Motorcycle Forum

Motorcycle Forum (
-   Misc News (
-   -   'Balanced Editoral on Helmets', says KSquid. (

sarnali 05-25-2006 05:50 AM

Re: 'Balanced Editoral on Helmets', says KSquid.
No, I think he's got you there queer-bait. You're gay as a picnic basket, that's why all the f*ck your wif crap, you're over compensting for being a little light in the loafers....

fastoldman 05-25-2006 06:24 AM

I don't think he's queer
He says he hasn't crashed in 15 years - Hey Jackass! Just because you're 15 and have never ridden a bike is no reason to brag!

Please, please, go get a bike and ride with no helmet. Do us all a favor.


Then again, Sarnali, maybe I'm wrong. Certainly the attitude is straight out of latent homos 'r us. And when I asked my mom about him, she did say he couldn't get it up without shemale porn. She's a ***** liar, though.

bigdx 05-25-2006 06:40 AM

Re: 'Balanced Editoral on Helmets', says KSquid.
On queue, the smelliest homo defending his boyfriend Â…

longride 05-25-2006 08:23 AM

Re: 'Balanced Editoral on Helmets', says KSquid.
Totally reckless could be classified as riding a motorcycle in a sea of cars. One man's meat is another's poison. Thank God we all don't have your attitude or motorcycles would have been banned shortly after inception.

maladg 05-25-2006 09:13 AM

Re: to helmet or not?
dx response reveals much. The point was that even someone with riding experience in the 99th percentile and a known expert rider, riding carefully can and did fall and fall HARD. And the full face lid saved the day - and face.

The link to Jeff Dean's site has a helmet schematic with zones of probable impact outlined from a recent study done in Germany. Without checking the Dean site again, as I recall, but wearing a half, dx is giving up 40% or so of the protection he is likely to need one of these days....

Years ago, Cook Nielson wrote an editorial in CYCLE that went something like this: Cook fell, Phil fell....then he went on for about a full page listing everybody in the Motorcycle World who is anybody noted that "they fell too" and ended with "and you will, too".

dx don't plan on falling. HAH! Neither does anyone else. Nor did I. And I did. Twice. In a 6 month period. 10 years into 35 years of riding. Never fell before that and never since...

Too bad this good info don't fit your tiny paradigm.

Pearls cast before a swine....

bigdx 05-25-2006 09:42 AM

Re: to helmet or not?
"you think the past is some kind of guide to the future"

Yes, it is a phenomenon called learning Â…

"i have never crashed before hence i will never crash in the future"

You say that, I did not.

"unfortunately that is out of your control unless you choose never to ride again"

No it isnÂ’t. By putting into practice what I have learned over the years I greatly diminish the probability of having a wreck. Now that is a fact.

"to believe or argue otherwise may leave you open to the charge of being delusional or stupid"

The individual who cannot learn from the past is the one that is stupid and delusional. Obviously you do not agree with that.

"feel free to insult my mother, family choice of motorcycle, sexuality, nationality or whatever"

Not worth insulting Â…

dmorga1 05-25-2006 10:42 AM

The $$$ always comes from somewhere. . .
As a final point to those who proposed not to allow public funds for care of individuals who crash a motorcycle without a helmet:

1. First, it's interesting, but would never, ever fly. Bleeding heart sentiment would win everytime. There would be pictures of disabled bikers in the paper every day saying, "Aren't I human, TOO? Now I've got all these bills. . ." And people would cry.

2. Removing public funding wouldn't stop them from receiving care anyway, if it's some eugenic argument you're shooting for. My hospital doesn't see an enormous amount of Medicaid patients as a result of our location (compared to inner-city), but we, like all other hospitals, tend to collect about 65-70% of our charges in a good day. The average motorcyclist is probably not eligible for Medicaid. He might not be able to afford insurance, but that doesn't mean Medicaid eligibility by a long shot. So, he comes in uninsured, guess who eats it every time? That's right, you do, Mister Consumer! That's why you pay $2 for a 4x4 gauze pad and $6 for a dose of Extra-Strength Tylenol. It's because we never get money from a third of folks who receive care. And legally, we cannot deny emergency care to anyone, under any circumstances, as things stand currently. Nor would I. Just some financial food for thought. . .

3. Personally, I like the helmet law with an insurance requirement. Call me crazy! I'll bet it would reduce (not eliminate) the number of helmetless uninsureds out there!

Buzglyd 05-25-2006 11:44 AM

Re: The $$$ always comes from somewhere. . .
EMTALA really turned ERs into the free clinic didn't it?

The law of unintended consequences strikes again!

Tadgh 05-25-2006 10:40 PM

Re: to helmet or not?
without getting too much further into this arguement; the phenomenon of learning reduces in this case crashes however the phenomenon of seeing the future or clairvoyance is still up for debate....the salient point which you appear to delibrately miss is that having an accident is not totally within your control..there are a million other factors other than your ability and experience in riding a bike ..other road users for one who may not have your experience...but i know you are well aware of this and i think you just enjoy misinterpreting what others say just to have a arguement....those who forget history are condemned to repeat it..i agree..those who think they can predict the bounce of a ball based on how it bounced before are give me a credible arguement not based on misquotes or grammatical semantics

Tadgh 05-25-2006 10:53 PM

Re: 'Balanced Editoral on Helmets', says KSquid.
on cue?

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:12 AM.