Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > Misc News

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-09-2003, 04:34 AM   #81
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default Re: Where's Highway*****?

I hear he's too busy getting a lot of chrome work and a new custom paint job on his trailer preparatory to going to Daytona.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 02-09-2003, 05:47 AM   #82
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default Re: Shot Down In Arkansas

Sarnali 99% isn't good enough!!LOL First, I have never argued against wearing gear. I wear it much of the time when I ride. Sometimes I don't wear it. So when I have my full face with full gear I'm a "genius", then my open face with partial body gear I'm "smart", and then I go into full "idiot" mode sans helmet. I just feel choice is the better way. Since you are a 99%er( or 1%er by default?) I guess you might be a choice guy yourself!
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2003, 08:44 AM   #83
sarnali
Founding Member
 
sarnali's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,415
Default Re: Shot Down In Arkansas

Retired, bro. I found out crankin' sportbikes was more fun than crankin' my head. Be that as it may, I didn't take you for a dip*****, I was just wondering how you could have the riding experiance you had, and not be more concerned with your hide, no offense intended. I'm definatly for choice, I think there should be some kind of age restriction to get young'uns and newbies past the learning stage, but I believe as an adult people are free to wear helmets or not, I've put lots of miles on both ways and I just got around to prefering helmets,
sarnali is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2003, 09:36 AM   #84
jmeyn
Founding Member
 
jmeyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 780
Default Re: Shot Down In Arkansas

Many of these posts are painting any and all regulation as bad. That's just not so as you have just admitted.



Let's take one regulation at a time.



In this Post we're talking about a particularly stupid legislative process with equally invalid arguments on both sides of the question. I argue that this example doesn't support the thesis that all regulation or all legislation is bad.
jmeyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2003, 12:18 PM   #85
DDBCretin
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8
Default Re: Shot Down In Arkansas

I do not condone any activity that puts another person at risk. I was talking about personal responsibility. As in: I am responsible for the results of my actions; both to myself and as it affects others.

A simple litmus test: We should be free to exercise our freedoms up to the point that it begins to interfere with the freedoms of others.
DDBCretin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2003, 05:55 PM   #86
gooseman_1
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 162
Default Re: Shot Down In Arkansas

I said I'm a commercial pilot, not an APT (airline transport pilot), there's a huge difference. Under the regs *I* operate under lighters/matches are fine. There are MANY things a pilot must know, but screening isn't there job.



I could check the FARs (federal aviation regulations) and see if anything is written about lighters, but many operational decisions are made by individual airlines. I’m not curious enough to search for it. I can assure you that most ATPs would have to look it up too. Heck, they even have HUGE books in the ****pit to LOOK UP emergency procedure responses! We're not machines with perfect databanks.



As with everything, there's a big difference between what is technically legal and what's actually enforced. It wouldn't surprise me if they were legal, as I've never heard of lighters being confiscated at metal detectors.





"It's also funny that you don't understand how the air supply system works on a commercial jet... half the air in the jet at any given time is newly introduced fresh air, pressurized by the engines and filtered before it is delivered to the cabin. In addition, the recirculated air is filtered at such a level that all smoke particles are removed..."





This is only true for the newest planes, and represents a tiny fraction of all jetliners. While I don't pretend to know everything, I certainly understand how aircraft pressurization works! This new system is designed to filter microscopic airborne contagins and such, and would quickly clog with smoke, it also saps much more engine power.While composing my post I originally wrote: 'In all but the newest jets smoking would...' but changed it because I thought it unimportant.



Sorry to confuse you.
gooseman_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2003, 06:01 PM   #87
gooseman_1
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 162
Default Re: Shot Down In Arkansas

"...but they didn't stop at airplanes did they?"



You're absolutely right. The govt. sees most things this way. Is something's good in one case, lots more would be great in all cases!



Unfortunately, common sense isn't so common these days.
gooseman_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off