Yet Another Tragic Case......
|
Yet Another Tragic Case......
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 13:26:31 -0400, "Don White"
wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... 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. Boy... JohnH & Waylon sure act like the Bobsy twins. They are desperate to drag the more moderate posters into their foolishness. Maybe they need someone to hold their hands while they do their instigating, facilitating etc. How's your mom, Don? Let's see, I've not been here for a couple days, but you find it necessary to drag me into some of Harry's crap. -- John H |
Yet Another Tragic Case......
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 16:04:23 -0500, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote: wrote in message ... There is, in fact, a national motorcycle helmet law in effect already. It only applies to people with something worth protecting. Please provide a cite. A while back the Fed refused money for road system maintenance if the state did not have a helmet law .... similar to the 55 mph speed limit of the 70's. But that is changing. Every year more states are changing the law or modifying it based on real data. Florida is a good example and reflects some common sense. There *is* a helmet law, but you are not required to wear one if over 21 years of age and can prove that you have at least some minimum amount of personal health insurance. There are more states that riding without a helmet is legal today than there were 20 years ago. Eisboch More regression. Agreed. -- John H |
Yet Another Tragic Case......
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 21:07:58 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: wrote in message ... There is, in fact, a national motorcycle helmet law in effect already. It only applies to people with something worth protecting. Please provide a cite. A while back the Fed refused money for road system maintenance if the state did not have a helmet law .... similar to the 55 mph speed limit of the 70's. But that is changing. Every year more states are changing the law or modifying it based on real data. Florida is a good example and reflects some common sense. There *is* a helmet law, but you are not required to wear one if over 21 years of age and can prove that you have at least some minimum amount of personal health insurance. There are more states that riding without a helmet is legal today than there were 20 years ago. Eisboch More regression. Why? If some moron wants to ride a motorcycle without a helmet, who cares? If you're stupid enough to think you're immune to head injuries, the gene pool is better off without you. Give this 200 years and the 54% might shrink a bit. I care if his death or injury results in higher taxes or insurance premiums. Helmet laws exist for the same reason any other law protecting the mentally disable exists. -- John H |
Yet Another Tragic Case......
On Dec 2, 8:54 am, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 21:07:58 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: wrote in message ... There is, in fact, a national motorcycle helmet law in effect already. It only applies to people with something worth protecting. Please provide a cite. A while back the Fed refused money for road system maintenance if the state did not have a helmet law .... similar to the 55 mph speed limit of the 70's. But that is changing. Every year more states are changing the law or modifying it based on real data. Florida is a good example and reflects some common sense. There *is* a helmet law, but you are not required to wear one if over 21 years of age and can prove that you have at least some minimum amount of personal health insurance. There are more states that riding without a helmet is legal today than there were 20 years ago. Eisboch More regression. Why? If some moron wants to ride a motorcycle without a helmet, who cares? If you're stupid enough to think you're immune to head injuries, the gene pool is better off without you. Give this 200 years and the 54% might shrink a bit. I care if his death or injury results in higher taxes or insurance premiums. Helmet laws exist for the same reason any other law protecting the mentally disable exists. -- John H- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well, I may be simple, but not disabled I don't think. I rarely wore a brain bucket..... of course back then, it would have been considered "waste basket" ;) |
Yet Another Tragic Case......
|
Yet Another Tragic Case......
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 09:21:19 -0500, HK wrote:
wrote: On Dec 2, 8:54 am, John H. wrote: On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 21:07:58 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: wrote in message ... There is, in fact, a national motorcycle helmet law in effect already. It only applies to people with something worth protecting. Please provide a cite. A while back the Fed refused money for road system maintenance if the state did not have a helmet law .... similar to the 55 mph speed limit of the 70's. But that is changing. Every year more states are changing the law or modifying it based on real data. Florida is a good example and reflects some common sense. There *is* a helmet law, but you are not required to wear one if over 21 years of age and can prove that you have at least some minimum amount of personal health insurance. There are more states that riding without a helmet is legal today than there were 20 years ago. Eisboch More regression. Why? If some moron wants to ride a motorcycle without a helmet, who cares? If you're stupid enough to think you're immune to head injuries, the gene pool is better off without you. Give this 200 years and the 54% might shrink a bit. I care if his death or injury results in higher taxes or insurance premiums. Helmet laws exist for the same reason any other law protecting the mentally disable exists. -- John H- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well, I may be simple, but not disabled I don't think. I rarely wore a brain bucket..... of course back then, it would have been considered "waste basket" ;) See, we do agree. :} My opinion is that one has to be *really stupid* to ride a motorcycle without wearing a real safety helmet. You say 'really stupid', I say 'mentally disabled'. Same, same. -- John H |
Yet Another Tragic Case......
"John H." wrote in message ... On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 21:07:58 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: Why? If some moron wants to ride a motorcycle without a helmet, who cares? If you're stupid enough to think you're immune to head injuries, the gene pool is better off without you. Give this 200 years and the 54% might shrink a bit. I care if his death or injury results in higher taxes or insurance premiums. If a law went into effect tomorrow that mandated helmets in every state, by how much would your current taxes, vehicle insurance and health insurance premiums be reduced by? Eisboch |
Yet Another Tragic Case......
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 10:08:22 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
If a law went into effect tomorrow that mandated helmets in every state, by how much would your current taxes, vehicle insurance and health insurance premiums be reduced by? I agree with you on this - it wouldn't make a whit of difference. My argument is that the same logic behind no helmet laws should also be applied to seat belts - personal choice. And the odd thing is that the "safety" statistics for seat belt use being more safe than not is highly fabricated and, frankly, false. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:35 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com