I’m not a Democrat but fully support this initiative by Sen. Anderson. Injuries caused by the failure to wear protective head gear can not only handicap a person for life but devastate families as well. This is not to mention the higher accident insurance premiums being paid as a result of the lack of a helmet law.
You can’t pass a law to make people smarter. I, personally never ride without a helmet and strongly encourage others to do so as well but I am opposed to forcing people to do so by legal mandate because I believe in personal responsibility; obviously I’m not a Democrat either.
Another self-righteous, elistist Democrat attempting to sufficate the liberties that freedom-loving folks may soon not enjoy. I encourage all biker-friendly organizations in the region to mobilize immediately and cut this initiative off at the stump.
Good luck!
There are many arguments. I say, go ahead, enjoy your freedom and don’t use a proven safety device. But you should be limited to minimum State liability requirements if you get clobbered. And no public dole, either. By the way, I’m an avid biker, and hate wearing a helmet. But it’s my choice.
When President Bush signed the Patriot Act into law, you lost the following fundamental freedoms:
FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION: Government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity to assist terror investigations.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION: Government has closed once-public immigration hearings, has secretly detained hundreds of people without charges, and has encouraged bureaucrats to resist public records questions.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH: Government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.
RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION: Government may monitor federal prison jailhouse conversations between attorneys and clients, and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.
FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES: Government may search and seize Americans’ papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.
RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL: Government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.
RIGHT TO LIBERTY: Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them.
*********************************
And you are concerned about “self-righteous, elitist” Democrats taking away your freedom to go without a motorcycle helmet.
Correct me if I wrong but wasn’t the Patriot Act put in place after 9/11? Our freedom is not being taken away. Our safety is being protected.
And I for one am glad that we have the Patriot Act. We have terrorist cells in the USA and believe you me; they are probably working on another plan to try to bring the USA to its knees again. And what does the Patriot Act have to do with wearing a helmet or not? A little over the top I would say.
They offer protection of course from a accident that may otherwise be fatal. Helmets do not offer protection from terrorist. I agree that no one should be mandated to wear a helmet OR purchase a product that they do not want to either. Still laughing?
January 5, 2012 at 11:19 am
The Other Point of View says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Yes, I’m still laughing. You apparently don’t get it. I’m laughing because you seem to have no issue with your CONSTITUTIONAL freedoms being taken away in order to secure some supposed protection from terrorists, but you are completely UP IN ARMS about a right not to wear a motorccyle helmet, which is not a right found anywhere in the constitution. That, to me, is hilarious. Your priorities are truly messed up.
As for your reasoning for why it’s OK to give up those Constitutional rights in the name of protecting yourself from the terrorists, Thomas Jefferson’s advice seems appropo…
Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.
— President Thomas Jefferson.
I do not believe that any of my Constitutional rights are being taken away with the Patriot Act. I doubt the powers that be would be very interested in anything I do or say. And by the way did not OB signed the NDAA into law ending the 4th Amendment? And you’re bringing up Bush and The Patriot Act in taking away our freedom? Paaaleeze. You do know what the 4th Amendment “was” don’t you?
Fourth Amendment
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Jefferson is rolling over in his grave right about now; wouldn’t you say?
And no; I am not “up in arms” about a law being put in place about motor cyclist being mandated to wear a helmet – if they want to lesson their chances for survival that should be their choice.
January 6, 2012 at 1:38 pm
New Point of View says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Nothing is wrong with this picture. I disagree with the helmet law, and in unrelated matters, disagree with the patriot act. Knowing you wouldn’t understand, your comment should be removed because it doesn’t go with the helmet law article. But, I guess you’ve gotten on to the “Bush did it” bandwagon and don’t understand why everything isn’t blamed on him, just because it’s not quite as bad. Let me put it this way, if someone were to kill one person, would a valid defense for you, if you were serving on the jury, be that OJ Simpson killed two, so it is ok to kill one? Because OJ is worse, there isn’t a problem? Does that make sense to you? If so, please stop voting.
I am as much an advocate of personal liberty as the next guy, but I don’t think society should have to pay for the medical expense and support of people who are badly injured by engaging in a dangerous activity when the injuries in many cases could be mitigated by wearing a helmet.
If you wish to take the position that medical expenses incurred by non-helmet wearing motorcyclists are such a burden to us all, then level the playing field by adding a few more “unnecessary social burdens” to the list. If society shouldn’t have to pay for an injured biker’s medical expenses because he legally chose not to wear a helmet (though the rider probably has his /her own health insurance), then we also shouldn’t have to pay for medical expenses related to tobacco use, illegal drug use, lack of seat belt use, alcohol use (not just abuse), pregnancy tests, abortions, welfare, drivers and occupants of uninsured vehicles, obesity, Medicaid for all but those who truly deserve it and unemployment subsidies for capable people. While we’re saving society from all this expense why not require capital punishment with no forced appeals process for voluntary manslaughter and forced labor for repeat offenders of lesser crimes. What about illegal immigrants who come to our country to give birth and then want citizenship and benefits from a society and system they have no intent to contribute to? BTW, because it is most likely minimal, there is never a price tag associated with the burden these motorcycle riders are costing us all, yet almost on a daily basis we hear and read about the deaths, abuse and cost of all of the other areas noted above. Rant concluded.
tobacco use, drug use, alcohol use, pregnancy tests, obesity, welfare… are not being debated here. Why bring it up? Many other completely unrelated topics could brought into this as well, but that kinda takes away from the seriousness of the conversation.
I think it is completely fair to say no helmet, no insurance. Your choice.
I think it should be up too the rider wheather he or she should have to wear a helmet. I have been riding for 20 plus years with and without a helmet. My friend was in an accident and the trooper said if she had been wearing a helmet it would of broken her neck and chances are she would be bead. So in some cases it’s good and in other cases it’s not good
That thinking is completely ridiculous. My uncle has been smoking for 50 years and hasn’t had a single health complication. Does that mean all those studies linking cancer & smoking are bull? Those goofy doctors don’t know what they are talking about!!! Who’s up for a Virginia Slim???
And I was in an accident caused by someone else where the helmet saved my life. Helmets save lives. But as Ron White says, “you can’t fix stupid” so the freedom at any cost to someone else group will probably win this round.
Hey Marty, for that matter all people who walk or run should wear helmets as they could fall or trip and smash there head! Better yet let’s just outlaw all activities surfing, scuba diving, swimming, hell come to think of it we should wear a helmet to bed after all could fall out and hit our head!
I’m reminded of Ron Burgundy…”wow, that really got out of hand quickly.”
The question we should ask ourselves is why is the law necessary? Yes, obviously helmets protect you when you ride a motorcycle. How much exactly, how do you measure that? Maybe in order to be allowed to ride without a helmet you have to show proof of maximum health insurance coverage when you apply for your motorcycle license. At least that way you can exercise your “personal freedoms,” as dumb as they may be, without possibly causing a drain on public funds.
Show proof of maximum health insurance to ride without a helmet?! Wow. Ok, put that in the same legislation that requires you to surrender your car keys or provide verifiable proof of an insured licensed and capable designated driver whenever you order at drink at a bar or restaurant. If you purchase cigarettes you’ll have to fill out a form with your next of kin and proof of burial funds. We should also mandate that all auto manufacturers install breath analyzers, eye sight strength recognition and reflex test controls so that only the truly fit can operate a 2+ ton weapon. Install mini versions of these on golf carts (!) Add some type of electronic scrambler in there too so that cell phones are rendered useless. (now there’s a plug in idea for Progressive) Ban skydiving too. How many backs has Disco thrown out? (let’s ban that regardless)
I realize you’re being jokey, but the motorcycle helmet rule is actually enactable. They already require proof of auto insurance in order to get a license plate. It’s not that difficult to require proof of health insurance to allow someone to ride without a helmet. The other examples are obviously impossible. The whole idea i’m trying to present is a way to allow people to keep their individual freedoms without imposing a burden on anyone else.
Mandatory health insurance should not be a pre-requisite to riding a motorcycle without a helmet. The argument could be made that the same law should allow someone to drive a motor vehicle without a seatbelt if they too show proof of health insurance. The other examples are only as impossible as society allows them to be. Who ever thought that an insurance company would be approved to sell auto insurance based on the calculated risk a driver presents per readings from a vehicles diagnostic port? Years ago people were up in arms about a vehicle’s black box providing post accident data. In the future that same data will probably be used on a real time basis to monitor and possibly control a vehicle. We could then forget about traffic cameras; law enforcement will just have to tap into streaming vehicle data to obtain a vehicles GPS location, speed limit for the location and vehicle speed, to process and mail speeding ticket. The requirement for a vehicle’s ability to uplink to DMV on a real time basis would be part of the registration process (its for the good of society). Imagine all of that in a national data base.
My point is that mandatory helmet use and all of the transparent arguments for it are a slippery slope.
I’m not a Democrat but fully support this initiative by Sen. Anderson. Injuries caused by the failure to wear protective head gear can not only handicap a person for life but devastate families as well. This is not to mention the higher accident insurance premiums being paid as a result of the lack of a helmet law.
You can’t pass a law to make people smarter. I, personally never ride without a helmet and strongly encourage others to do so as well but I am opposed to forcing people to do so by legal mandate because I believe in personal responsibility; obviously I’m not a Democrat either.
Are you also opposed to laws mandating seatbelt use in cars? I’m not trying to be facetious, just wondering.
Another self-righteous, elistist Democrat attempting to sufficate the liberties that freedom-loving folks may soon not enjoy. I encourage all biker-friendly organizations in the region to mobilize immediately and cut this initiative off at the stump.
Good luck!
There are many arguments. I say, go ahead, enjoy your freedom and don’t use a proven safety device. But you should be limited to minimum State liability requirements if you get clobbered. And no public dole, either. By the way, I’m an avid biker, and hate wearing a helmet. But it’s my choice.
When President Bush signed the Patriot Act into law, you lost the following fundamental freedoms:
FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION: Government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity to assist terror investigations.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION: Government has closed once-public immigration hearings, has secretly detained hundreds of people without charges, and has encouraged bureaucrats to resist public records questions.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH: Government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.
RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION: Government may monitor federal prison jailhouse conversations between attorneys and clients, and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.
FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES: Government may search and seize Americans’ papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.
RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL: Government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.
RIGHT TO LIBERTY: Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them.
*********************************
And you are concerned about “self-righteous, elitist” Democrats taking away your freedom to go without a motorcycle helmet.
What’s wrong with this picture?
Correct me if I wrong but wasn’t the Patriot Act put in place after 9/11? Our freedom is not being taken away. Our safety is being protected.
And I for one am glad that we have the Patriot Act. We have terrorist cells in the USA and believe you me; they are probably working on another plan to try to bring the USA to its knees again. And what does the Patriot Act have to do with wearing a helmet or not? A little over the top I would say.
You crack me up! Our freedom is not being taken away…our safety is being protected….What do you think helmet laws do?
They offer protection of course from a accident that may otherwise be fatal. Helmets do not offer protection from terrorist. I agree that no one should be mandated to wear a helmet OR purchase a product that they do not want to either. Still laughing?
Yes, I’m still laughing. You apparently don’t get it. I’m laughing because you seem to have no issue with your CONSTITUTIONAL freedoms being taken away in order to secure some supposed protection from terrorists, but you are completely UP IN ARMS about a right not to wear a motorccyle helmet, which is not a right found anywhere in the constitution. That, to me, is hilarious. Your priorities are truly messed up.
As for your reasoning for why it’s OK to give up those Constitutional rights in the name of protecting yourself from the terrorists, Thomas Jefferson’s advice seems appropo…
Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.
— President Thomas Jefferson.
I do not believe that any of my Constitutional rights are being taken away with the Patriot Act. I doubt the powers that be would be very interested in anything I do or say. And by the way did not OB signed the NDAA into law ending the 4th Amendment? And you’re bringing up Bush and The Patriot Act in taking away our freedom? Paaaleeze. You do know what the 4th Amendment “was” don’t you?
Fourth Amendment
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Jefferson is rolling over in his grave right about now; wouldn’t you say?
And no; I am not “up in arms” about a law being put in place about motor cyclist being mandated to wear a helmet – if they want to lesson their chances for survival that should be their choice.
Nothing is wrong with this picture. I disagree with the helmet law, and in unrelated matters, disagree with the patriot act. Knowing you wouldn’t understand, your comment should be removed because it doesn’t go with the helmet law article. But, I guess you’ve gotten on to the “Bush did it” bandwagon and don’t understand why everything isn’t blamed on him, just because it’s not quite as bad. Let me put it this way, if someone were to kill one person, would a valid defense for you, if you were serving on the jury, be that OJ Simpson killed two, so it is ok to kill one? Because OJ is worse, there isn’t a problem? Does that make sense to you? If so, please stop voting.
I am as much an advocate of personal liberty as the next guy, but I don’t think society should have to pay for the medical expense and support of people who are badly injured by engaging in a dangerous activity when the injuries in many cases could be mitigated by wearing a helmet.
If you wish to take the position that medical expenses incurred by non-helmet wearing motorcyclists are such a burden to us all, then level the playing field by adding a few more “unnecessary social burdens” to the list. If society shouldn’t have to pay for an injured biker’s medical expenses because he legally chose not to wear a helmet (though the rider probably has his /her own health insurance), then we also shouldn’t have to pay for medical expenses related to tobacco use, illegal drug use, lack of seat belt use, alcohol use (not just abuse), pregnancy tests, abortions, welfare, drivers and occupants of uninsured vehicles, obesity, Medicaid for all but those who truly deserve it and unemployment subsidies for capable people. While we’re saving society from all this expense why not require capital punishment with no forced appeals process for voluntary manslaughter and forced labor for repeat offenders of lesser crimes. What about illegal immigrants who come to our country to give birth and then want citizenship and benefits from a society and system they have no intent to contribute to? BTW, because it is most likely minimal, there is never a price tag associated with the burden these motorcycle riders are costing us all, yet almost on a daily basis we hear and read about the deaths, abuse and cost of all of the other areas noted above. Rant concluded.
tobacco use, drug use, alcohol use, pregnancy tests, obesity, welfare… are not being debated here. Why bring it up? Many other completely unrelated topics could brought into this as well, but that kinda takes away from the seriousness of the conversation.
I think it is completely fair to say no helmet, no insurance. Your choice.
I think it should be up too the rider wheather he or she should have to wear a helmet. I have been riding for 20 plus years with and without a helmet. My friend was in an accident and the trooper said if she had been wearing a helmet it would of broken her neck and chances are she would be bead. So in some cases it’s good and in other cases it’s not good
That thinking is completely ridiculous. My uncle has been smoking for 50 years and hasn’t had a single health complication. Does that mean all those studies linking cancer & smoking are bull? Those goofy doctors don’t know what they are talking about!!! Who’s up for a Virginia Slim???
And I was in an accident caused by someone else where the helmet saved my life. Helmets save lives. But as Ron White says, “you can’t fix stupid” so the freedom at any cost to someone else group will probably win this round.
Hey Marty, for that matter all people who walk or run should wear helmets as they could fall or trip and smash there head! Better yet let’s just outlaw all activities surfing, scuba diving, swimming, hell come to think of it we should wear a helmet to bed after all could fall out and hit our head!
I’m reminded of Ron Burgundy…”wow, that really got out of hand quickly.”
The question we should ask ourselves is why is the law necessary? Yes, obviously helmets protect you when you ride a motorcycle. How much exactly, how do you measure that? Maybe in order to be allowed to ride without a helmet you have to show proof of maximum health insurance coverage when you apply for your motorcycle license. At least that way you can exercise your “personal freedoms,” as dumb as they may be, without possibly causing a drain on public funds.
Show proof of maximum health insurance to ride without a helmet?! Wow. Ok, put that in the same legislation that requires you to surrender your car keys or provide verifiable proof of an insured licensed and capable designated driver whenever you order at drink at a bar or restaurant. If you purchase cigarettes you’ll have to fill out a form with your next of kin and proof of burial funds. We should also mandate that all auto manufacturers install breath analyzers, eye sight strength recognition and reflex test controls so that only the truly fit can operate a 2+ ton weapon. Install mini versions of these on golf carts (!) Add some type of electronic scrambler in there too so that cell phones are rendered useless. (now there’s a plug in idea for Progressive) Ban skydiving too. How many backs has Disco thrown out? (let’s ban that regardless)
I realize you’re being jokey, but the motorcycle helmet rule is actually enactable. They already require proof of auto insurance in order to get a license plate. It’s not that difficult to require proof of health insurance to allow someone to ride without a helmet. The other examples are obviously impossible. The whole idea i’m trying to present is a way to allow people to keep their individual freedoms without imposing a burden on anyone else.
Mandatory health insurance should not be a pre-requisite to riding a motorcycle without a helmet. The argument could be made that the same law should allow someone to drive a motor vehicle without a seatbelt if they too show proof of health insurance. The other examples are only as impossible as society allows them to be. Who ever thought that an insurance company would be approved to sell auto insurance based on the calculated risk a driver presents per readings from a vehicles diagnostic port? Years ago people were up in arms about a vehicle’s black box providing post accident data. In the future that same data will probably be used on a real time basis to monitor and possibly control a vehicle. We could then forget about traffic cameras; law enforcement will just have to tap into streaming vehicle data to obtain a vehicles GPS location, speed limit for the location and vehicle speed, to process and mail speeding ticket. The requirement for a vehicle’s ability to uplink to DMV on a real time basis would be part of the registration process (its for the good of society). Imagine all of that in a national data base.
My point is that mandatory helmet use and all of the transparent arguments for it are a slippery slope.