On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 12:44:36 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
...



There is NO logic behind "No Helmet" laws.

No. There aren't any "No Helmet" laws that I know of.
There *are* many states .... about half .... that have some form of "Helmet
Law", although they are slowly being repealed, state by state.

I don't know this for a fact, so it's pure speculation on my part, but I
suspect that the majority of people that support helmet laws .... don't
ride motorcycles.

Eisboch


That statistic would be meaningless. It would be like asking the general
public if those who fire artillery rounds should wear earplugs.
--
John H

"John H." wrote in message
...


I don't know. But I believe the number of severe head injuries due to
motorcycle accidents would go down.


Of course they would.

Who's head?

Eisboch

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 12:44:36 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
m...



There is NO logic behind "No Helmet" laws.

No. There aren't any "No Helmet" laws that I know of.
There *are* many states .... about half .... that have some form of
"Helmet
Law", although they are slowly being repealed, state by state.

I don't know this for a fact, so it's pure speculation on my part, but I
suspect that the majority of people that support helmet laws .... don't
ride motorcycles.

Eisboch


That statistic would be meaningless. It would be like asking the general
public if those who fire artillery rounds should wear earplugs.


Exactly right.

Eisboch

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:38:34 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .


I don't know. But I believe the number of severe head injuries due to
motorcycle accidents would go down.


Of course they would.

Who's head?

Eisboch


You don't need a helmet!
--
John H

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:38:34 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
. ..


I don't know. But I believe the number of severe head injuries due to
motorcycle accidents would go down.


Of course they would.

Who's head?

Eisboch


You don't need a helmet!
--
John H


I asked you how much money you would save by forcing me to wear a helmet.
You didn't know.

Thank you for your understanding.

Eisboch

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

Just be careful. The last thing we need right now is yet another
presidential candidate.

I will not seek, nor will I accept ....

Eisboch



If you're a human vegetable, you have no choice. You're drafted. You get a
free presidential dog, a speech writer recruited from the rec.guns
newsgroup, and you start calling everyone "folks".

Please be careful.



I don't believe Eisboch is dumb as one has to be to be the next GOP
nominee. Remember, Dubya set the GOP standard.

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:59:11 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:38:34 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
...


I don't know. But I believe the number of severe head injuries due to
motorcycle accidents would go down.


Of course they would.

Who's head?

Eisboch


You don't need a helmet!
--
John H


I asked you how much money you would save by forcing me to wear a helmet.
You didn't know.

Thank you for your understanding.

Eisboch


My comment was in response to your 'who's head?' That question made no
sense whatsoever. If you meant 'who is head', it makes no sense. If you
meant 'whose head', it makes no sense. Obviously I'm talking about the head
of the motorcyclist.
--
John H

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:59:11 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:38:34 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
m...


I don't know. But I believe the number of severe head injuries due to
motorcycle accidents would go down.


Of course they would.

Who's head?

Eisboch


You don't need a helmet!
--
John H


I asked you how much money you would save by forcing me to wear a helmet.
You didn't know.

Thank you for your understanding.

Eisboch


My comment was in response to your 'who's head?' That question made no
sense whatsoever. If you meant 'who is head', it makes no sense. If you
meant 'whose head', it makes no sense. Obviously I'm talking about the
head
of the motorcyclist.
--
John H

Right. Me too.

Eisboch

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 21:52:55 -0500, Eisboch penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

"HK" wrote in message
. ..

Don White wrote:
It dropped quickly the last few days here... buoy at harbour mouth says
36.5 F right now.


Now that's cold!

Climate change. Global cooling.

NC...... on December 2nd. We just bought our Chrismahanukwanzakah
tree......

Air temperature 71 degrees.
Water temperature 71 degrees.

That's just wrong.

http://www.wunderground.com/MAR/buoy/41013.html



Grrrrrr.

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:59:11 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:38:34 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
...


I don't know. But I believe the number of severe head injuries due to
motorcycle accidents would go down.


Of course they would.

Who's head?

Eisboch


You don't need a helmet!
--
John H


I asked you how much money you would save by forcing me to wear a helmet.
You didn't know.

Thank you for your understanding.

Eisboch


Here are some results of the only extensive study of motorcycle accidents
that I'm familiar with. Note #'s 45, 48, 49, and 53. Of side note is number
26 for the anti-countersteering crowd.
--
John H