It is not the role of the govt to babysit every citizen through laws and regulations. With the increase of govt involvement with healthcare, everything can be done under the umbrella of “it’s to lower healthcare costs.”
They should do away with all mandatory seat belt and helmet laws. Who owns your body? You do, not the govt.
The flaw in your argument is that we all pay the cost for those who get injured when not wearing a helmet through our health care or our taxes. Obamacare did not change that fact. When cycle riders did not wear helmets, many taxpayers have footed the bill through unpaid health care claims. When excessive health care claims (that were paid) occurred, the costs were passed to the consumer in the form of increased premiums.
I hate wearing a helmet. Perhaps the solution is to use the fines collected and put them in a fund to help defray medical costs of those who do not wear helmets. Another alternative would be to have the state charge a yearly fee for not wearing a helmet and put that in the fund to offset costs.
Seatbelts could be treated in the same manner. However, I would never advocate for not using a seatbelt.
If you don’t want to wear your helmet, you should forfeit any right to sue for damages due to head injuries received in a crash. If you die from those injuries, tough luck. It isn’t just about the motorcyclist. It is about everyone around you as well. Why should others pay for your poor choice.
I agree Bill. If folks want to ride without a helmet, fine with me but don’t expect any sympathy (or money) for a loss that could have been avoided or at least mitigated. Some behaviors are more likely to result in permanent injuries regardless of fault; we should remove the incentive of plaintiff’s attorneys to pursue recovery for helmetless rider’s injuries. I think that is a fair trade-off.
It is not the role of the govt to babysit every citizen through laws and regulations. With the increase of govt involvement with healthcare, everything can be done under the umbrella of “it’s to lower healthcare costs.”
They should do away with all mandatory seat belt and helmet laws. Who owns your body? You do, not the govt.
The flaw in your argument is that we all pay the cost for those who get injured when not wearing a helmet through our health care or our taxes. Obamacare did not change that fact. When cycle riders did not wear helmets, many taxpayers have footed the bill through unpaid health care claims. When excessive health care claims (that were paid) occurred, the costs were passed to the consumer in the form of increased premiums.
I hate wearing a helmet. Perhaps the solution is to use the fines collected and put them in a fund to help defray medical costs of those who do not wear helmets. Another alternative would be to have the state charge a yearly fee for not wearing a helmet and put that in the fund to offset costs.
Seatbelts could be treated in the same manner. However, I would never advocate for not using a seatbelt.
If you don’t want to wear your helmet, you should forfeit any right to sue for damages due to head injuries received in a crash. If you die from those injuries, tough luck. It isn’t just about the motorcyclist. It is about everyone around you as well. Why should others pay for your poor choice.
I agree Bill. If folks want to ride without a helmet, fine with me but don’t expect any sympathy (or money) for a loss that could have been avoided or at least mitigated. Some behaviors are more likely to result in permanent injuries regardless of fault; we should remove the incentive of plaintiff’s attorneys to pursue recovery for helmetless rider’s injuries. I think that is a fair trade-off.