Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
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!




I always urge all rightwingers everywhere to ride their motorcycles in
as macho a fashion as possible and without helmets or other protective
gear, and, whenever possible, to make sure at least one of their
fertile family members is on the back seat. Oh. And make sure a
handgun is in the saddlebag.


Is that directed towards SWF? I think he would be considered a
rightwinger? He is definitely right of my political views. While I
disagree with many individual's politics and/or religious viewpoints, I
know I would wish ill will on them. I am glad you are not reflective
of most people I have meet.


Nice try, a**hole.

No, it is not directed at SW, Eisboch, or any of the other responsible
righties here.

But nice try.

Oh. Whatever your politics, it is directed at you.

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
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!




I always urge all rightwingers everywhere to ride their motorcycles
in as macho a fashion as possible and without helmets or other
protective gear, and, whenever possible, to make sure at least one of
their fertile family members is on the back seat. Oh. And make sure a
handgun is in the saddlebag.


Is that directed towards SWF? I think he would be considered a
rightwinger? He is definitely right of my political views. While I
disagree with many individual's politics and/or religious viewpoints,
I know I would wish ill will on them. I am glad you are not
reflective of most people I have meet.


Nice try, a**hole.

No, it is not directed at SW, Eisboch, or any of the other responsible
righties here.

But nice try.

Oh. Whatever your politics, it is directed at you.

What makes someone a responsible righties?

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Is that directed towards SWF? I think he would be considered a
rightwinger? He is definitely right of my political views. While I
disagree with many individual's politics and/or religious viewpoints,
I know I would wish ill will on them. I am glad you are not
reflective of most people I have meet.


Nice try, a**hole.

No, it is not directed at SW, Eisboch, or any of the other responsible
righties here.

What is your definition of a "responsible rightie?"

Why are you afraid of calling out SWS and Eisboch when they express the
same views as others that you choose to attack because of their same views?

But nice try.

Oh. Whatever your politics, it is directed at you.

"Larry" wrote in message
...
Chuck Gould wrote in news:0b23b105-
:

Then there's the old "it's my life, I'll risk it" BS.
Unfortunately,
society doesn't work that way.


It does or we'd bust anyone's ass that was caught with beer or
wine or other booze not sealed away in the trunk.....just like we
do to CARS.

We'd **** on the boat dealers' feet by making them all take a
competency boat DRIVERS LICENSE test BEFORE we allowed them to
drive off in a 55 ton Hatteras with 1500 HP diesels. Just having
money isn't a competency test, but that's all we got now.

At least SOME of the drivers on the road don't do the really
stupid things boaters do, like driving drunk on booze, for fear
of losing that LICENSE TO DRIVE. I know lots of boaters who
drink and wouldn't do so if they lost that Boat Driver's License,
or stood a chance of losing it...

Of course, if we really cared, we'd say:
NO PFD....NO BOATING
But, a thousand yachties will come to that aid.


Larry


Larry, about 54% of the population is permanently stupid, and that will
never change. People in that category will never be able to tell the
difference between a day when they can keep the PFD nearby, and a day when
things are weird and they should be wearing one.

On a calm day in July, when it's 90 degrees, I doubt you wear a PFD.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
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!




I always urge all rightwingers everywhere to ride their motorcycles
in as macho a fashion as possible and without helmets or other
protective gear, and, whenever possible, to make sure at least one
of their fertile family members is on the back seat. Oh. And make
sure a handgun is in the saddlebag.


Is that directed towards SWF? I think he would be considered a
rightwinger? He is definitely right of my political views. While I
disagree with many individual's politics and/or religious viewpoints,
I know I would wish ill will on them. I am glad you are not
reflective of most people I have meet.


Nice try, a**hole.

No, it is not directed at SW, Eisboch, or any of the other responsible
righties here.

But nice try.

Oh. Whatever your politics, it is directed at you.

What makes someone a responsible righties?



You'll find the answer you seek by bending over, putting your head
between your knees and looking up.

BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Is that directed towards SWF? I think he would be considered a
rightwinger? He is definitely right of my political views. While I
disagree with many individual's politics and/or religious viewpoints,
I know I would wish ill will on them. I am glad you are not
reflective of most people I have meet.


Nice try, a**hole.

No, it is not directed at SW, Eisboch, or any of the other responsible
righties here.

What is your definition of a "responsible rightie?"

Why are you afraid of calling out SWS and Eisboch when they express the
same views as others that you choose to attack because of their same views?

But nice try.

Oh. Whatever your politics, it is directed at you.


You'll find the answer you seek by bending over, putting your head
between your knees and looking up.

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
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!




I always urge all rightwingers everywhere to ride their motorcycles
in as macho a fashion as possible and without helmets or other
protective gear, and, whenever possible, to make sure at least one
of their fertile family members is on the back seat. Oh. And make
sure a handgun is in the saddlebag.


Is that directed towards SWF? I think he would be considered a
rightwinger? He is definitely right of my political views. While
I disagree with many individual's politics and/or religious
viewpoints, I know I would wish ill will on them. I am glad you
are not reflective of most people I have meet.


Nice try, a**hole.

No, it is not directed at SW, Eisboch, or any of the other
responsible righties here.

But nice try.

Oh. Whatever your politics, it is directed at you.

What makes someone a responsible righties?



You'll find the answer you seek by bending over, putting your head
between your knees and looking up.

Harry,
I just want to join the club of responsible righties, and was wondering
what the membership requirements are.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
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!




I always urge all rightwingers everywhere to ride their
motorcycles in as macho a fashion as possible and without helmets
or other protective gear, and, whenever possible, to make sure at
least one of their fertile family members is on the back seat. Oh.
And make sure a handgun is in the saddlebag.


Is that directed towards SWF? I think he would be considered a
rightwinger? He is definitely right of my political views. While
I disagree with many individual's politics and/or religious
viewpoints, I know I would wish ill will on them. I am glad you
are not reflective of most people I have meet.


Nice try, a**hole.

No, it is not directed at SW, Eisboch, or any of the other
responsible righties here.

But nice try.

Oh. Whatever your politics, it is directed at you.

What makes someone a responsible righties?



You'll find the answer you seek by bending over, putting your head
between your knees and looking up.

Harry,
I just want to join the club of responsible righties, and was wondering
what the membership requirements are.



You'll find the answer you seek by bending over, putting your head
between your knees and looking up.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in
:

On a calm day in July, when it's 90 degrees, I doubt you wear a
PFD.



We wrote a law for jetskiiers. ON a warm day in July when it's
90, the jetskiiers better have their PFDs on. We can easily
extend this law to include drunken sailors and bassboat
alcoholics.

It would be a fine tool to get the stupids off the waterways, to
the benefit of the rest of us. So wouldn't boater licensing.

Larry
--
Isn't it ironic that the same ISPs that are telling you
you're downloads threaten their networks......
.....are testing 100Gbps TV to sell on the SAME systems?
http://tinyurl.com/27qx3v

"Larry" wrote in message
...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in
:

On a calm day in July, when it's 90 degrees, I doubt you wear a
PFD.



We wrote a law for jetskiiers. ON a warm day in July when it's
90, the jetskiiers better have their PFDs on. We can easily
extend this law to include drunken sailors and bassboat
alcoholics.

It would be a fine tool to get the stupids off the waterways, to
the benefit of the rest of us. So wouldn't boater licensing.

Larry


Wouldn't letting them drown be more effective? :-)