State laws about motorcycle helmets are exceedingly controversial, as the threads on this site bear ample witness.

You may be interested to know that today's CNN online poll question is this: "Should motorcyclists be required to wear helmets?" As of this moment, over 60,000 votes have been cast: 77% say yes; 23% say no. (As always, it is noted that "This is not a scientific poll.")

Anecdotally: Yesterday I rode a 100-mile circuit (mostly on randomly-chosen country roads and blue highways) from Cincinnati to Brookville Lake in Indiana and back via Oxford, OH. It was a beautiful Fourth of July, and motorcycles (mostly cruisers) were everywhere. And most of the riders were NOT wearing helmets.

were is the link? I'd like to vote! I'd vote "NO"! it's riders choice! although I do feel everyone who rides should wear a helmet, BUT I don't feel it should be required by law!

That is interesting. I bet it was mostly non-riders that said we should wear helmets (weather your for it or against it) After all, it is law in Ohio now you have to wear a seatbelt in a cage.

I still think that should be my choice.

Up here in Rochester, NY I see a lot of different types of riders. I see the Harley riders with the tee shirt, shorts, and novelty helmet. The younger crowd seems to favor the same gear with the exception of a full face helmet. There are very few people with proper riding gear on, IMHO. That doesn't mean we need more laws to protect us from ourselves. You can't legistrate common sense.

Up here in Rochester, NY I see a lot of different types of riders. I see the Harley riders with the tee shirt, shorts, and novelty helmet. The younger crowd seems to favor the same gear with the exception of a full face helmet. There are very few people with proper riding gear on, IMHO. That doesn't mean we need more laws to protect us from ourselves. You can't legistrate common sense.

I noticed that yesterday when I was cruising around Orleans and Niagara counties. Shorts sleevless shirts and sneakers seemed to be the preferred riding gear. Tons of non-DOT helmets. I might look stupid in my leather when its 85 out but its vented very well and I'm partial to my skin. I'm surprised how many people get away with those "novelty" helmets the way NYS Troopers are always lurking around every corner looking for revenue. Should really be the riders choice. Did you hear about the guy in the Southern Tier this weekend who was protest riding with no helmet, crashed and died?

Why don't people wear helmets?

Because of all the dumb asses out there that are afraid to wear a helmet because it might not be 'cool'... and their friends might make fun of them.

It only shows how much of a 'follower' they are.

Stupid is, as stupid does.

I'm not sure about forcing helmets with law, but buying a helmet is an added expense for those just starting out, and without being required, can be enough of a deterrent to keep them from wearing one. Once they get in the habit of not wearing one, that becomes their 'norm'. If they had to buy one starting off, then they might get used to wearing one.

I believe the movie star Nick Nolte used to protest against helmet laws... until he busted his gourd and got a head injury. After that, he protested FOR helmet laws.

Same thing with seat belts. People do NOT like change. Once they get in the habit if NOT wearing one, it's hard for them to get used to it. Nowadays, since it's been mandated, people are used to it, and they've saved untold numbers of lives. Same thing with car seats.

Unless I'm just putting a dirt bike around the yard, I always wear a helmet. I worked with a guy who got a head injury on a 4-wheeler. Messed him up for life. Couldn't do his job, anymore... and left him running at around half his mental capacity. I'm sure he's on full disability right now, drawing tax dollars.

I wear a helmet but don't really get into the debate one way or the other. One plus side is that supposedly it cracks down on folks stealing bikes for joy rides since folks looking to steal a ride don't usually carry a helmet with them.

I would say "no" it's my choice! But if they say you are required by law to use a brain bucket then I would because "law abiding citizens "follow the laws right?

If you can scrape the money together to buy a bike, you can save up to buy a helmet too... So don't give the "I'm poor " speech unless the bike is the only transportation you own...

Most bikes are secondary vehicles... Meaning their owners also have a car or truck.

Many dealers give you a discount on a helmet if you are buying a bike from them. If you plan to buy a bike, work in the price of gear beforehand.

And as shocking as it might be to some of you, if it came to asking me to vote on having a helmet law in my state, I'd vote to make helmets mandatory.

Government involvement aside here.... I could not in good conscious tell anyone they don't have to wear a helmet. If you told your son he didn't have to wear a helmet because it's "legal" in your state, how would you feel if he died from a head injury?

I get tired of reading about folks using the "freedom of choice" arguement, when they seem to have a double standard on it if it's one of their kids......

If you can scrape the money together to buy a bike, you can save up to buy a helmet too... So don't give the "I'm poor " speech unless the bike is the only transportation you own...

Most bikes are secondary vehicles... Meaning their owners also have a car or truck.

Many dealers give you a discount on a helmet if you are buying a bike from them. If you plan to buy a bike, work in the price of gear beforehand.

And as shocking as it might be to some of you, if it came to asking me to vote on having a helmet law in my state, I'd vote to make helmets mandatory.

Government involvement aside here.... I could not in good conscious tell anyone they don't have to wear a helmet. If you told your son he didn't have to wear a helmet because it's "legal" in your state, how would you feel if he died from a head injury?

I get tired of reading about folks using the "freedom of choice" arguement, when they seem to have a double standard on it if it's one of their kids......

We are not your kids. You can't preface something by saying "government involvement aside here" and go on to aspouse government involvement. We are not the government's kids either. If you want your kids to wear a helmet tell them to.
That being said I won't ride without one. I've crashed dirt bikes way too many times and know you always hit your head when you crash a bike. However, freedom means the freedom to be stupid as long as it's not effecting someone else.

To take the poll, just go to the home page - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com) - the day's poll is always on that page somewhere, usually on the right side about halfway down.

Each day's poll usually relates to some current news story. I think this particular poll is being presented not simply because this is "riding season" for many, but because of the recent news story of the guy who was on a group ride protesting mandatory helmet laws. Stopping suddenly, he took a header over the handle bars and suffered a fatal head injury. He was not, of course, wearing a helmet.

Late breaking news story: sorry folks. The motorcycle helmet poll has suddenly given way to "Were you surprised by the verdict in Casey Anthony's murder trial?"

We are not your kids. You can't preface something by saying "government involvement aside here" and go on to aspouse government involvement. We are not the government's kids either. If you want your kids to wear a helmet tell them to.

However, freedom means the freedom to be stupid as long as it's not effecting someone else.

Yes I can...and I think I did...;)


And I did not know that was the definition of Freedom.

You missed my point I guess. I was saying that folks make the whole issue a political one, but not looking at it that way, could you in clear concious, tell someone NOT to where a helmet?

By joining the "freedom of choice" crowd, you are in effect doing that. "I don't know you, if you want to risk your life, go ahead, I do not care" And that is the crux of the biscuit here...folks not caring. The same arguement can be used to find "reason" to legalize drugs, walk around naked, or piss in public. "I'm not hurting anyone" (why do I still get a ticket for speeding when no one else is on the road?)

NOT wearing a helmet does effect someone else. The paramedics that waste the effort in trying to save you, the insurance companies that raise rates effect everyone, and your family dealing with the loss of their breadwinner.

I was saying that if asked, I would vote for mandatory helmet laws...now, in my thinking, that is one of my freedoms, how dare you question it...;)

KM

Yes I can...and I think I did...;)


And I did not know that was the definition of Freedom.

You missed my point I guess. I was saying that folks make the whole issue a political one, but not looking at it that way, could you in clear concious, tell someone NOT to where a helmet?

By joining the "freedom of choice" crowd, you are in effect doing that. "I don't know you, if you want to risk your life, go ahead, I do not care" And that is the crux of the biscuit here...folks not caring. The same arguement can be used to find "reason" to legalize drugs, walk around naked, or piss in public. "I'm not hurting anyone" (why do I still get a ticket for speeding when no one else is on the road?)

NOT wearing a helmet does effect someone else. The paramedics that waste the effort in trying to save you, the insurance companies that raise rates effect everyone, and your family dealing with the loss of their breadwinner.

I was saying that if asked, I would vote for mandatory helmet laws...now, in my thinking, that is one of my freedoms, how dare you question it...;)

KM

LOL you did indeed. I retract that part of my statement. :beerchug:

I did not say that was the definition of freedom did I? At any rate it was not implied. Freedom means many things, the point I made above is just part of it.

As far as the freedom crowd being implicit in convincing people to not wear helmets I disagree. I already stated that I would not ride without one,and since I am part of the freedom crowd you just defeated your own argument. I'm not going to get into how ridiculous prohibition is we'll save that for another thread.

Your point on not wearing a helmet effecting others is a strawman argument. You could make anything illegal with the base point being; something may happen to you that will inconvenience EMT's or take you away from your family or raise insurance rates. Jeez bro, you could make walking without a helmet illegal.

Lastly, you cannot vote away my freedom. That is not your right. (at least it's not supposed to be) This country wasn't meant to be a democracy. Democracy at it's base is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner. We are supposed to have a constitutional republic. But I digress.......

...could you in clear concious, tell someone NOT to where a helmet?

no one is saying NOT to wear a helmet.



By joining the "freedom of choice" crowd, you are in effect doing that.


That's a ridiculous statement, even for you... :doh:
What if we had a mandatory safety class, like the MSF, to obtain the privilege to operate a motorcycle on public roads? We do it for cars, so why not bikes as well? Show a picture of a guy with his head split like a melon. But at the end of the day, the government gets to make the call because they own and maintain public roads.

...The same arguement can be used to find "reason" to legalize drugs, walk around naked, or piss in public. "I'm not hurting anyone" (why do I still get a ticket for speeding when no one else is on the road?)

I don't have a problem with marijuana, or any other naturally occurring intoxicates. Walking around naked violates our social morays, it is acceptable in other places around the world. Pissing in public is of course unsanitary. You get a ticket because your "speeding." If the law read you could drive as fast as you want when no one was around, then you wouldn't get a ticket.


NOT wearing a helmet does effect someone else. The paramedics that waste the effort in trying to save you, the insurance companies that raise rates effect everyone, and your family dealing with the loss of their breadwinner.


You forgot the taxpayers that have to pay you social security, welfare, and whatever other social program/handout you get after the accident.


I was saying that if asked, I would vote for mandatory helmet laws...now, in my thinking, that is one of my freedoms, how dare you question it...;)

KM

No one is questioning your freedom, just your usual half-baked logic and tongue-in-cheek rhetoric. :)

Why don't people wear helmets?

Because of all the dumb asses out there that are afraid to wear a helmet because it might not be 'cool'... and their friends might make fun of them.

It only shows how much of a 'follower' they are.

Stupid is, as stupid does.

I'm not sure about forcing helmets with law, but buying a helmet is an added expense for those just starting out, and without being required, can be enough of a deterrent to keep them from wearing one. Once they get in the habit of not wearing one, that becomes their 'norm'. If they had to buy one starting off, then they might get used to wearing one.

I believe the movie star Nick Nolte used to protest against helmet laws... until he busted his gourd and got a head injury. After that, he protested FOR helmet laws.

Same thing with seat belts. People do NOT like change. Once they get in the habit if NOT wearing one, it's hard for them to get used to it. Nowadays, since it's been mandated, people are used to it, and they've saved untold numbers of lives. Same thing with car seats.

Unless I'm just putting a dirt bike around the yard, I always wear a helmet. I worked with a guy who got a head injury on a 4-wheeler. Messed him up for life. Couldn't do his job, anymore... and left him running at around half his mental capacity. I'm sure he's on full disability right now, drawing tax dollars.

I believe that was gary busey!

and as far as the whole issue and this might be my next tat, metallica said it best. "Freedom, with their exceptions"

Well thank you all for letting me exercise my right to be stupid.... Which is kinda where I was wandering there. Sarcasm aside and half baked as it was, we will never get to vote on any issue like this, as even the government realizes that as a whole, the public is stupid, and the need to protect us from ourselves is thereby needed.:)

If you pass a law that says you don't have to wear a helmet, there will be stupid people that will believe that means "you are safe" without one, lacking the sense to realize the dangers on their own. The stupid will die along with those smart enough to make their own choice not to wear a helmet , based on facts they are smart enough to understand.... But this means that those making the choice with no forethought other than "it's not against the law" in effect are going to die needlessly.

Easy to say "not my problem"... But agreeing that there should be no law requiring a rider to wear a helmet is still, to me, being socially irresponsible... When we all aware how many stupid people there are out there.... ;)

Well thank you all for letting me exercise my right to be stupid.... Which is kinda where I was wandering there. Sarcasm aside and half baked as it was, we will never get to vote on any issue like this, as even the government realizes that as a whole, the public is stupid, and the need to protect us from ourselves is thereby needed.:)

If you pass a law that says you don't have to wear a helmet, there will be stupid people that will believe that means "you are safe" without one, lacking the sense to realize the dangers on their own. The stupid will die along with those smart enough to make their own choice not to wear a helmet , based on facts they are smart enough to understand.... But this means that those making the choice with no forethought other than "it's not against the law" in effect are going to die needlessly.

Easy to say "not my problem"... But agreeing that there should be no law requiring a rider to wear a helmet is still, to me, being socially irresponsible... When we all aware how many stupid people there are out there.... ;)

Ahh....collectivism at its finest. Bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator therefore bringing equality to all. You would make Karl Marx proud!

When I read the words "socially irresponsilble" in your last statement, it kind of gave me a bad feeling. I may be off base but it felt like the commune should look out for us all. We should look out for ourselves and ours with out the help of big daddy.
I feel for those that lost thier loved one. And I agree wearing a helmet is a simple think to do. Not riding a bike is also a simple thing to do. They may want to outlaw bikes because people get killed on them even when wearing helmets.
My 2 cents the best way I can say it. Not intended to piss any one off.

When I read the words "socially irresponsilble" in your last statement, it kind of gave me a bad feeling. I may be off base but it felt like the commune should look out for us all. We should look out for ourselves and ours with out the help of big daddy.
I feel for those that lost thier loved one. And I agree wearing a helmet is a simple think to do. Not riding a bike is also a simple thing to do. They may want to outlaw bikes because people get killed on them even when wearing helmets.
My 2 cents the best way I can say it. Not intended to piss any one off.

Perhaps "irresponsible" was a bit harsh. Guess I feel that as a "motorcyclist", I should in some respect, offer a "positive" front. Not doing anything that casts a negative image, and to , if called for, be "pro safety".

I would wish we all could feel the same, and not let politics, "Americanism", or anything ...sway that us from what is just plain common sense. We instead keep making it an issue of "freedom" and not trying to save lives. Even one life lost needlessly seems such a waste.

Sorry, guess it's just me.....

Its always smart to wear a helmet yes, but dont be pushing your beliefs on me that I should by law be required to wear one if I choose not to. Our forefathers must be turning in their graves with the current governments power control over its people today.

As one of my favorite Bands once wrote in their lyrics "It's still, We the people, Right"? So I say, put it to a vote, let the people decide, not some damn politician that "Thinks" they know best.

i use my helmet. drop a bike and you will be looking for one. i know. but its up to you.its your head.

State laws about motorcycle helmets are exceedingly controversial, as the threads on this site bear ample witness.

You may be interested to know that today's CNN online poll question is this: "Should motorcyclists be required to wear helmets?" As of this moment, over 60,000 votes have been cast: 77% say yes; 23% say no. (As always, it is noted that "This is not a scientific poll.").

Its always smart to wear a helmet yes, but dont be pushing your beliefs on me that I should by law be required to wear one if I choose not to. Our forefathers must be turning in their graves with the current governments power control over its people today.

As one of my favorite Bands once wrote in their lyrics "It's still, We the people, Right"? So I say, put it to a vote, let the people decide, not some damn politician that "Thinks" they know best.
With far more Americans being non motorcycle riders than riders, and the poll results running 77% for laws forcing riders to wear helmets, are you sure you want to put it to a vote of the people? If you want to continue to have the opportunity to to chose to ride bareheaded, letting your neighbors decide doesn`t appear to be the smart way to proceed in this instance.:(

With far more Americans being non motorcycle riders than riders, and the poll results running 77% for laws forcing riders to wear helmets, are you sure you want to put it to a vote of the people? If you want to continue to have the opportunity to to chose to ride bareheaded, letting your neighbors decide doesn`t appear to be the smart way to proceed in this instance.:(

Exactly. Democracy is a bad idea if you want to decide anything for yourself. It's mob rule and the minority will lose every time no matter how righteous the cause.

I even think there should be a seat belt law for dogs in cages, and dogs under 14 should have to be strapped in a safety seat with a locked chain around their neck with a minimum of 2" slack... And only dead dogs should be allowed in truck beds, any live ones in the truck bed should be shot by any passing cyclist...lol...
BTW-I do wear a FF helmet at all times, and carry an unathorized rider & dog eliminator...
Have a good one...Old Dog...

Exactly. Democracy is a bad idea if you want to decide anything for yourself. It's mob rule and the minority will lose every time no matter how righteous the cause.

Good, you seem to have jumped onto my Marxist bandwagon and appear to agree with me that people are stupid, and it is up to the government to protect them from themselves.

Some of the same folks that claim the gubberment should not be involved here are the same ones that once said "there should be a law keeping 18 year olds from riding powerful sport bikes"

And I would say that if the had bikes capable of going 100 + mph back when our "fore fathers" were around, our inventor Ben Franklin might have made up some kind of protective suit even back then.... And they likely would have made it a Federal Law that you had to wear one if you rode one of those crazy contraptions........

And I would say that if the had bikes capable of going 100 + mph back when our "fore fathers" were around, our inventor Ben Franklin might have made up some kind of protective suit even back then.... And they likely would have made it a Federal Law that you had to wear one if you rode one of those crazy contraptions........

Thats a far fetched assumption. Its that same arguemant that the anti-gun wingnuts use against so called "assault weapons" not being part of our 2nd ammendment protections. The argument goes "If our forefathers had known that AK-47s would be invented they surely would have excluded them from private ownership". It's a strawman arguement. Franklin may very well have invented helmets or armoured jackets, but it's doubtfull he would have tried to make them mandatory. The spirit back then was one of individual liberty and little to zero government intervention in our private lives. Very far removed from our modern era Orwellian overseers.

I fail to see how being anti-democracy (rule by the majotrity) means I'm pro communist.

Thats a far fetched assumption. .


Sorry if you thought I was being serious....

It was supposed to as far fetched as the statement "Our forefathers must be turning in their graves with the current governments power control over its people today"

Assuming again. It's a much different world, I don't know what our forefathers would think and I wouldn't begin to try.

Seems you don't care for our government much .... :(

the error in the democracy debate here is ,The USA is not a true democracy where everyone votes on every issue ,We are a representative Republic where we vote representatives to supposedly carry out the will of the majority of the people who voted them in,not just the one's who voterfor them.or provided the majority of their campaign fund.

Sorry for the hijack ,but this thread derailed a long time ago .It was about a CNN poll which means nothing to me,I don't listen to CNN or MSNBC who are clearly in the liberal,progressive and wealth redistribution camp anyway and have ruined their credibility with me as a source of "news" cough,cough,gag ,gag,during WWII it was called ..propaganda.

I have always known that if someone says"I'm from the government,and I am here to help you" Leave ,quickly because you are about to be hosed.:wow:

CNN, MSNBC, Fox ....a bunch of brainless twats. I get all my news from John Stewart and Steven Colbert......

CNN, MSNBC, Fox ....a bunch of brainless twats. I get all my news from John Stewart and Steven Colbert......

I hate to say it, but I am starting to agree with KM on more and more things.

CNN, MSNBC, Fox ....a bunch of brainless twats. I get all my news from John Stewart and Steven Colbert......

Ditto! :smiley_th

Sorry if you thought I was being serious....

.... :(

Sorry, I thought my post was in keeping with your tongue in cheek theme........:beerchug:

No I'm not a big fan of government. Is it really that obvious?;)

With far more Americans being non motorcycle riders than riders, and the poll results running 77% for laws forcing riders to wear helmets, are you sure you want to put it to a vote of the people? If you want to continue to have the opportunity to to chose to ride bareheaded, letting your neighbors decide doesn`t appear to be the smart way to proceed in this instance.:(

IMO it is the ONLY way to proceed. If the people speak (Vote) to the effect that we all should wear a helmet then I'd be more inclined to not complain as much. If a small handful of old geezers that think they know what the people aught to do when they say to do it, that chit pizzes me off, I'm not a sheep to be lead blindly by some damn politician, is all I am saying. I trust in the people as a whole more so than a single voice. As its been said before "I love my country but hate the government"

IMO it is the ONLY way to proceed. If the people speak (Vote) to the effect that we all should wear a helmet then I'd be more inclined to not complain as much. If a small handful of old geezers that think they know what the people aught to do when they say to do it, that chit pizzes me off, I'm not a sheep to be lead blindly by some damn politician, is all I am saying. I trust in the people as a whole more so than a single voice. As its been said before "I love my country but hate the government"

OK, now I think I understand what you are saying.

If you want to continue to have the opportunity to to chose to ride bareheaded, letting your neighbors decide doesn`t appear to be the smart way to proceed in this instance.
The point I was making, is that if your objective is to keep the option to ride w/o a helmet, don`t push for a referendum on helmet laws! Odds are the public as a whole will vote for mandatory helmets. So you then lose the option.

It doesn`t affect me, because as far as I know, all Canadian provinces have mandatory helmet laws. There was a short time about 30 years when ago when the helmet law was found to be invalid in Alberta for some reason that I do not recall. I just happened to be riding my brothers 650 Honda at that time for a few weeks while fixing my car. I did take a few rides sans helmet, and enjoyed the feeling of the wind in my hair. I don`t know that I would take advantage of the same opportunity now.

This thread announcing the CNN poll went in two obvious directions: motorcycle safety and politics. While the content of most of the postings has been predictable, I appreciate the overall thoughtfulness, humor, and civility.

As its been said before "I love my country but hate the government"

As Pogo famously observed, "We have met the enemy... and he is us."

Maybe it's time to stop being civil. :)

All that said they wear a helmet , and always will, but think the gubberment should "not tell them what to do" and would vote against mandatory helmet laws if given the chance..... Are what I call hypocrites.

The government has been FKing you in the ass for years , but this one issue you decide to take a stand on is something that would not effect your life, not
cost you one dime in taxes, and would if anything, save the lives of others.

What did Spock say? "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.."


I don't like Anyone telling me what to do either, but sometimes, for the good of the many, you gotta let one get by.

Maybe it's time to stop being civil. :)

All that said they wear a helmet , and always will, but think the gubberment should "not tell them what to do" and would vote against mandatory helmet laws if given the chance..... Are what I call hypocrites.

The government has been FKing you in the ass for years , but this one issue you decide to take a stand on is something that would not effect your life, not
cost you one dime in taxes, and would if anything, save the lives of others.

What did Spock say? "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.."


I don't like Anyone telling me what to do either, but sometimes, for the good of the many, you gotta let one get by.


Yeah Spock said that but it's been a mantra for socialism/communism for centuries.
The basic principle is that the "many" is everyone but you. You, as an individual are worthless. Your own interests, goals and loves should all be sacrificed for "the greater good". This leaves the individual without identity or self worth. Thus more willing to submit to surfdom.
Of course the greater good is never the community or the people in it. The greater good is the power and authority of those asking for your submission. Rand called them the mystics of spirit and the mystics of muscle.
The Mysitcs of Spirit ask for you to submit to the greater good of a god. They use the eternal well being of your soul as the threat to give up your indivitality or selfishness as they call it. Since you are not a god you are not part of this greater good and are therefore nothing.
The other group are the Mystics of Muscle. They use the fear of state force to have you give up your individuality to the greater good of the people. Since you are not supposed to do anything for your own selfish gain you are by default not part of the people. The greater good in this case is by default the state.
They say the greater good is defined by those with the most need. To quote Marx "From each according to his ability to each according to his need." This is the greater good you speak of no doubt. When a mans actions become dependant on others needs rather than his own personal gain they no longer hold any value for the individual and and the man soon becomes part of the crowd that also "needs". As this progresses you get what we see now in the USA. A country whose greater goods "needs" outweigh it's individuals ability to support them.

Bet you didn't think quoting Spock would illicit such a long winded response.

No I didn't , but I did enjoy reading it.

The concept of being actually able to vote on this issue, which I doubt will ever occur, is of course intrestimg. I see it thus:

Allowing one to make the "choice" themselves to wear or not wear a helmet means one person gets to decide the fate (life or death) of one person...(themselves)

Voting to make helmets mandatory means one person gets to decide the fate (life only) of many....conceivably saving the lives of many.

Logic here makes the answer obvious....as Spock would say.

No I didn't , but I did enjoy reading it.

The concept of being actually able to vote on this issue, which I doubt will ever occur, is of course intrestimg. I see it thus:

Allowing one to make the "choice" themselves to wear or not wear a helmet means one person gets to decide the fate (life or death) of one person...(themselves)

Voting to make helmets mandatory means one person gets to decide the fate (life only) of many....conceivably saving the lives of many.

Logic here makes the answer obvious....as Spock would say.

Thank you. I enjoyed writing it. The philosophy of liberty is a passion of mine.

Voting on an issue such as one persons actions or personal choice is raw democracy. Raw democracy is evil. Not to say it isn't done all the time in this country but it doesn't make it right. Any time you make a law that could "conceivably" save lives. You are taking away the personal choice of the individuals life that you are supposedly trying to save. One learns how to live a moral life by facing the consequences of these small personal decisions throughout thier life.
Lets use a small example here. Lets say you walk out of a store and step on some ice. You slip and fall. It hurts. In an ideal situation you wouldn't be able to blame this on anyone but yourself for not looking where you were walking. The next time you walk out of the store you look first, see the ice and step to one side of it. In this world of greater good you aspouse, you walk out of the store, slip and fall and blame it on the store owner for not throwing enough salt down. You sue the store owner for your own stupidity, get a monetary reward. Therefore learning nothing but that you can always make someone else pay for youer stupidity and are resonsible for nothing. In the long term there is a law passed that every single store must have the doorway completely clear of ice at all times. The store owner has to hire help in the winter months to accomplish this. Down the road a little further business owners petition the city to keep the sidewalks clear of ice since they actually own them. The city complies, hires more city employees and raises property taxes on everyone to pay for it.
Now in this case the greater good was served in your eyes but at what cost? Everyone now has to pay for one persons stupidity and gets to keep less of the fruits of thier own labor. But hey, the greater good was served.
Take a moment and think about how much "enforcement" of these helmet laws cost us. Not only in financial terms but in terms of lost liberty when people are pulled aside and have thier helmets inspected for compliance. That my freind, is oppression.

Nice example, but not relative to this issue, unless you are suggesting that our government supply the mandatory helmets.

Costs here, at least in dollars would be less, more helmets would be sold, creating more jobs. Although mentioned that hospital - doctor costs would not be a significant saving, they still could be factored in.

The problem here of course is making the whole thing a political issue. Child seats have saved lives....(and are required by law) helmets have been proved to save lives...(but are not required in all states)

GFI circuits in bathrooms are required by law, and have saved lives. I could go on, but you get the point.

Putting a cost on a human life should not even be a consideration here....nor making it some attack on your "rights"....JMHO

Nice example, but not relative to this issue, unless you are suggesting that our government supply the mandatory helmets.

Costs here, at least in dollars would be less, more helmets would be sold, creating more jobs. Although mentioned that hospital - doctor costs would not be a significant saving, they still could be factored in.

The problem here of course is making the whole thing a political issue. Child seats have saved lives....(and are required by law) helmets have been proved to save lives...(but are not required in all states)

GFI circuits in bathrooms are required by law, and have saved lives. I could go on, but you get the point.

Putting a cost on a human life should not even be a consideration here....nor making it some attack on your "rights"....JMHO

OK one final rebuttal here I guess. No government law can create jobs. The government cannot create jobs. It can only destroy them. Lets side step the fact that it is totally unconstitutional, not to mention imoral for the gov't to mandate that you buy a product from a private company (I realize it's already being done but its still wrong). If the gov't mandates that you buy a helmet, the people who object to wearing them aren't going to go out and buy a quality helmet made here (are any helmets made here?) I know quite a few people that object to the helmet law and buy those cheap "novelty" helmets just to not get hassled. Now, are they being protected in the way the law you support intends?
You made the example of the baby car seat. I don't agree with that law either. However, I can see some validity to it since the child is far too young to realize what consequences are much less understand life and death. Therefore the law could conceivably be a moral one based on the fact that the person it concerns is not an adult able to make thier own decisions. It is a slippery slope though.
The GFI circuit thing is a moot point. If the gov't didn't mandate it the insurance companies would in order to get your property insured. The private market has a way of sorting these things out. Gov't intervention is not at all needed in that case.

You are talking here about grown adults that MUST have the ability to make thier own decisions and face the consequences. In the end you have no right to tell me what to do with my own life. When you advocate for a law to do just that, of course it's a political issue. To think it's anything else is absurd.

What did Spock say? "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.."


Wrong.....again.....

Star Trek II "The Wrath of Kahn" (1982)

Spock: "That is wise. Were I to invoke logic, however, logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

Kirk: "Or the one."

Wrong.....again.....

Star Trek II "The Wrath of Kahn" (1982)

Spock: "That is wise. Were I to invoke logic, however, logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

Kirk: "Or the one."

How many fingers am I holding up ?
That's not damn funny !

How many fingers am I holding up ?
That's not damn funny !


Correction.........
KIRK: How many fingers am I holding up ?
McCoy: That's not VERY damn funny !

Star Trek III "The Search For Spock" (1984)

Nerd alert!

I agree, sir.

OK..............guessing you have a different meaning of the term "nerd" up there in the NE?

(not understanding the inclusion of my other quote)


KM

maybe it's time to stop being civil. :)

all that said they wear a helmet , and always will, but think the gubberment should "not tell them what to do" and would vote against mandatory helmet laws if given the chance..... Are what i call hypocrites.

The government has been fking you in the ass for years , but this one issue you decide to take a stand on is something that would not effect your life, not
cost you one dime in taxes, and would if anything, save the lives of others.

What did spock say? "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.."


i don't like anyone telling me what to do either, but sometimes, for the good of the many, you gotta let one get by.


turd alert!

Turd? Seems a bit harsh. But I hear old nerds are abit testy....

My kids however are both young nerds, so perhaps Star Trek references are not our best suit. Star Wars would be a closer fit for us.

Oddly even Luke wore a helmet in his X wing.......

Turd? Seems a bit harsh. But I hear old nerds are abit testy....

My kids however are both young nerds, so perhaps Star Trek references are not our best suit. Star Wars would be a closer fit for us.

Oddly even Luke wore a helmet in his X wing.......

They must have past a universal helmet law by than. lol

i believe it should be the riders choice. i dont wear a helmet and i dont want too. i also believe i shouldnt have to wear a seatbelt in my car, and i dont.i dont wear it because i dont like the way it feels. i like the wind in what little hair i have left. i dont make fun of people who wear them thats not how i am. thats their choice.

Riding without a helmet is not, in and of itself, dangerous. Crashing, on the other hand, is not to be done if you don't have a brain bucket on.

I wear one cause it's the law. If it wasn't, I would still wear one, cause I like my brains inside my skull. I make my son wear one because he is not of age to make infomraed adult decisions. When he is an adult, if the law does not mandate that he wear one, I'll kick his a$$, but I won't *make* him wear one.

I personally won't ride without a helmet. I have a good friend who dumped his Indian with no helmet on - not even going fast - and he came out of it with severe head trauma. It is only by the Grace of God that he doesn't have any permanent injury or disability. I also wiped out several years ago, wearing no helmet, and by some miracle came out relatively unscathed. I took it as my 'warning' and have not wanted to tempt fate since.

To me, there is also another aspect to all of this - my family. If I ride without a helmet, and wipe out, and come out with some severe brain injury that I could have avoided by wearing one, would that be fair to them? I like to think it's all about me. But in the ultimate analysis, there are many things I do as much for my loved ones as I do for myself, and wearing a helmet is just one of them.

Should it be a law? I don't think so. I believe that we ought to be free to make our own decisions regarding those types of decisions. Would I care if they made it a law? No, not really, because I wear one all the time anyway. And like AJC above - if my son or daugher were to ride, you can bet your sweet @$$ that I would make them wear one for as long as I was physically able! Lol.

Have fun, and ride safe all =)

AZ Kev

I personally think it is up to the rider. I see it as a personal responsibility issue. The govmnt is NOT responsible for my safety, I am. If I want to go scraping the pavement without protection, it is up to me, not Big brother. The same goes for seat belts.

I was told a story back in 6th grade about a man in England who was thrown from his car in an accident and that is what saved his life. But he got a ticket for not wearing his seat belt. This was back in the '80's. So he was fined, I saw, for living or surviving an accident. So when the seat belt laws came here in Illinois, I saw it as a step closer to communism/socialism/whatever you want to call it. It is none of their damn business if I wear a helmet or a seat belt. It's just another encroachment on our liberty, "in the name of safety." So screw 'em all! I, when I was riding that is, ride a bike I will wear a helmet and jacket and boots. Going sixty miles an hour with nothing between you and the pavement.......I want protection. But I have ridden with no protection before too. it is up to ME!, not f*****g Uncle Sam. Screw him!!!!!!!

I personally think it is up to the rider. I see it as a personal responsibility issue. The govmnt is NOT responsible for my safety, I am. If I want to go scraping the pavement without protection, it is up to me, not Big brother. The same goes for seat belts.

I agree up to the point where you stopped and left off that the government is responsible for "scraping" up the remains after one of those accidents. Having been one of those whose job it was to do the "scraping" as an EMT and now as one who is first or second on the scene for motor vehicle accidents on the New Jersey Turnpike I really hate that clean up job. Banged up and wrapped in leather and a helmet isn't too bad but without it there is a real mess. Chasing after body parts in traffic is not fun and does happen until the roadway is closed properly. I also agree with the NRA that when we just let the government set certain restrictions and/or limits they usually come back and try to take away more soon after. Driving is a privilege but with all the constant restrictions, fees, taxes and such it is becoming overly burdensome.

Helmet laws are enforced in NJ but I wear mine by choice first and by law second. I also wear a leather jacket and boots most times by choice. JMHO

You will all get there in the end all of Wales Scotland Ireland and England have to wear seat belts and helmets, it has been law for years so I guess we are used to it now, I have been riding since 1972 and have always had to wear a helmet, next to come is hiviz vests no luxury of choice in this so called free country :(

..I want protection. But I have ridden with no protection before too. it is up to ME!, not f*****g Uncle Sam. Screw him!!!!!!!

Screw Uncle Sam? Whos the commie now? LOL. Considering you live in a state that's does not require you to wear a helmet you seem overly outraged.

I'll say this again for those that missed it. Laws in this country to some extent can be changed. Don't come on this forum and bitch about the "gubberment" if you do nothing to else about the issue. If you have at least not written your state representatives about changing a law you are unhappy with, shut the fk up.

Thank you.:)

wow. good point Knifemaker.this country was built so it can be changed by us,the people.if enough "voting" taxpayers talk, Uncle Sam will listen.i also like Vulcan2000's comennt that riding is not a right.it can be taken away from you.so if the law says you must wear a helmet,either wear the helmet or do the AMERICAN thing and get enough people together and talk to Uncle Sam.last i knew Uncle Sam was not a member of this forum so how can he read our points of view?.:smiley_thride safe, as all my brothers around here say