Conquer Club

Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby Haggis_McMutton on Sun Mar 10, 2013 6:57 am

But probably because they also reduce the number of people who cycle.

See study.

I guess a real analysis of the costs of such laws would have to measure the reduced hospital costs for less bike injuries against the increased cost of having unhealthier children(and also any enforcement costs, though, I'm not sure how many places actually enforce these laws)

No points awarded for guessing BBS' stance on this issue.
Highest score: 3063; Highest position: 67;
Winner of {World War II tournament, -team 2010 Skilled Diversity, [FuN||Chewy]-[XII] USA};
8-3-7
User avatar
Major Haggis_McMutton
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 11:32 am

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby Metsfanmax on Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:49 am

The law in most states is very unfriendly toward vehicular cycling. For example, anyone who has rode a bike through an urban area should know how unintuitive it is that bicycles are required to fully obey stop signs. While there's a lot of controversy among the cycling community about whether to push for full cyclist rights on the road, or to push for separate bicycle lanes, I would contend that either one would go a long way towards making cycling more common. In particular, helmet laws are unpopular because I imagine most people are unfamiliar with the real risks associated with vehicular cycling. On the other hand, a good portion of the cycling community itself rails against helmet laws, just as a general principle of freedom. It seems like the only way to placate everyone is to build separate bike lanes and only require helmets to be mandatory on roads shared with vehicles.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby b.k. barunt on Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:17 am

Bad enough that our elected officials sell out to the big insurance companies and make helmet laws for motorcycles, but bicycles?? Niggaplease! When i was a kid nobody wore helmets on bicycles. We'd play chicken in the streets and very few would chicken. My brother and i rode on trails in the mountains (no, mountain bikes hadn't been invented yet) and would have spectacular wrecks going off of cliffs and such. Helmets? Never saw one and never knew anyone personally who got a severe head injury on a bicycle.

I can understand participants in a bike race wearing them, but other than that it's just chickenshit. Far more head injuries in cars than on bicycles so what's next? Mandatory helmet laws for cars? This preoccupation with safety by our skeert yuppie culture is really starting to chap my ass. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as it were. If i choose to risk my life to enhance my happiness that should be my perogative.

Consider the custom of counting coup - a tradition shared by all of our Indian tribes. No matter how many warriors you killed in battle, no matter how many horses you stole, you were not considered a true man if you hadn't counted coup. For those of you who aren't familiar with counting coup, it involved riding into a battle, charging an armed opponent, slapping him on the ass with your "coup stick" (approximately 3 ft long and about as big around as your little finger) and escaping with your life. Sounds crazy? Maybe so, but like i say it spanned all of the tribes in our Indian culture. A typical Indian song that a brave would sing before indulging himself in this pastime was "Let us see let us see, what is this life that we are living".

The first 5 years of my marriage i rode a 5 speed bicycle 8 miles one way to work through the busiest part of the streets of New Orleans. I never felt the need for a helmet and when i see an adult male wearing one now i feel a marked contempt for such a pussy.


Honibaz
User avatar
Cook b.k. barunt
 
Posts: 1270
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 11:33 pm

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby Metsfanmax on Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:26 am

b.k. barunt wrote:The first 5 years of my marriage i rode a 5 speed bicycle 8 miles one way to work through the busiest part of the streets of New Orleans. I never felt the need for a helmet and when i see an adult male wearing one now i feel a marked contempt for such a pussy.


Seriously, don't listen to him. You're going to get doored.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby AAFitz on Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:56 am

b.k. barunt wrote: When i was a kid nobody wore helmets on bicycles.


Who's side do you think this helps, exactly.

I assume they used lead paint and gasoline too?

Stupidity in the past, does not justify it in the future.
I never felt the need for a helmet and when i see an adult male wearing one now i feel a marked contempt for such a pussy.


Some have more to lose than others.

____
That all being said, I don't always were one cycling, and Ive almost died in a bike accident.

I also don't wear one skiing, and I can clock in at over 60 MPH on skis.

Ive also been up 200 feet high, with shorts, a polo shirt, and my fingers as the only safety device.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby BigBallinStalin on Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:57 pm

b.k. barunt wrote:Bad enough that our elected officials sell out to the big insurance companies and make helmet laws for motorcycles, but bicycles?? Niggaplease! When i was a kid nobody wore helmets on bicycles. We'd play chicken in the streets and very few would chicken. My brother and i rode on trails in the mountains (no, mountain bikes hadn't been invented yet) and would have spectacular wrecks going off of cliffs and such. Helmets? Never saw one and never knew anyone personally who got a severe head injury on a bicycle.

I can understand participants in a bike race wearing them, but other than that it's just chickenshit. Far more head injuries in cars than on bicycles so what's next? Mandatory helmet laws for cars? This preoccupation with safety by our skeert yuppie culture is really starting to chap my ass. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as it were. If i choose to risk my life to enhance my happiness that should be my perogative.

Consider the custom of counting coup - a tradition shared by all of our Indian tribes. No matter how many warriors you killed in battle, no matter how many horses you stole, you were not considered a true man if you hadn't counted coup. For those of you who aren't familiar with counting coup, it involved riding into a battle, charging an armed opponent, slapping him on the ass with your "coup stick" (approximately 3 ft long and about as big around as your little finger) and escaping with your life. Sounds crazy? Maybe so, but like i say it spanned all of the tribes in our Indian culture. A typical Indian song that a brave would sing before indulging himself in this pastime was "Let us see let us see, what is this life that we are living".

The first 5 years of my marriage i rode a 5 speed bicycle 8 miles one way to work through the busiest part of the streets of New Orleans. I never felt the need for a helmet and when i see an adult male wearing one now i feel a marked contempt for such a pussy.


Honibaz


I wear a helmet while riding my bicycle so that I can take greater risks while incurring less costs (e.g. brain damage).*

So far, so good, but I can't take the risk of losing my brain matter when my skull cracks. My future streams of income are riding on that gray matter baby.


*tangent: the same goes for car insurance. It subsidizes the costs of risky behavior. E.g. if a dagger was attached to everyone's steering wheel and pointed straight at the driver, then people would drive extremely carefully (and some wouldn't drive at all). Incentives matter.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby BigBallinStalin on Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:00 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:The law in most states is very unfriendly toward vehicular cycling. For example, anyone who has rode a bike through an urban area should know how unintuitive it is that bicycles are required to fully obey stop signs. While there's a lot of controversy among the cycling community about whether to push for full cyclist rights on the road, or to push for separate bicycle lanes, I would contend that either one would go a long way towards making cycling more common. In particular, helmet laws are unpopular because I imagine most people are unfamiliar with the real risks associated with vehicular cycling. On the other hand, a good portion of the cycling community itself rails against helmet laws, just as a general principle of freedom. It seems like the only way to placate everyone is to build separate bike lanes and only require helmets to be mandatory on roads shared with vehicles.


Generally, I don't care if other people wear helmets, but I have trouble countering this argument:

1. Wearing a helmet reduces the price of lawsuits for other parties.

So, in the case of accident, had the bicyclist worn a helmet, the settlement/trial would have extracted a lesser amount from the other parties involved.
(Of course, the bicyclist may reap a higher price by not wearing a helmet--assuming he's not at fault and that there's no Helmet Law. It would be like exchanging one's brain damage for more cash money).
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby john9blue on Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:05 pm

AAFitz wrote:
b.k. barunt wrote: When i was a kid nobody wore helmets on bicycles.


Who's side do you think this helps, exactly.

I assume they used lead paint and gasoline too?

Stupidity in the past, does not justify it in the future.


i think his point is that he didn't wear a helmet when he was a kid, and he turned out all rig... wait
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)
User avatar
Captain john9blue
 
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:18 pm
Location: FlutterChi-town

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby AAFitz on Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:38 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:Generally, I don't care if other people wear helmets, but I have trouble countering this argument:

1. Wearing a helmet reduces the price of lawsuits for other parties.

So, in the case of accident, had the bicyclist worn a helmet, the settlement/trial would have extracted a lesser amount from the other parties involved.
(Of course, the bicyclist may reap a higher price by not wearing a helmet--assuming he's not at fault and that there's no Helmet Law. It would be like exchanging one's brain damage for more cash money).


This really creates a beautiful array of levels of irony.
____
While they are obvious, I need to type some out just to see them myself.

A smart person (one who correctly weighs the risks vs benefit and chooses to wear a helmet) gets hit by a car, and has a brain that is worth more, but has less injury, so needs less compensation.

A stupid person (one who incorrectly weighs the risk vs benefit and chooses not to wear a helmet and chooses not to wear a helmet) gets hit by a car, in the same scenario and has more brain damage, but to a brain that is worth far less than the other brain, but needs more compensation to repair the damage.

The smart person, receives less money for the same situation.

The stupid person receives more money for the same situation.

The smart person, stays smart, with potentially less economic 'reward'.

The stupid person becomes stupider, albeit, potentially better off financially, which some might argue made him smarter.
(but not the smart ones.)
Last edited by AAFitz on Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby AAFitz on Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:49 pm

The single most effective way for states to save lives and save money is a universal helmet law.
Helmets reduce the risk of death by 37%.
Helmets reduce the risk of head injury by 69%.
The United States saved $3 billion due to helmet use in 2010.
The United States could have saved an additional $1.4 billion in 2010 if all motorcyclists had worn helmets.
Helmets do not reduce visibility or impair hearing.


From the CDC.
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/mc/states/nh.html

If you assume the stats are close enough to accurate, it is difficult to argue helmets are not worth the slight discomfort.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby tzor on Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:03 pm

I don't know if bike helmet's reduce "injuries" but generally speaking a broken leg heals better than a broken skull.

There are a lot of problems when cars and bikes share the same space, even with bike lanes.
Image
User avatar
Cadet tzor
 
Posts: 4076
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Long Island, NY, USA

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby Army of GOD on Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:07 pm

helmets are for gays and girls
mrswdk is a ho
User avatar
Lieutenant Army of GOD
 
Posts: 7187
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 pm

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby BigBallinStalin on Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:22 pm

AAFitz wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:Generally, I don't care if other people wear helmets, but I have trouble countering this argument:

1. Wearing a helmet reduces the price of lawsuits for other parties.

So, in the case of accident, had the bicyclist worn a helmet, the settlement/trial would have extracted a lesser amount from the other parties involved.
(Of course, the bicyclist may reap a higher price by not wearing a helmet--assuming he's not at fault and that there's no Helmet Law. It would be like exchanging one's brain damage for more cash money).


This really creates a beautiful array of levels of irony.
____
While they are obvious, I need to type some out just to see them myself.

A smart person (one who correctly weighs the risks vs benefit and chooses to wear a helmet) gets hit by a car, and has a brain that is worth more, but has less injury, so needs less compensation.

A stupid person (one who incorrectly weighs the risk vs benefit and chooses not to wear a helmet and chooses not to wear a helmet) gets hit by a car, in the same scenario and has more brain damage, but to a brain that is worth far less than the other brain, but needs more compensation to repair the damage.

The smart person, receives less money for the same situation.

The stupid person receives more money for the same situation.

The smart person, stays smart, with potentially less economic 'reward'.

The stupid person becomes stupider, albeit, potentially better off financially, which some might argue made him smarter.
(but not the smart ones.)


Nice post! The situation seems exacerbated by the judicial systems (of fed govt and the States) since they aren't taking the right measures to correct for perverse incentives.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby Lootifer on Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:23 pm

Holy fucksticks you guys live in the stone age!

OH NO, DEM CURSED RENT SEEKING EVIL HELMET MANUFACTURERS!!!

For fucks sake. I will never understand american culture.
I go to the gym to justify my mockery of fat people.
User avatar
Lieutenant Lootifer
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:30 pm
Location: Competing

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby BigBallinStalin on Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:26 pm

AAFitz wrote:
The single most effective way for states to save lives and save money is a universal helmet law.
Helmets reduce the risk of death by 37%.
Helmets reduce the risk of head injury by 69%.
The United States saved $3 billion due to helmet use in 2010.
The United States could have saved an additional $1.4 billion in 2010 if all motorcyclists had worn helmets.
Helmets do not reduce visibility or impair hearing.


From the CDC.
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/mc/states/nh.html

If you assume the stats are close enough to accurate, it is difficult to argue helmets are not worth the slight discomfort.


Hmm...

    if all of the poor people in the US were eliminated (which I don't condone),
    then the US would save billions and billions of dollars.

What's missing is the value people enjoy of being alive (or analogously, of increasing their comfort by not wearing a helmet).

That enjoyment value (which is part of their opportunity costs) is not calculated into the statistics. I don't hold a strong stance either way, I'm just sayin'.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby TA1LGUNN3R on Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:26 pm

b.k. barunt wrote:Bad enough that our elected officials sell out to the big insurance companies and make helmet laws for motorcycles, but bicycles?? Niggaplease! When i was a kid nobody wore helmets on bicycles. We'd play chicken in the streets and very few would chicken. My brother and i rode on trails in the mountains (no, mountain bikes hadn't been invented yet) and would have spectacular wrecks going off of cliffs and such. Helmets? Never saw one and never knew anyone personally who got a severe head injury on a bicycle.

I can understand participants in a bike race wearing them, but other than that it's just chickenshit. Far more head injuries in cars than on bicycles so what's next? Mandatory helmet laws for cars? This preoccupation with safety by our skeert yuppie culture is really starting to chap my ass. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as it were. If i choose to risk my life to enhance my happiness that should be my perogative.

Consider the custom of counting coup - a tradition shared by all of our Indian tribes. No matter how many warriors you killed in battle, no matter how many horses you stole, you were not considered a true man if you hadn't counted coup. For those of you who aren't familiar with counting coup, it involved riding into a battle, charging an armed opponent, slapping him on the ass with your "coup stick" (approximately 3 ft long and about as big around as your little finger) and escaping with your life. Sounds crazy? Maybe so, but like i say it spanned all of the tribes in our Indian culture. A typical Indian song that a brave would sing before indulging himself in this pastime was "Let us see let us see, what is this life that we are living".

The first 5 years of my marriage i rode a 5 speed bicycle 8 miles one way to work through the busiest part of the streets of New Orleans. I never felt the need for a helmet and when i see an adult male wearing one now i feel a marked contempt for such a pussy.


Honibaz


It's all for the money. If the legislators can make it mandatory to wear a helmet/seat belts, now the cops can give you a ticket for such.

-TG
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class TA1LGUNN3R
 
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:52 am
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby smegal69 on Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:36 pm

Australia ans New Zealand have had bike helmet laws for years.

Now it's just a way of life..... you going to go ride a bike you put a helmet on ..... and i know i would rather have a healthy son than a million dollars and a son that dribbles in his dinner plate when you have to feed him
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant smegal69
 
Posts: 991
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 5:17 am
Location: Doing Hard Time on "The ROCK", in the southern ocean
2

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby AAFitz on Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:55 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
AAFitz wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:Generally, I don't care if other people wear helmets, but I have trouble countering this argument:

1. Wearing a helmet reduces the price of lawsuits for other parties.

So, in the case of accident, had the bicyclist worn a helmet, the settlement/trial would have extracted a lesser amount from the other parties involved.
(Of course, the bicyclist may reap a higher price by not wearing a helmet--assuming he's not at fault and that there's no Helmet Law. It would be like exchanging one's brain damage for more cash money).


This really creates a beautiful array of levels of irony.
____
While they are obvious, I need to type some out just to see them myself.

A smart person (one who correctly weighs the risks vs benefit and chooses to wear a helmet) gets hit by a car, and has a brain that is worth more, but has less injury, so needs less compensation.

A stupid person (one who incorrectly weighs the risk vs benefit and chooses not to wear a helmet and chooses not to wear a helmet) gets hit by a car, in the same scenario and has more brain damage, but to a brain that is worth far less than the other brain, but needs more compensation to repair the damage.

The smart person, receives less money for the same situation.

The stupid person receives more money for the same situation.

The smart person, stays smart, with potentially less economic 'reward'.

The stupid person becomes stupider, albeit, potentially better off financially, which some might argue made him smarter.
(but not the smart ones.)


Nice post! The situation seems exacerbated by the judicial systems (of fed govt and the States) since they aren't taking the right measures to correct for perverse incentives.


You did miss the repetition highlighted...though as i said, I almost died in a bike accident, and I wasn't wearing a helmet. (Another 3' and Id have hit the A pillar or roof of a pickup truck and there is no question the damage would have been serious. As it was, both eyes were bouncing back and forth in my head from a serious and obvious concussion. That however, was just from the trauma, and not actual contact to my head...as far as I know.)

But more likely, it was the wedding party last night that was responsible for this current example of repetition.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby Gillipig on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:09 pm

You guys don't have laws on wearing bicycle helmets??? That's just retarded! Do you have laws for wearing seat belt in cars or is that optional too?
AoG for President of the World!!
I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!
User avatar
Lieutenant Gillipig
 
Posts: 3565
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby john9blue on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:16 pm

Gillipig wrote:You guys don't have laws on wearing bicycle helmets??? That's just retarded! Do you have laws for wearing seat belt in cars or is that optional too?


here in america we enjoy a little something called FREEDOM

bald_eagle.jpg
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)
User avatar
Captain john9blue
 
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:18 pm
Location: FlutterChi-town

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby AAFitz on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:22 pm

john9blue wrote:
Gillipig wrote:You guys don't have laws on wearing bicycle helmets??? That's just retarded! Do you have laws for wearing seat belt in cars or is that optional too?


here in america we enjoy a little something called FREEDOM

bald_eagle.jpg


Except....when using public property, there are many laws you must obey. :roll:

Or are you suggesting, speed limits, crosswalks, stop signs, seat belts, airbags etc...are all infringements of your supposed freedom?
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby john9blue on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:24 pm

AAFitz wrote:
john9blue wrote:
Gillipig wrote:You guys don't have laws on wearing bicycle helmets??? That's just retarded! Do you have laws for wearing seat belt in cars or is that optional too?


here in america we enjoy a little something called FREEDOM

bald_eagle.jpg


Except....when using public property, there are many laws you must obey. :roll:

Or are you suggesting, speed limits, crosswalks, stop signs, seat belts, airbags etc...are all infringements of your supposed freedom?


okay first of all, i was being facetious... i'm fully aware that americans are far from free.

secondly, just because you can make a law doesn't mean you should.
Last edited by john9blue on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)
User avatar
Captain john9blue
 
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:18 pm
Location: FlutterChi-town

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby TA1LGUNN3R on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:24 pm

AAFitz wrote:
john9blue wrote:
Gillipig wrote:You guys don't have laws on wearing bicycle helmets??? That's just retarded! Do you have laws for wearing seat belt in cars or is that optional too?


here in america we enjoy a little something called FREEDOM

bald_eagle.jpg


Except....when using public property, there are many laws you must obey. :roll:


Because nothing affects the public like an unbuckled person.

-TG
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class TA1LGUNN3R
 
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:52 am
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby AAFitz on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:27 pm

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
AAFitz wrote:
john9blue wrote:
Gillipig wrote:You guys don't have laws on wearing bicycle helmets??? That's just retarded! Do you have laws for wearing seat belt in cars or is that optional too?


here in america we enjoy a little something called FREEDOM

bald_eagle.jpg


Except....when using public property, there are many laws you must obey. :roll:


Because nothing affects the public like an unbuckled person.

-TG


Actually, and I apologize if you did previously suffer a head injury from not wearing a helmet...BBS and I, with the help of the CDC conclusively showed that those not wearing helmets, and similarly those unbuckled, very much affect the public to the tune of multiple billions of dollars. :roll:
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Bike helmet laws shown to reduce number of injuries

Postby AAFitz on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:31 pm

john9blue wrote:
AAFitz wrote:
john9blue wrote:
Gillipig wrote:You guys don't have laws on wearing bicycle helmets??? That's just retarded! Do you have laws for wearing seat belt in cars or is that optional too?


here in america we enjoy a little something called FREEDOM

bald_eagle.jpg


Except....when using public property, there are many laws you must obey. :roll:

Or are you suggesting, speed limits, crosswalks, stop signs, seat belts, airbags etc...are all infringements of your supposed freedom?


okay first of all, i was being facetious... i'm fully aware that americans are far from free.

secondly, just because you can make a law doesn't mean you should.


Ok...Ill accept the facetious part, but as I asked, does that mean you think that those other laws are infringements of your freedom? And if so, which ones?

Having to spend money on airbags, seat belts, proper tires, brakes, bumpers? Which are responsible laws and which tremble greatly on your false sense of freedom to choose?

As a follow up question, does the relativity of your objection not become incredibly obvious?

Sometimes, because you can make a law, it means you absolutely should.

Being against laws, just because they are laws is just an utterly ridiculous stance.

In a very real way, it is laws that give you most of your freedom.

Irony is just a big bad bitch that way.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Next

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ConfederateSS