Quote from: Twism86 on July 06, 2011, 05:22:43 PM
There is a line and certain laws would set a dangerous precedent. Therefore I doubt we will ever see laws along those lines.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/King-Co-requires-life-vests-for-swimmers-1432255.php

There is a discussion about this going on in another forum I frequent (xdtalk.com).  Listening to the reactions on both forums, I can't help but think that most individuals who are against wearing a helmet as a requirement sound like children complaining how they don't want to do something simply because their parents are telling them to do it.

In Pa, if you're driving a car, you are required by law to wear a seatbelt; when you pilot a personal watercraft, you're required by law to wear a personal flotation device.  Why??? Because it's been proven that wearing a seatbelt in a car and a PFD while in the water will, in the vast majority of instances, save your life.  Why should helmets be any different.  There will be isolated instances to the contrary, but they would be statistically insignificant (like women who claim to have ended up on the short end of the stick after a divorce).

Operating a vehicle isn't a right.  It is a privilege.

Now I am not necessarily for the law, because those who ride irresponsibly without safety gear are best left to weed themselves out and chlorinate the gene pool a bit.  It would also be nice if they could take some absent minded and irresponsible cagers with them for the same reason.

Simply put, govt should only pass laws to limit the effects of someone else's actions on ME.  Govt should not pass laws to limit the effects of MY actions on ME.  Whatever happens to me due to what I choose to do, I deserve.  The guy in the OP chose to ride without a helmet, and he deserves the effects.  I DO support his right to be stupid, as long as it does not effect ME!

Another way to think about it:
Let's say govt mandates helmet use because riding sans helmet increases the likelihood of death by xx%.  Wouldn't that logic also hold in banning motorcycle riding altogether?  After all, riding a bike increases the likelihood of death by some %, does it not?

There shouldnt be laws that are "protecting" you from yourself, only you from others.

Drugs illegal, ok, maybe the crack or meth head will go insane, kill 5 cops, and murder a child on a pcp binge...

Not wearing a seatbelt? You die, your family morns a little, nobody else is physically hurt.

Helmet, Ok, you die family morns a but, nobody is hurt.

When I lived in Nh for 3 years, seat belts and helmets are not required to be worn... But I still did. I respect my family and wouldn't want to hurt them based on my idiocy, but whose the government to tell me not to be a moron?

which, confuses me, because pot, which is illegal, is safer and causes less harm then ciggs, both first hand and second hand, and they could make a KILLING off of taxing it, but its illegal... Weird.

-Justin

Quote from: xunedeinx on July 06, 2011, 10:43:59 PM

When I lived in Nh for 3 years, seat belts and helmets are not required to be worn... But I still did. I respect my family and wouldn't want to hurt them based on my idiocy, but whose the government to tell me not to be a moron?

NH is an exception, they are all F-ing weird......

Mister,

You are a firm believer in Social Darwinisim I see. Fluck the disabled, fluck the poor, why should I have to pay taxes to help them. That is a great thing to say until you become one of those people you want to fluck off! Say, you are one of those that want there freedom of riding without a helmet and you end up with a brain stem injury not bad enough to kill you "no that would be a blessing" but one that completely disables you so you cannot work or contribute to society in a way that you once did. Does that mean you don't want anyone to help take care of you? The "I have insurance" isn't going to help you either. Because, 87% of those in the statistic below "had insurance" too.

Here in America 90% of all bankruptcy is due to medical cost. 85% of all Americans are one major illness or accident away from that statistic as well. It is good to have a safety net don't you think? Because, in your view we would just have to kill off 85-90% of Americans that fall on hard times. Stereotypes help no one in no fashion at anytime.

NO I believe helmets should be a law just as seatbelts are. I did scrape up those who didn't and it has left an indeliable mark on my life everytime I go to get on Flick without any of my gear I just picture my friend Troy that is enough to take the extra 5 and put the gear on.

As Paulcet put it, the govt exists to Protect my Property Rights not to infringe upon them for the so-called benefit of others.

The only true wrongs are infringements on my Property Rights. As the overwhelming vast majority of people do not infringe on anyone's property rights the only way to turn them into criminals to is create a myriad of victim-less offences and dangle those over their heads. Eg. seat belt laws, pool fence laws, etc.

I find it most interesting how the victimless offences only ever serve two functions...

Function # 1 - raise revenue for the govt
Function # 2 - lower costs / make money for big money, big pharma and big insurance

Much more can be said, I'll leave it with this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I

Michael

Quote from: Toogoofy317 on July 08, 2011, 02:10:18 PM
Mister,

You are a firm believer in Social Darwinisim I see. Fluck the disabled, fluck the poor, why should I have to pay taxes to help them. That is a great thing to say until you become one of those people you want to fluck off! Say, you are one of those that want there freedom of riding without a helmet and you end up with a brain stem injury not bad enough to kill you "no that would be a blessing" but one that completely disables you so you cannot work or contribute to society in a way that you once did. Does that mean you don't want anyone to help take care of you? The "I have insurance" isn't going to help you either. Because, 87% of those in the statistic below "had insurance" too.

Here in America 90% of all bankruptcy is due to medical cost. 85% of all Americans are one major illness or accident away from that statistic as well. It is good to have a safety net don't you think? Because, in your view we would just have to kill off 85-90% of Americans that fall on hard times. Stereotypes help no one in no fashion at anytime.

NO I believe helmets should be a law just as seatbelts are. I did scrape up those who didn't and it has left an indeliable mark on my life everytime I go to get on Flick without any of my gear I just picture my friend Troy that is enough to take the extra 5 and put the gear on.

My country and yours have different Healthy Systems. So I can only comment from mine, fair enough. And down here we have what is called Medicare. That is Nationwide FREE Medical/Dental - at the cost of a yearly percentage based Levy taken from your income - 1.5% of your taxable income, 2.5% for those who earn above $80k and who do not have their own Private Health Cover as well. So if you want to go to a Doctor you just rock up, show your Medicare Card and are taken care off. Some Docs charge a little more than what the Medicare would reimburse them so what you do is Pay them then go to the Medicare office in your locality and get most of your money back. ALL Doctors at a Hospital are free, so if no Docs in your area will accept the card without extra $ you can always go to the hospital - might have to wait, but as you know, Triage is necessary when seeing large groups of people.

Ambulances in my state were run on a double system. If you use you pay. Or, subscribe like in subscribing to a break down service and then the Ambo is free if you use it. Even though I was a subscriber I objected when it become mandatory because it was no longer a freedom but an enforced thing added to your power bill - don't pay it and they disconnect your electricity!

Our vehicle registrations have portions which provide payouts of money and aid to those who sustain injuries. So with your friend who was hit by the woman in the SUV and ended up in hospital with massive head trauma, under our system he would not want or lack for medical treatments regardless of any private health coverage he may or may not have had.

As for paying taxes to Help The Poor. Our taxes do NOT go to Help Poor. They go into General Revenue. The govt's money source is the Reserve Bank of Australia. They operate exactly like the Federal Reserve does in the USA - they provide money to the govt AT INTEREST and that interest is paid back using the Income Tax of people drawn out of General Revenue. The money from any Help The Poor programs comes from this Bank NOT our taxes.

In addition, we have Unemployment Benefits that do NOT have a time limit on them, disabled benefits systems and a vast array of support programs to help people who lack food, rent money, who are single moms with no income source, etc. Programs provided by a mix of govt and charities with paid and volunteer workers.

So in the case of a family friend who sustained head trauma in a car crash and who will never work again, in addition to a large lump sum payment, all his medical was taken care of, he receives a Disabled Benefit and his wife receives a Carer's Benefit adjusted to take into account their two dependent children. They receive deductions on just about anything and everything they purchase or have to pay (such as power bills, phone bills, etc.). And if they still cannot manage, then they can get help from the other programs I mentioned - mix of govt and charity.

When my single mom niece had her rent and food money stolen and was about to be forceably removed from her dwelling, I had to show her where she could go for emergency accommodation for women, how to get emergency rent assistance and food. Provided by a mix of govt and charities. And I do volunteer work for one such charity as well as a charity that provides emergency helicopter rescue for crash victims.

In short, No, I do NOT practice Social Darwinism nor do I think "fluck the poor and disabled".

Michael

Quote from: Toogoofy317 on July 08, 2011, 02:10:18 PM
Mister,

You are a firm believer in Social Darwinisim I see. Fluck the disabled, fluck the poor, why should I have to pay taxes to help them. That is a great thing to say until you become one of those people you want to fluck off! Say, you are one of those that want there freedom of riding without a helmet and you end up with a brain stem injury not bad enough to kill you "no that would be a blessing" but one that completely disables you so you cannot work or contribute to society in a way that you once did. Does that mean you don't want anyone to help take care of you? The "I have insurance" isn't going to help you either. Because, 87% of those in the statistic below "had insurance" too.

Here in America 90% of all bankruptcy is due to medical cost. 85% of all Americans are one major illness or accident away from that statistic as well. It is good to have a safety net don't you think? Because, in your view we would just have to kill off 85-90% of Americans that fall on hard times. Stereotypes help no one in no fashion at anytime.

NO I believe helmets should be a law just as seatbelts are. I did scrape up those who didn't and it has left an indeliable mark on my life everytime I go to get on Flick without any of my gear I just picture my friend Troy that is enough to take the extra 5 and put the gear on.

73.6% of all statistics are made up on the spot...except on GStwins.com, where it's more like 93.6%...

If an act is so horrible and detrimental to society that a law must be imposed to prohibit society from committing that act then the said punishment from breaking said law should be so severe that nobody (or very few) will risk committing the offense. What if say, we said, "hey, look, not wearing your helment can kill you so, if you break that law, death is the penalty" I know, I know, I can hear it now, "are you out of your flucking mind?" We as a society need to be very careful in how we approach the regulation of the actions of others. I'm not saying we need no laws. (locks keep people honest right?)

Now, personally, I wear all safety devices designed for their purpose. I wear safety glasses and such at work. Why? Because they'll help protect me in all but the most extreme accidents. I wear my seatbelt for the same reason. Thing is though, I value my life and body parts so much that even if it were NOT law, I would still do the same.

I'll also say that whenever someone(i.e-the government) says, "you must do this, it's for your own good/safety". Think long and hard about it. Should we allow it? Who knows better than you about what is safe for you? (slippery slope) The TSA always comes to mind lately when I hear of someone saying, "hey, we need a law against _____ to help keep us safe."

what about a law agains barack obama. which keeps us from falling into this hole were headed into  . yeah safety gear, im all for that. and wont ever NOT use it. , id rather it not be forced though. let the idiots weed themselves out of hte pool though. except for one issue. it has been known to raise ones insurance premiums ( health especially because of the actions of a few ppl.  ) and some like myself cant get insurance lol.  so much in this country is messed up atm.

Regimes come and go.  We never know what kook is going to be in charge next, so I don't want our government getting involved in everything.  (Heavy Orwellian overtones)