I’m with you, Kurt. I think those not wanting to buckle up/wear a helmet should be allowed to do so, but ONLY after they sign a legal wavier that prevents them from receiving (increased) damages from any accident involving their so called expression of freedom.
Happy liberty day! (But use some common sense, even if you legally don’t have to.) Gene libertarian (lower case ‘L” – not claiming a political affiliation or affliction!) From: Kurt Nolte Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 11:27 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Nighthawk Lovers] Re: Motorcyclist Killed While Riding Without Helmet to Protest New York Helmet Law Reasonable expectation of injury is the serious difference in most of those instances. In the case of someone hitting you, with a car or such, THEY made the action and are liable, rather than you, and there are legal consequences and avenues to pursue. Walking down the street you're not likely to do much more than ding your ego and bruise your body, maybe a little blood. Motorcycle at 15/20/25 and you can see a serious concussion or skull fracture. Most folks aren't thinking about accidents at these speeds. Bicycle at 15/20 you can see a skull fracture/concussion. 10mph can give your head a good rattle and a moderate/mild concussion. Most folks don't believe you can seriously hurt yourself in a bike wreck outside of professional or racing levels. Most folks ride between 5-12mph. Falling down a set of stairs hard enough/big enough to cause serious injury is a lower probability than a vehicular collision, and most stair-fall injuries are statistically limbs and neck, not head trauma. Helmets wouldn't prevent these injuries. I support seatbelt and helmet laws primarily because people are phenomenally good at ignoring the consequences of their actions, and the consequences that others will face for their action, until it's too late. Giving a more immediate and less immediately fatal consequence to instill a good habit is a good idea, in my opinion. "It won't happen to me" is a big mentality, and the costs to other people are staggering when you sit back and think about traumatic experiences, lost time, direct medical costs, property damages, EMT/FD/Police response costs... Statistically speaking, traffic fatalities and injuries have been in steady decline since there was first mandated, and then increased enforcement of seatbelt usage. There have been other factors involved in the decline, but that's been a constant element. It for certain isn't purely a "money ticket." The sad thing is that the way to most reliably make people change their behaviour is to cost them money. Not education, not reason, not discussion, not warnings, but poking a needle in the wallet changes someone's behaviour very quickly. -Kurt On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Javier Garcia <[email protected]> wrote: I have heard that argument before. If you are walking on the street and don't pay attention you can fall, get hit by a car, etc. If you walk down the stairs too fast you can fall down the stairs and really injure yourself. Why not require everybody to wear helmets all the time? The way I see it there is not much difference between a helmet/seatbelt ticket and a parking ticket, both are meant to collect more money. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Nighthawk Motorcycle Lovers!" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nighthawk_lovers?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Nighthawk Motorcycle Lovers!" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nighthawk_lovers?hl=en.
