Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > MO Reader Feedback

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-23-2002, 03:25 AM   #241
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default Re: Nothing to do with helmets

Again you are reading between the lines instead of what is on them. You have NO PROOF of anything you just said up there. Just shows you KPaul how you talk yourself into what you want to believe. That is called believing your own BS. The FACTS are sportbikes are causing an insurance company massive losses. NO helmet law here in Illinois and Allstate writes coverage no problem. Why not the 320% loss you just predicted? Because it's BS and you know it. You claimed in earlier discussions that cruisers were accidents waiting to happen. "Sitting ducks" was the term and now you just approved a rate increase for safe sportbikes! Can you contradict yourself any more and appear to know anything?
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 08-23-2002, 03:36 AM   #242
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default Re: ''Helmet or Thick Skull'' Reader Feedback

Sorry but associated with all that "replacing plasitic" are injuries. Those cost 10 to 100 times the plastic. Like I said 9 second 180 mph bikes are killers and we can all figure that out. If helmets made a big difference, the insureance companies would give us a break here in Illinois for wearing one. The only differences are age and type of bike. Helmets aren't even in the equasion for them.
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2002, 04:39 PM   #243
johnnyb
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,597
Default Re: The AMA advocates helmet use Burnsie

Well then I'm dumb. If they support use of helmets, how can they also be pals with ABATE? You'll have to `splain that to me. As far as I'm concerned, if one kid brains himself as the result of Uncle Bob, or Billy down at the meat packing plant who's a big ABATE guy, persuading him not to wear a helmet in the name of Freedom--then that one kid is one too many, and his blood is on ABATE's hands. And the AMA is an accessory to the crime. Just my opinion.
johnnyb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2002, 03:18 PM   #244
dogdanz
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 4
Default Re: John Burns: an exercise in contradiction

Freedoms are great, but when freedoms affect the health, safety, or pocketbooks of other members of the society in which you choose to live, guidelines are put in place in the interests of fairness. There are plenty of times I would prefer to ride without a helmet, but I know it's a generally stupid thing to do. I am completely in favor of society heavily taxing the things that directly or indirectly cost society lots of money: gasoline, cigarettes, alcohol, firearms, children; and eliminating the income tax (after all, unless you're employed by the government, your having a job doesn't cost society much)
dogdanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2002, 04:27 AM   #245
Tom_Glassen
Founding Member
 
Tom_Glassen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11
Default Re: ''Helmet or Thick Skull'' Reader Feedback

As a matter of fact, the cost of caring for smoking related illness far exceeds the cost of caring for those injured riding motorcycles without helmets, or those riding with helmets , for that matter. Your point is well taken and significant to this argument - how does it make sense to require individuals to wear helments yet allow them to smoke or do any of the many other activities that create risk of injury or illness? It doesn't. A corallary argument is that the more we regulate, the less we require or motivate individuals to make those 'quality decisions'.

My 'quality decision' is to always wear full protective gear so I'll be able to continue participating in debates such as this.
Tom_Glassen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2002, 04:15 PM   #246
Buzglyd
Founding Member
 
Buzglyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,904
Default Re: Regulations are good for you

Nice strawman argument you set up there. That one wasn't too easy to kick down was it?



Can't I just reverse it and say that a lot of riders die or get injured even while wearing helmets so we should just make motorcycling illegal altogether? I wasn't aware that all riders who wear helmets have great medical insurance and don't cost the taxpayers anything.



In fact we should just have the government regulate all activities deemed "too dangerous."



Rock climbing, waterskiiing, jogging, etc. I would guess illegal aliens cost taxpayers more money in hospital emergency rooms than all unhelmeted riders combined.
Buzglyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2002, 08:26 PM   #247
Jexter
Founding Member
 
Jexter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 129
Default Re: A glutton for punishment? Or concealed readership boosting?

I'm right with ya. Exactly. Dead on. Hit the nail on the head, an' all that jazz.
Jexter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2002, 08:40 PM   #248
Jexter
Founding Member
 
Jexter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 129
Default Re: ''Helmet or Thick Skull'' Reader Feedback

Maybe it's just me, but that seemed quite a stretch for an illustration on this particular topic.



I would contend that giving information out on paper isn't exactly a restriction, it's a voluntary release of your right to privacy. In comparison to the helmet law thing, I would point out that Uncle Sam (BB, whatever), isn't MAKING people do this stuff.
Jexter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2002, 03:40 AM   #249
Buzglyd
Founding Member
 
Buzglyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,904
Default Re: John Burns: an exercise in contradiction

It's nice to see you peace-loving left wingers getting angry and telling people to f off.



There is no constitutaional argument here. The 10th amendment clearly delegates powers to the states.



The whole notion that unhelmeted riders are a burden to the taxpayer is an total fallacy. Plenty of out of control Arai-helmeted squids get toted off in the meat wagon every weekend. I'll bet they don't have insurance!



I wear my helmet happily and would even if there was no law. I just don't believe in the state targeting one segment of society for helmet use when we could certainly make the case that everyone should be wearing a helmet even while driving.



Your rich /poor analysis is classic bitter, jealous, socialist crap and is ignorant at best and dangerous at worst. Sadly, that's the kind of drivel jammed down the throats of our college students today by angry little professors who have never lived in the real world.





Ride free bro
Buzglyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2002, 07:13 AM   #250
electraglider_1997
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 640
Default Re: ''Helmet or Thick Skull'' Reader Feedback

The lamest excuse for legislating helmet use is that it cost tax payers money to keep head injured victims on life support. So what. Our tax money also gets distributed, without my support, to every third world country with their hand out. In fact our taxes get wasted on every pork barrel project that our head injured elected officials can dream up. Burnsie doesn't seem to like anyone except his own family so what does he care if there is a person out there risking his cranium. The answer of course is that he doesn't give a rats ass. He just decided to get on the wrong side of the helmet issue and then start complaining about ABATE and the AMA. It takes alot more effort and committment to accomplish the things they do then to sit down at a computer and pontificate as Burns does. It also seems that crotch rocket riders want to ride at a high rate of speed. I would think, yes, they should wear a helmet because the likelyhood of leaving the confines of a road at 120 mph and striking and an inanimate object and ending up on life support regardless of having that helmet on is a very likely possibility. The vast majority of bikers don't ride on a race track or even live near a track. Hell yes, if I rode my bike on a race track I'd sure as hell wear a helmet and leathers. It seems like all the motojournalist spend alot of time testing 150 mph+ bikes on race tracks and then when they leave the race tracks they seem to have left their balls back at the track. Just because you scare the ***** out of yourselves all day on the track doesn't mean the rest of us are riding like that on the streets. I grew up in Iowa where personal freedoms are still a way of life. When freedom to choose is stripped away little by little you talk yourself into agreeing with those that took your freedom because it is the path of least resistance. The AMA and ABATE have chosen the harder path. Burns may think that ABATE is full of dirt bags but then that is a right that hasn't been taken from him yet. Maybe short folks won't be allowed to pass on their genes. You'd be in trouble then Burns.
electraglider_1997 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