Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 15:53:25 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
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

My guess is the person who hit the ground with his helmet vs. his head.

It seems to me (with my limited medical background) that a head surrounded
by a helmet can take more abuse than a head alone.

I make it a priority not to find out.

Ok, let's take a different tack on this.

Why do mandatory bicycle helmet laws exist? Largely, because of head
injuries.

So, assuming that is true, then how does that not also apply to
motorcycles? It would seem to me that if head injuries on bicycles
(max speeds - 15/17 mph) occur from low speed impacts, then they would
also occurr in higher speed accidents involving motorcycles.

Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 3:33 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...







"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

True, but a head injury could qualify him instantly. That, and a small
adjustment with a surgical icepiculum to the frontal lobes. Finally, a
few months with a speech pathologist to help with the fake accent, and
he'd be as good as elected.

Hmmm....

Starting to sound good.
How much does it pay?

Eisboch

Not enough to compensate for being shunned forever after you leave
office.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ahhhh, those silly clintons...


justwaitafrigginyearandseewhatBushisdoingforwork.

More important....look at his history before politics and see if he wrecks
another oil company, leaving investors holding the bag.

Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 20:30:25 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:19:33 -0500, John H. wrote:

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


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


"John H." wrote in message
news:6626l35nu1auoptql7ll543hdd2l6l3o85@4ax .com...


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.

Whoops: http://www.ibmwr.org/otech/hurt.html
--
John H


Ya know, why are we discussing this? The most obvious bikers are the ones
with the loudest bikes, and unbeknownst to them, everyone wants them dead.
Everyone. There are no exceptions, except the two or three of you who will
say you are the exceptions. Let them ride without helmets. Hell...let them
ride blindfolded. Who cares?


I don't believe anyone wants them dead. Quieter, yes. Dead, no. It's
funny,
but when I hear of a motorcycle accident on the beltway, there's an extra
twinge that doesn't happen when I hear of a car accident. I'm sure Marines
feel it for Marines, soldiers for soldiers and so on.


I believe you're wrong. People who intentionally make their bikes louder do
it to be a pain in the ass. Normal people notice this and respond
accordingly.

Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 12:49:03 -0500, HK wrote:

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



It should be mandatory. Period.

So you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
people from themselves?

What do you do when they take away your unsafe, low transom boat?

(for your own good, of course)



Ever the a**, eh, Dwayne?

Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:30:30 -0500, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


I find it hard to believe that insurance companies, who actually know
the cost, would promote anything that would cost them more money. If
seat belts and helmets were not safer, insurance companies would
aggressively fight against the laws.

The push for mandatory seat belt laws didn't come from insurance
companies, it came from the auto industry. In 1984, the Secretary of
Transportation ruled that air bags would not be required if more than 2/3
of the population resided in states with mandatory seat belt laws. All
of a sudden, Detroit began lobbying for mandatory seat belt laws. It's
not about safety, it's about money.

Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 23:15:42 -0000, wrote:

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:30:30 -0500, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


I find it hard to believe that insurance companies, who actually know
the cost, would promote anything that would cost them more money. If
seat belts and helmets were not safer, insurance companies would
aggressively fight against the laws.

The push for mandatory seat belt laws didn't come from insurance
companies, it came from the auto industry. In 1984, the Secretary of
Transportation ruled that air bags would not be required if more than 2/3
of the population resided in states with mandatory seat belt laws. All
of a sudden, Detroit began lobbying for mandatory seat belt laws. It's
not about safety, it's about money.

And then we got air bags anyway which caused a zillion injuries and
still do.

Not to mention severe allergic reactions as a result of the powder
used as a lubricant to aid inflation.

And I have yet to have an SAE qualified engineer tell me why, if seat
belts are so effective in reducing injuries, we need air bags as
additional restraints.

Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 23:15:42 -0000, wrote:

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:30:30 -0500, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


I find it hard to believe that insurance companies, who actually know
the cost, would promote anything that would cost them more money. If
seat belts and helmets were not safer, insurance companies would
aggressively fight against the laws.
The push for mandatory seat belt laws didn't come from insurance
companies, it came from the auto industry. In 1984, the Secretary of
Transportation ruled that air bags would not be required if more than 2/3
of the population resided in states with mandatory seat belt laws. All
of a sudden, Detroit began lobbying for mandatory seat belt laws. It's
not about safety, it's about money.

And then we got air bags anyway which caused a zillion injuries and
still do.

Not to mention severe allergic reactions as a result of the powder
used as a lubricant to aid inflation.

And I have yet to have an SAE qualified engineer tell me why, if seat
belts are so effective in reducing injuries, we need air bags as
additional restraints.


Because the same sort of idiots who won't wear helmets while riding a
motorcycle won't wear seatbelts in a car. Airbags are passive.

A rash is a small price to pay for not flying through the windshield in
a car crash.

Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 13:54:07 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

married for 38 years or something ....

Um...didn't you say that Mrs. E read rec.boats once in a while? :)

Loose lips sink ships I guess.

I am just in an ornery mood. Somehow I caught a humdinger of a cold and
feel really lousy.
I can't remember the last time I was sick and it's something I don't
tolerate very well.

Eisboch

Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 23:26:28 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


And then we got air bags anyway which caused a zillion injuries and
still do.

Not to mention severe allergic reactions as a result of the powder used
as a lubricant to aid inflation.

And I have yet to have an SAE qualified engineer tell me why, if seat
belts are so effective in reducing injuries, we need air bags as
additional restraints.

Remember the '50s cars? Metal dashboards, steering columns like spears,
metal door handles that would slice you like a knife, etc. etc. I'll
take the air bags and seat belts. Looking back, those old cars were
scary. Seat belts are not without problems. I've heard of broken
collarbones and even deaths caused by shock to the heart. Still, I'll
wear them.

Yet Another Tragic Case......
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 13:54:07 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

married for 38 years or something ....

Um...didn't you say that Mrs. E read rec.boats once in a while? :)

Loose lips sink ships I guess.

I am just in an ornery mood. Somehow I caught a humdinger of a cold and
feel really lousy.
I can't remember the last time I was sick and it's something I don't
tolerate very well.

Eisboch



Time to make your blood inhabitable to germs. Jack Daniels.