That's just an old cliche, around here they hang out at the pizza buffets most of the time now.

 

I wish the keyboard on a smart phone would lock while the car is moving. It would be easy for them to do since they all have GPS.

 

It would also be easy to mute the stereo while in motion, disable the engine for an hour after hitting a drive through (cheeseburgers are distracting not to mention some folks get sleepy after eating), Kill all the gauges while in motion(don't take your eyes off the road), outlaw passengers from speaking or distracting the driver, etc,etc.

Maybe it would just be easier to come down really hard on people who cause accidents due to any of their head-up-the a$$ reasons. Seems more logical to me. Some folks are quite capable of doing two things at once, others are not.

 

Speaking of seatbelts, cynic that I am, I believe it is just a matter of time before New York makes a mandatory seatbelt law for motorcycles. Not a safety issue - merely a revenue issue. Remember, NY has some of the toughest gun laws in the nation and our murder rate confirms how effective the gun laws have been.

 

I'm really surprised they are not already making the trike folks wear a seatbelt. I see it in the not so far off future.

Apologies for thread drift. Back to helmet laws... I'm against making anybody go without.. It's their right to wear one if they wish. I wish they would support my rights the way I support theirs.

 

That's just it- everyone has the inherent right to protect themselves as they see fit, not some mandatory enactment.
Sometimes I'll put on a helmet in a rainstorm or wearing my modular knowing my route takes me past a bark dust production plant.
Same for seat belts, if I feel that the road condition or traffic situation runs a higher risk of an accident, then I click up.
It's not about reasonable law, it's about spurious statistics and corporate profit codified into public law.
I believe more in education and not legislation.
A debate is a fronting of opinions and beliefs without anyone being right or wrong after all.
Ride on!

 

I agree with all of that. I think we're on the same page. Sometimes my sarcasm, over the top analogies, and sense of humor get lost on many.

I'm against all nanny laws, they're ineffective and distract the courts from important stuff( murder, rape, stealing, and unprovoked violence).

 

Of course there is obesity. And that is proof everyone eats, so the public wouldn't tolerate laws to prevent eating however much, of whatever, they wanted to eat. Unlike a possible response to too many injuries of motorcycle riders. Decades ago most motorcycle riders were kids going to school, wannabe 'outlaws', or young guys without families to support, mortgages to pay, etc., more of today's riders have families to support, are female, and just generally people whose injuries/deaths would have a greater impact on society.

The government could easily curb some people from riding a motorcycle by subterfuge, it wouldn't take an explicit law. And the public wouldn't understand what the government was doing, nor would they care and support motorcyclists rights if they did understand. Is that clear?

This is an easy one. There could be a medical expense, a huge one for head injuries, that the public could be easily convinced is avoidable by requiring helmets, more insurance, or reducing/eliminating motorcycle riding. And since most people, outside your 'circle', don't/wouldn't ride a motorcycle there would not be much public support for motorcycle riders. Then there are the people that just 'care' about people's safety in general. It may not be fair but the numbers are against us.


I think helmet laws will slow down the eventual imposition of far worse, IMO, laws. Unfortunately "our actions have no direct impact on others" is not what actually happens. We are all in this together and our actions, justified/fair or not, generate responses from society.

 

Are there any stats on the number of increased head injuries and increased medical costs vs instant death and less hospital costs? Not being a smartass. I hear people saying the death count went up in Michigan. Just seems like if people are dying on impact without a helmet the hospital cost would be lower than living through it and having broken bones, surgeries, and rehab costs. There may be plenty of evidence one way or the other, I haven't bothered to look.

 

If you are old enough to die for your country, you are old enough to decide whether or not to wear a friggin' helmet.


As far as seat belts laws are concerned, they were lobbied for by the insurance industry. Not to save more lives, but to save THEM money.