Fat Cat inna Helmet

InnerMuse

Flaccid Member
Two days ago, a friend of mine was witness to a motorcycle accident. The guy was NOT wearing a helmet and plowed into a car at about 40 miles an hour. The ambulance slowly drove away 30 min. later without turning the sirens on. I think my friend is under the right assumption that the guy was DOA. In another instance, 7 years ago I saw a motorcyclist in the middle of Dale Mabry (a.k.a. "Death Maybe" to the local Tamponians) with a white sheet over him/her. It creeped me out. I felt so sorry for the guy/gal's family, but I have little sympathy for those who choose to not equip themselves appropriately. Several of my family members and family friends have been in accidents. If they hadn't been wearing their helmets, they would not be here. So wear a helmet and give the effing bureaucrats the middle finger for being phenomenally retarded. No amount of insurance is going to help you if you are DEAD from not wearing the appropriate gear and not riding responsibly. I know I speed in my car, but when riding a bike, I'm uber careful. After all, they skipped right over the motorcycle section in the driver's ed. class I took back in 95/96. When I asked the teacher, she said, "We don't have enough time to cover it." I can only imagine what they did then and do now in other schools. How do they expect other drivers to be motorcycle conscious if they aren't even touching the subject in the classrooms? A conspiracy theorist would have a field day with this. Are the Fat Cats concerned with our safety or do they have ties with the insurance companies.
 
I don't understand the thread title or the conspiracy theory.

I think the lack of helmet laws is the last inkling of Darwinism we have left in the world.
 
Not having helmet laws is the fault of the riders, not the administrations or politicians.

Whenever a helmet law is put up for vote the hardcore "live free, die young, don't let establishment tell us what to do" baby-boomer crowd votes it out and then runs the people that put it on a ballot out of town.

Plus, this whole arguement is flawed anyway. Everyone has the CHOICE to wear a helmet for safety. Not doing so is a mistake on the individual's part, not the governments because they didn't "force" them to wear one.
 
Last edited:
KNYTE said:
Not having helmet laws is the fault of the riders, not the administrations or politicians.

Whenever a helmet law is put up for vote the hardcore "live free, die young, don't let establishment tell us what to do" baby-boomer crowd votes it out and then runs the people that put it on a ballot out of town.

Plus, this whole arguement is flawed because they have the choice to wear a helmet because it's safe, regardless of what they're told to do.
Yeah I don't see the need for a law telling people to exercise common sense and safety.
 
FlamingGlory said:
Paragraphs?

So there's a government conspiracy to make us not wear helmets?

(I hit the send button before separating the paragraphs. I type backwards on occasion. My apologies, dear friends.)

The issue is not about them throwing a motorcyclist in the slammer for wearing helmets; it's about them taking a law that made sense and fudging it so that more cyclists can become statistics and, therefore, raise insurance rates for all other riders.

However, I agree with some part of the fudged laws. Motorcyclists should have a set amount of insurance coverage. Unfortunately, the option of wearing a helmet if you have above the allotted amount of coverage gives free reign to those young kids with a tendency to be reckless who want to by a crotch rocket for their first bike and fly down the streets like maniacs. One too many times I hear about some young kid ending up in the morgue because he chose to not wear a helmet.

Perhaps I should ask a more focused question. If they require all passengers in a car to wear a seat belt, why is it ok for a motorcyclist to choose to wear a helmet?
 
I shouldn't have to wear a seatbelt OR a helmut if I don't want to. I don't need a government wiping my ass for me either. LESS legislation is a good thing, MORE is NEVER a good thing.
 
b_sinning said:
Seat belt laws seem more of a culsion with insurance companies and an easy way to gain extra money.

Helmet laws just seem more of common sense.
The first auto accident I was in, I was in the backseat of a Jeep, buckled in, the 2 passengers in the front were not.

The Jeep flipped and rolled 3 times, the guys in the front were thrown from the Jeep, I stuck along for the ride.

Had the 2 in teh front been wearing seatbelts, they would have been crushed by the windshield and killed, had i NOT been wearing mine, I would have been crushed by the rollbar and killed.

edit: They both got tickets for not wearing seatbelts... which the cops admitted saved their lives... but still got tickets
 
There shouldn't be laws for anything regarding self protection. It's extremely unconstitutional. How do you pass a law forcing me to preserve my health? Fuck you.

Now I can see laws requiring seatbelts or helmets for minor passengers, but adults? Blow.
 
InnerMuse said:
(I hit the send button before separating the paragraphs. I type backwards on occasion. My apologies, dear friends.)

The issue is not about them throwing a motorcyclist in the slammer for wearing helmets; it's about them taking a law that made sense and fudging it so that more cyclists can become statistics and, therefore, raise insurance rates for all other riders.

However, I agree with some part of the fudged laws. Motorcyclists should have a set amount of insurance coverage. Unfortunately, the option of wearing a helmet if you have above the allotted amount of coverage gives free reign to those young kids with a tendency to be reckless who want to by a crotch rocket for their first bike and fly down the streets like maniacs. One too many times I hear about some young kid ending up in the morgue because he chose to not wear a helmet.

Perhaps I should ask a more focused question. If they require all passengers in a car to wear a seat belt, why is it ok for a motorcyclist to choose to wear a helmet?
Ahhhh.

I never much was a fan of seatbelt laws. It isnt about protecting people but rather about generating revenue and to quote Ayn Rand:

"Did you really think we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken...There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law breakers - and then you cash in on guilt..."

There is far more involved in stupid legislation than simple economics. I'd rather if someone without insurance hit me I could put a lein on their personal property and garnish wages than pay $500 a month (NY, age 19, Truck, State Farm Insurance quote).
 
Sarcasmo said:
There shouldn't be laws for anything regarding self protection. It's extremely unconstitutional. How do you pass a law forcing me to preserve my health? Fuck you.

Now I can see laws requiring seatbelts or helmets for minor passengers, but adults? Blow.
Suicide is also illegal
 
Sarcasmo said:
I love this one. I do.

I really don't think there's any hope for humanity.
I think that was necessasary for assisted suicide to be illegal.

Dr. Kavorkian
 
fly said:
I shouldn't have to wear a seatbelt OR a helmut if I don't want to. I don't need a government wiping my ass for me either. LESS legislation is a good thing, MORE is NEVER a good thing.

*loud cracking sound

...that was Zach's head, wasn't it?

(meet reference)
 
Last edited:
helmet%20cat.jpg
 
FlamingGlory said:
I never much was a fan of seatbelt laws. It isnt about protecting people but rather about generating revenue.

QFT

Only last year the "commonwealth" of PA repealed the helmet laws. Now there are "legislators" that want to make the driving without a seatbelt violation from a secondary offense to a primary offense. :rolleyes: :mad: