaltman 105565 wrote:

    Al, no. I do not feel I am complicit in the least regarding stupid choices others make. If you choose to play Russian Roulette with a semi-auto, feel free. If you want to jump out of airplanes without a parachute, heck, I will fly the plane! I support helmets for bike riders for the simple fact that you likely won’t die, and you will end up suing the state or some poor homeowner whose home was closest to your lack of bicycling skills. Until we can perfect the removal of liability, or kill all the lawyers, I will infringe on your liberty to do stupid things when the infringement doesn’t infringe on your freedom to act. A helmet doesn’t infringe on anything more that ability to be a dumba$$.

    I get your point. I put up the ‘complicit by inaction’ argument as devil’s/philosopher’s advocate. There are a number of people moved by it to recognize their own complicity if they don’t act.

    On a personal level, I don’t feel complicit until the dumba$$ is a relatively close relative. At that point, I’m moved to intervene physically. For someone a little more distant, I’ll just preach at them for awhile. The cost they incur to themselves or us doesn’t factor in until I start to think about how long I want to keep preaching. I have no doubt that part of that is my personal preference to avoid attaching monetary value to human life, but I DO recognize that one must be prudent about these things.

    Still, I don’t think the financial argument moves people who look at this in terms of ethics and that includes those who would prefer to halt the creep of scope of government regulation to defend our liberty. Absent the costs, one can still balance the loss of liberty for some against the loss of life and love for others. I prefer to consider that balance because it avoids the part of this debate where one gets to accuse one’s opponent of placing too high or too low a price on human life.

  • #275787

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    @Action>Emotion 105571 wrote:

    You should be so worked up about 5 million illegals or the money we as a nation send to countries that want us dead, or taxes that Obamacare is creating or the taxes on gasoline to pay for the stupid bullet train. This is all government in your life screwing with your money and you want to give them more power for the oft individual who gets a head injury that doesn’t have health care? Please.

    Last time I checked my score card, he DOES get worked up about these things.

  • #275788

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    @EGL Admin 105573 wrote:

    Should we be responsible for the stupidity of others?

    Asked that way, most people will say “No”. Yet… they support these kinds of laws. That suggests you are asking the wrong question. 8)
    Consider it this way…

    Should we be responsible for mitigating the harm suffered by survivors who lose loved ones?

    When I smacked my face into the ground, I obviously suffered. However, it was and old girlfriend who stepped back into my life and gave me the TLC I needed… not a hospital. She was seeing someone else, but couldn’t see herself not acting to help me. It is people like her that we are helping the most when we intervene against folks who want to do something stupid.

    (I survived the first night because other friends stepped up including a fellow who had experience as a fullback and catcher at the college level. The student’s clinic patched me up and handed me off to my friends, but I don’t remember any of that.)

  • #275824

    Bainc
    Member
    • Topics - 9
    • Replies - 892
    • Total Posts - 901

    I’m not sure making someone wear a helmet is really infringing on that persons rights. What are we talking about the right to have your hair blow in the wind? Come on.

    Now on the other hand I’m not sure I want our limited police resources spent giving people tickets for not wearing a helmet. I’d also like to know how big a problem this actually amount to. When I was a kid in the 80’s nobody wore a helmet (same with seat belts). Now I rarely see people w/o helmets. Most of those that don’t are economically disadvantaged and probably can’t afford a helmet yet alone a ticket (ie the homeless I see riding in downtown Sac).

  • #275808

    SteveB6509
    Participant
    • Topics - 36
    • Replies - 1,460
    • Total Posts - 1,496

    I normally am a personal liberty kind of person and feel a reasonable solution would be to not mandate helmets on cyclists or motorcycle riders but do mandate that insurance premiums take that into account (in other words, I have to pay a higher insurance rate for not wearing my helmet on a bike). Same for motorcycle riders.

    I do feel seatbelt use should be mandatory because injury could come to a passenger. Even if the driver is alone, seatbelt use should be mandatory because certain actions of the car could cause the person to lose their position behind the wheel. The seatbelt keeps them in place and allows them to control their car in these instances.

  • #275795

    doclaguna
    Member
    • Topics - 216
    • Replies - 5,943
    • Total Posts - 6,159

    @Action>Emotion 105571 wrote:

    My wife was a head trauma patient, not one penny of taxpayer money went into her care. NOT ONE! So because other people need help you would rather make laws and regulations to take the danger out of living life because you don’t want to pay? This is such an over reach over an over reaction. You should be so worked up about 5 million illegals or the money we as a nation send to countries that want us dead, or taxes that Obamacare is creating or the taxes on gasoline to pay for the stupid bullet train. This is all government in your life screwing with your money and you want to give them more power for the oft individual who gets a head injury that doesn’t have health care? Please.

    Well that’s a nice anecdote, but most of the serious head trauma I’ve seen ends up in a patient who cannot work and therefore is on Social Security Disability and MediCare from a young age. Now if they are lucky they can live at home, and get In Home Support Services which the state pays for. If they are severely disabled they end up in long term skilled nursing, that again the government has to pay for. Your anecdote has no relevance, as it’s not reality. They reality is support services do exist for people with head injury beyond mere hospital bills. I can’t believe any fiscal conservative would have a problem with helmet laws, unless you feel your right to feel the wind through your hair should cost your fellow taxpayer. The rest of your post is a rant that is not applicable to my belief system.

  • #275806

    lizzie
    Member
    • Topics - 17
    • Replies - 650
    • Total Posts - 667

    I do not know how long it has been but motorcycle helmets have been a law for awhile now. I know people complained. It is accepted now

  • #275789

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    I think you are still allowed to ride free in New Hampshire.
    Maybe they also have rules preventing the associated bleeding budgets.

  • #275819

    Anonymous
    • Topics - 18
    • Replies - 1,250
    • Total Posts - 1,268

    @lizzie 105713 wrote:

    I do not know how long it has been but motorcycle helmets have been a law for awhile now. I know people complained. It is accepted now

    It has probably been 20 years or so for motorcycles helmets. I used to have a motorcycle. On freeways, I would never have gone without a helmet. around town, if it was legal, I might have gone without a helmet.

    Motorcycles go as fast or faster than cars. I am lucky to hit 15mph on my mountain bike.

  • #275790

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    @CJay916 105824 wrote:

    I am lucky to hit 15mph on my mountain bike.

    I couldn’t have been doing more than about 5 mph when I came off my bike.
    I damn near died or became one of the vegetables docl described.

  • #275796

    doclaguna
    Member
    • Topics - 216
    • Replies - 5,943
    • Total Posts - 6,159

    @CJay916 105824 wrote:

    It has probably been 20 years or so for motorcycles helmets. I used to have a motorcycle. On freeways, I would never have gone without a helmet. around town, if it was legal, I might have gone without a helmet.

    Motorcycles go as fast or faster than cars. I am lucky to hit 15mph on my mountain bike.

    I hit 40 MPH descending on my road bike yesterday. I feel I have a moral obligation to my family, to the state, and to myself to wear a helmet.

    Last year, I wrecked on my bike going maybe 5 mph tops and my head hit the ground. Helmet split, head didn’t.

  • #275803

    tomwaltman
    Member
    • Topics - 96
    • Replies - 6,770
    • Total Posts - 6,866

    I have gone over my handle bars on a technical descent. Head hit ground, bike flipped over me. I survived because I had my helmet on. I was not even going 5 mph when it happened.

  • #275782

    EGL Admin
    Member
    • Topics - 3,082
    • Replies - 21,888
    • Total Posts - 24,970

    @doclaguna 105881 wrote:

    I hit 40 MPH descending on my road bike yesterday. I feel I have a moral obligation to my family, to the state, and to myself to wear a helmet.

    Last year, I wrecked on my bike going maybe 5 mph tops and my head hit the ground. Helmet split, head didn’t.

    40 mph? You crazy man!

  • #275820

    Anonymous
    • Topics - 18
    • Replies - 1,250
    • Total Posts - 1,268

    @adiffer 105865 wrote:

    I couldn’t have been doing more than about 5 mph when I came off my bike.
    I damn near died or became one of the vegetables docl described.

    To be honest, I completely understand why people should wear helmets. Obviously it is safer. If I had a wife and children I would take extra caution knowing I am responsible for other people. I am not saying we should ban helmets, just make it optional as an adult.

    I just don’t like the aspect of the government getting their hand in every aspect of my life as an adult. Unless that aspect directly involves someone else. For example, speeding through a neighborhood (dangerous for residents), noise violations (disturbing neighbors), etc… Besides my family, friends, and potentially medical expenses (one could argue this), if I ride a bike with no helmet, the general population is not affected.

    I don’t like to rely on the “slippery Slope’ argument, but I am afraid that this need by law makers to pry into everyone’s lives won’t stop. Just think about all the laws and regulations that are made to “protect” us. Are they smart laws, probably. but I don’t need my hand held through every aspect of life.
    Will I have to wear a life jacket if I want to swim in a river? Will all violent video games be banned because a few think they are dangerous? Some politician who wants to look busy or has some passion will start creating laws that reach deeper and deeper into my personal life.
    I don’t have the stats, but I assume Alcohol and Cigarettes kill and injure WAY more people than head injuries on a bike. Yet it is my choice as an adult whether or not I want to partake in them.

  • #275791

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    I get your liberty argument. I agree with it as a default. Where I break with it is when I recognize that ‘love’ is dominating our decision making processes. For example, you pointed out that you’d take extra caution if you had a wife and kids. Obviously a law wouldn’t be needed to push you in that case. The problem arises from the fact that there are other people who care about you so much that they are willing for force others to pay extra taxes to cover you beyond what your insurance might cover.

    I’m not being sarcastic on that. Some of us can’t quite imagine ourselves tolerating the pure ‘libertarian’ way of letting people fend for themselves when they emphatically claim the right to do so. It’s too close to tolerating suicide when we think they are being stupid about it.

  • #275821

    Anonymous
    • Topics - 18
    • Replies - 1,250
    • Total Posts - 1,268

    @adiffer 106532 wrote:

    The problem arises from the fact that there are other people who care about you so much that they are willing for force others to pay extra taxes to cover you beyond what your insurance might cover.

    .

    I understand this argument, just wish it wasn’t the case.

    I don’t want others to have to pay for my mistakes. But I assume the system has made it so we are forced to make rules to “protect” others by making personal decision for them.

  • #275825

    Bainc
    Member
    • Topics - 9
    • Replies - 892
    • Total Posts - 901

    Requiring a helmet is more like having limits on hours and/or type of alcohol being served then alcohol being banned outright.

  • #275792

    adiffer
    Participant
    • Topics - 179
    • Replies - 9,504
    • Total Posts - 9,683

    I’m not convinced it is the ‘system’ that forced the rules. From where I sit it looks like the accumulation of ethics decisions. Traditions emerge from the smallest of things that accumulate over the years and I suspect this is a good example of one. No one (with the power to make it happen) intended to force people to wear helmets and no one (with the power again) intended to steal our money to pay the medical bills covering people who can’t. Enough of us can’t imagine letting someone die, though, that only a small amount of power is needed to tip us into this illiberal position.

    I think it is one of those ‘choose the lesser evil’ situations because of this.

    It is also possible there is something quite sane going on here, though. Individualists are most annoyed at these kinds of rules. Try to imagine a world where the ‘community’ or ‘family’ has more power, however, and you can see ‘who’ is forcing these rules. If you imagine yourself as part of a social collective, it is the group that is defending its parts much like you would defend your body parts in a fight.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.