Helmets or no Helmets? that is the question!

[Kerry]

(I believe what Ben Franklin said...or was it Aretha Franklin, I don't remember).."the government that governs best governs least..."

It was Henry David Thoreau, in the opening line of his essay on "Civil Disobedience".


Here's the actual line.

I heartily accept the motto, "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically.

(Not agreeing or disagreeing - just reporting.)

[Ed_in_Az]

 

[Zarathustra]

well, personally i don't like a whole lot of government intrusion either.  but with the way taxes work, and everything else, we need certain laws to protect those of us that are sensible.  such as me wanting helmet laws so i don't pay for helmetless riders.  as for his statement itself...  it's a really biased statement.  lookign at something hobbsian it would show that a government that doesn't govern is terrible.  now, i don't get down the social contract myself, but i think that every government does need to take some activity in every day affairs.  We need the gov't to help inner city kids get better funding, we need the gov't to help keep our roads in shape, etc.  basically, we need them to do the good things that no one would be doing without them.  if people would pick up the slack and be humanitarians, then i'd agree with this statement.  but, the way it is, we need them around, and need them to do their job.  exactly how they do their job is open to debate however.  i favor less intrusion so long as i am not penalized for my peer's mistakes.  if the government hadn't governed first that i would have to pay people's family money, that i'd say they could bail on the helmet law.  once governing is started you need new laws to amend and fix the old.  it's a vicious cycle.  there's my take.

oh, and "wake up and smell the coffee" is the conspiracy theorist's mantra.  :mrgreen:

[Ed_in_Az]

 

[Zarathustra]

Ed if you're going to be a child there's really no sense in us talking about this.  you think what you think, and i think what i think.  however, i don't see that as a reason to take this down to the level of insults and offhand remarks.  don't waste my time.

yes, i think i know what is right.  if i thought differently, i would change my opinions.  But of course what i think and say is what i think is right; it'd be pretty rediculous if it wasn't.

the way to gov't works is that people who think they have it right sits down and drafts laws.  these laws are then passed by other people who think they know what's right.  everyone thinks they have it right, but obviously that is impossible; not everyone can be right.  that is why i think you're wrong.  as for the cycle working for me?  it does at times, and at others it doesn't.  i don't agree with many laws in effect, and there are some other laws that i would like to see passed.  this isn't a cut and dry, draw a line and ascribe to a polical side arguement that you try to make it out to be.  yeah, i come off as arrogant, but you come of as a jackass, so let's be civilized shall we?
no offense man, but you've given no arguments for anything that you believe.  you've asked me to respond to thomas paine, and you've spouted crazy theories.  so yeah, i'm gonna go one thinking i'm right until you say something substancial.

[Laura]

Hey...have any of you seen Bowling for Columbine? If so, what do you think about it?


:mrgreen:

[Ed_in_Az]

 

[Ed_in_Az]

Hey...have any of you seen Bowling for Columbine? If so, what do you think about it?


:mrgreen:

I watched Michael Moore's movie Canadian Bacon. That was too much for me. It displayed his biting wit and wretched predjudice. The biting wit was good, the wretched predjudice was Bowling For Columbine. I've read it's also rife with distortion, falsehoods and sound bites. Try some of his Canadian Bacon instead.

[Kerry]

Now check out the second line of Thoreau's essay:

Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe--"That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.  (Italics added.)

I can see both sides.  (I can't believe I'm "getting involved" here, but oh well....)

If "men are prepared for it", then having NO government would surely equal some form of paradise.  Otherwise, could it equal anything other than anarchy?  Personally, I don't think either extreme could last very long.  Human beings feel the need to control (or to be controlled), to protect (or to be protected), to take (or to keep), and so on.  Factions will ALWAYS arise, for better or worse.

Surely we would all agree that some amount of government is necessary -- and even good -- at this particular time and place in geo-history.  I enjoy not having to boil my water or to ride my GS on a dirt track (because noone ever laid an asphalt ribbon down) or to live in constant fear for my people and possessions.

On the other hand, I think we would all agree that there are areas in our lives where the government gets too involved.  The differences between people's opinions on this depends on where along the (WIDE) continuum they are comfortable standing.  Does this make us good, or bad, or just different?

As I see it, the best we can do is to work on becoming those "prepared men (and women)".  To quote Phil Connors in Groundhog Day, just after he steers the car off the railroad tracks, out of the way of an oncoming train: "You make choices ... aaand you live with 'em."

IF one believes that less government is better, and IF one also believes Thoreau's statement that we will have less and less government as we are more and more prepared for it -- then is that person making decisions that will hasten the day ... or assure its delay?

If all of this sounds pretty middle-of-the-road-ish ... you've got Kerry pretty well pegged.

==============================

I just had an interesting thought!  As far as I know, there are no laws that make wearing a helmet illegal.

Why is that ... do you suppose?

[dmp221]

I'm glad we have a system where different viewpoints can be heard, respected, and best of all, balanced by each other.  

Politics (and my apologies to Henry David, Ben and Aretha aside) has anyone heard of another study like the Hurt study being proposed?
I thought I read a few months back that such a study was in the works, and that Mr. Hurt was to be involved in some capacity (and who better?).
I think another study on motorcycle accidents, causes, and prevention would be extremely valuable.

[jangofett]

Me and a friend were riding a few weekends ago and we pulled our helmets off for about 15 minutes and rode around downtown at an event they have there on Saturday nights. The feeling without the helmet left me feeling scared shitless. I put it back on, and that is where it stays. I just do not feel safe without it. With that said, I cannot imagine riding down the interstate without one. I love my helmet!!

[danny_never]

the helmet not helping at speeds over 40 mph thing is bullshit.  check out what the racers wear, the speeds at which they crash and then get up and try to ride off.

my personal experience:
In the mountains, went down about 70mph in a turn, lowside. slid on my stomach through a parking lot, then did the flippedy floppedy thing when i hit the grass, broken pinkie, broken toe. huge scrape down the front of my full face shoei, which would have meant missing missing teeth/lips maybe?roadrashed face at least.
(hell, a couple of weekends ago i fell off my girlfriends bed on her tile floor in a drunken state and chipped a tooth, so i am pretty sure asphalt surfing on my face at 70mph would messed my grill up) i was wearing full leathers, so no rash. i did feel like someone beat me over my entire body with sticks. i rode the 2hours home from the mountains, pulled my boot off, and my big toe bone was sticking out through the bottom of my foot. I know if i wasnt wearing a helmet, i wouldnt have been able to ride home. well, i probably would have gotten a ride in a helacopter...

crash two. lowside on the track, prolly 60mph, nasty scrapes on the helmet which would have prolly rung my bell good, and would have made me even less pretty.

i live in florida (no helmet law) and i cringe seeing all these squids on liter bikes in tank tops and flip flops and no helmet.

i see no problem with the govt making helmet laws, etc. you have to stop at stop signs, you have to have brake lights, cars have to pass certain crash tests. its a highway its not your bedroom.

[oldsport]

Maybe it's just me, but once, I took a short ride without a helmet and my eyes watered so badly, that I couldn't really see.  

I had 'salt track' flames on the sides of head when I got back.

[scratch]

Have I mentioned the time I was hit head-on while out blowdrying my hair?

I was 19, riding the 650 Maxim (my first bike) after I had taken a shower on my day off. As I rounded a corner on a green light from a 40mph to a 30mph street, I had whipped it up to 35 in the short distance that it usually takes me to, when an oncoming '70's Plymouth began its left turn across my path towards the driveway of a drugstore. I began braking and had just started to swerve when I plowed into the car dead center of the hood. As I went over the handlebars, the last words that went through my head were, "Oh well...", I'm begining to vaguely remember the sound of the impact and the sounds of the metal thereafter...anyway, I was floating through the air (things really do slow down in an accident) fighting to keep my head up and then hitting the asphalt on my hands and knees, I tucked and rolled, and my right ear just touched the road. Luckily, I was wearing TourMaster summer gloves, a Hein Gericke V-Pilot jacket and Levi jeans. Zero roadrash. None! But, I had fractured my left kneecap on the hood of the car (the second time I've been hit by a '70's Plymouth...). And a motorcyclist had told me, when I was looking for a motorcycle, that I should always wear gloves, because those are the first things that go out to protect yourself, and you can protect your head with your hands. Back then was before the helmet law, and after that I always wore my helmet and still do.

I did not support the helmet law, but it did not impact me when it did go into effect. I still occasionally ride without the helmet just on my street when I'm listening to the engine, and would like the option.

[Ed_in_Az]