abogado

"What gives YOU the right to apply YOUR book to other peoples lives? -Sean"



It is what we do every day. It is the formation of our society. Whether helmet laws are a good or bad thing is available for debate. The idea that your "individual freedom" is infringed by them is not. I hate to tell everyone that is seriously offended by the notion of helmet laws, but YOU HAVE NO RIGHT NOT TO BE TOLD TO WEAR A HELMET. Thats right, there is no liberty interest, nothing fundimental to the American way of life, hell, no good philisophical rational to have the freedom from having helmet laws.



This is different from saying there should or should not be helmet laws, which is another issue. All I am saying is that there absolutely should be the ability to institute helmet laws (and age restrictions for drivers licences, and seatbelt laws, and taxes, and to make OSHA regulatuions, and to be able to enforce contracts, and ... well you pick the law). As long as it does not interfere with a realm that 1. would otherwise limit the democratic process, or 2. so invasive to "personal liberty" as to be outside the realm of what the governemnt should be able to infringe upon, (here is where you may want to um, hang your hat, but sorry, general welfare and safty is the area where it has always been ok for government to legislate, kinda the point of governemnt doncha think?) or 3. there is some other ultimate prohibition on enacting that kind of law (usually a bad idea for specific things like um say prohibition, or constitutional definitions of marriage, but a good idea for broad principles).



So Sean to answer your question, no one really has the right to apply his/her book to other peoples lives (and be able to enforce it. But if you believe in America (meaning the foundational doctrine of our form of governemnt, which is a republican form of representational democracy, just to remind people who seem to always forget), then you belive in the ability for the PEOPLE to apply it's book to how YOU live your life. If that is through a helmet law, so be it. I hate to say it, but if that is to ban all motorcycles, or place rediculous horsepower restrictions on them, so be it as well. Howerver, if you dont want this to happen, dont elect people who would do these things, just dont kid yourself that there is any "right" or "individual freedom" or it infringes on your "liberty" to ride motorcycles without a helmet.

Abe_Froman

ouch.....I was thinking more along the lines ofa fiery crash on the racetrack, I tend not to do the kind of stuff that this guy was apparently attempting.



Most of my riding consists of twisty and extremely familiar roads with sparse traffic, or the local riding spot, an industrial park with twisty one-way two-lane roads that is all but deserted on the weekends/nights. And the track, of course.

Mo0kie

RIP Larry.



If I have to hear another abstract helmet analogy I'll go do a helmetless swan dive right now.

__________________
?Que es el dillio?

fireworks

I know it's been said, but I think its important.

Wear a helmet. Yes, I support the right to choose, but your not giving yourself the best chance to survive. Of all of the parts of the body, you just can't mess up it's your head. It's also the most likely thing to get you killed if it does get hurt.



Perhaps the best reason to at least _try_ to protect yourself is if you have people that love you and you really should be there for. I can't believe that people can rationalize having 'wind in your hair' is more important than the people you could leave behind. You compromise or give up all sorts of things as you go through life, and especially with families. Why is it that potentially dying and forever changing the lives of people your supposed to love isn't enough to at least _try_ to be safe.



He didn't need full leathers, or armour. He probably wouldn't have died from anything that they would have protected him from doing what he was doing. But he did need a helmet. Not many people die from falling off of a bike, but plenty of people die from falling on their head.



Freedom of choice must be balanced against what you stand to lose if you lose. Sometimes this means you fight, sometimes you give in.

abogado

I'm interested in the wager. Seriously. How would we calculate it. What will count as a contribution?



Is it merely in terms of cash deductable amounts? (I hope not, as this would be the most pointless measure of anything, as there are people who far outstrip YOU (and I have no clue who you are, just playing the odds) in terms of what they donate, and their donations should be in no way determinative of their generosity. However, if so, is it just gross or are we going to compare it in relative terms. (WWJD, or more specifically, what would he think is the real measure of valuable donations?)



Will time contribution count? If so, how will we measure the value of time? Will it be measured in terms of actual earning potential, or will it be based on some figure of what the individual gave up to donate the time?



Who does the donation count to? Does Amenesty International, the Promise Keepers and the United Way all count equally?



Seriously. I think I might be interested in this wager. Let me know what you think. I could use your money.



Caveat: This is not to say that I am "Lefty" I just love a sucker bet.

kwh

That is by no means obvious to me. What price a body bag and ten minutes with a firehose to wash brains off the street compared with a lifetime of 24x7 care for the helmet wearer who survives as a vegetable? What about having to treat the shattered bones and internal injuries of people wearing helmets when if they had ridden lidless they'd have been dead instantly? Dead people are arguably cheaper to clear up than smashed up ones. So, unless there are some proper numbers that prove your point, who is the idiot?

__________________
Ken Haylock

ccd3

DOn't hold back- please say how you feel. But- just remember that some of us "lazy bastards" are the folk that will drag your kids out of the house when you fall asleep smoking in bed or work our damndest to get your .20 ass extricated from your mangled car.

longride

The flaw in your reasoning is that the government has no business protecting me from me. Nobody gets hurt if I don't wear a helmet. All the other laws you mention are keeping one party from hurting another. If I want to smoke, eat fatty foods, not exercise, have unprotected sex, and cut myself with razor blades, it's my life and my consequences. In your world laws against any or all of the above are acceptable. In my world they are not. You say there is no infringement of "personal freedom". I say there is. I don't agree that the government should legislate morality or personal safety. Can they? Sure. They will do whatever we let them get away with.

__________________
I'm a knucklehead

seruzawa

Difficult to determine since anyone can lie. In any case the wager would have been against the people who love to slam others gratuitously as mean-spirited. You don't fit the category, that I've ever seen.



All I know from personal experience is that either my cash contributions or volunteer time each are far greater than those of any of the whining babies who accuse others of a lack of compassion. In my unscientific sampling of personal aquaintances I discovered that the worst whiners gave absoultely no money or ever did any charity work of any kind. Apparently their idea of compassion is to vote for the biggest social spender.

__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."

pdad13

You think like a p*ssy.