Thread
:
Yet Another Tragic Case......
View Single Post
#
10
posted to rec.boats
John H.
external usenet poster
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,543
Yet Another Tragic Case......
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 13:49:47 GMT,
wrote:
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 01:42:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 01:32:55 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 18:51:03 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
I *do* have a problem with mandatory helmet laws. All the arguements
about
beoming a burden to society due to medical costs and increased insurance
premiums for all just don't hold up under close scrutiny.
Not to take this in a different direction, but I'm of the opinion that
if I am required to wear a seatbelt under the dubious rational that it
will "save" my life and reduce medical costs, then helmets should also
be required along with full leathers and body armor for motorcycle
riders.
The stated rational for seatbelts is BS for a number of reasons, but
the most important is that seatbelt use is over stated and over
reported in vehicle accidents resulting in skewed "safety" statistics.
Let's consider the opposite: In the subset consisting of people ejected
from their vehicles during an accident, what percentage survive?
If I were a betting man, I would say, proportionally, about the same
as a motorcycle rider's.
However, the more important question is how many major accidents
result in ejection? Probably about the same number as high speed
motorcycle accidents.
FAR more people suffer tramatic brain injury or death from head injuries in cars
than on motorcycles. If you aren't wearing a helmet when in a car, you are
simply asking for it!
Proportionally? I've never heard that.
--
John H
Reply With Quote
John H.
View Public Profile
Find all posts by John H.