Say Anything Blog

If you are stupid enough to ride in traffic without a helmet you deserve to be left on the pavement to die. Was that hate-filled enough? Or should I have done it in CAPS? Long story short, you ride without a helmet that is your choice. You should pay your medical/burial costs, not insurance or Medicare/Medicaid. You made the choice, you pay for it.

Honest to goodness. When my sister was in ICU. More people had head injuries from not wearing a helmet than any other kind of accident including car accidents.

If the government is constantly protecting people from the consequences of their own actions, won’t this serve to weaken society over time? It seems to me that the best way to ensure a thriving society is to allow people as many free choices as possible while simultaneously holding them (and them alone) accountable for the consequences of those actions.

Exactly, this is Darwinism in its purest form.  Because not only are people capable and knowledgable of the protection that helmets provide, they choose not to wear them, for whatever reason.  So when they get into accidents, even if it is not their fault, that is nature ridding of us of the unintelligent.

Why is it seat belt laws make sense but helmet laws do not?

Because seatbelt laws generate revenue. See where I am going with this?

Ah ha!…

So not wearing a helmet carries no fine?

My point is our lovely elected officials have no isse passing laws in the guise of public safety, what makes riding a motorcycle different?

Or a bicycle, skateboard, skates etc...? AND, shouldn’t we have to wear a helmet in a car? Government needs to dictate more! NOT…

Where I live kids get ticketed for not wearing a helmet on all three until the get of 14, which I do not get, what changes at 14 that makes me less likely to die if I bounce my head off of the pavement.

I agree ZZ we need less government intrusion.

Just trying to point out that he morons that we have as elected officials pick find it nearly impossible to be consistent with where they intrude.

Under the age of 14 are ticketed? So do they get a fine or their bike taken away? Or do parents have to pay? What did we do when these laws were not around?

I have no problem with helmet/seat belt laws for children.  It makes sense because kids that age aren’t always able to make the most sensible choices.  Hell, those laws are merely an extension of requiring car seats and booster seats for kids in cars.

And what changes Richard (and I wouldn’t say that it happens at age 14, that seems like a weird age for laws like this) is that at age 18 you are supposed to become personally responsible for your own choices.  You obtain the free will to make decisions that effect your life.

We shouldn’t need the government to make these choices for us.  Seat belt/helmet laws for adults are ridiculous.  We should not enact laws to protect us from ourselves, that is not the government’s job.

Just like everything the government does to raise our kids, they make the rules and then fine the parents.

Isn’t it ironic J.R.? Here in Jersey they seem to like that age. We have a 4.5 billion budget shortfall here and our elected officials just the other day passed a law saying that kids under the age of 14 have to have their parents permission to go to a tanning bed.

It is absolutetly ridiculous.

My daughter wanted to get highlights and the beauty shop wouldn’t do it until I came in and signed a consent form…

I grew up Jersey so I am somewhat familiar with the sort of nanny-state policies of the state.  But again, I don’t see anything wrong with laws being passed requiring children to obtain permission to do certain things or limiting the freedom of choice altogether.  Although the hypocrisy is startling when it comes to getting parental permission to get an abortion!!  But that’s a whole other can of worms.  And yet, I still don’t understand why the age limit is 14.  You would think that it would be 18 like most of the other laws for minors. 

Fining the parents isn’t the answer though, that’s just a revenue generator.  What do the kids care if their parents pay for their transgressions.

Jerry Seinfeld said it best -

“There are many things you can point to as proof that the human is not smart. But my personal favorite would have to be that we needed to invent the helmet. What was happening, apparently, was that we were involved in a lot of activities that were cracking our heads. We chose not to avoid doing those activities but, instead, to come up with some sort of device to help us enjoy our head-cracking lifestyles. And even that didn’t work because not enough people were wearing them so we had to come up with the helmet law. Which is even stupider - the idea behind the helmet law being to preserve a brain whose judgment is so poor, it does not even try to avoid the cracking of the head it’s in.”

What’s really surreal to me is that we have laws requiring child seats, seatbelts, helmets, and so on, but we don’t give people the evidence that shows why it’s a good idea. 

For helmets, all you need to do is show the accelerometer data of a dummy’s skull hitting the pavement or a tree with, and without, a helmet.  If the fatality data cited in “no helmet” states is that compelling, only prospective “Darwin Award” winners would ignore it, no?

we don’t give people the evidence that shows why it’s a good idea.

If a person needs it proved to them that their head hitting the pavement without a helmet is worse than it hitting the pavement with one, that suggests to me that they are probably incapable of understanding ‘data’ in the first place…

Mark, that Jerry Seinfeld album is a favorite of mine.

Personally, I don’t think that engaging in a “head crackin’” lifestyle is all that stupid.  Never doing anything the least bit exciting or risking in your life sounds stupid to me.  But to the point at hand, regardless of how stupid you may think it is the choice as to whether or not to ride my motorcycle without a helmet is mine and mine alone.  I enjoy riding without my helmet.  It is one of life’s little pleasures that help get me through the dreary work week.  I like cruising with the sun on my face, the wind in my hair and the smells of the fields and rivers I’m passing in my nose.

I don’t see where your concern over my head possibly getting cracked should trump my desire to ride without a helmet.  And if you speak to me of the “greater cost to society” I’m going to point out that sports like soccers cause a lot of injuries that could be avoided if we just banned it, but I’m not about to advocate for taking people’s fun away from them.  Plus, the idea that my personal choices may effect your bottom line is an argument against a system of health care that makes you responsible (at least in part) for my choices, not an argument for limiting my personal freedoms.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Not having helmet laws is God’s way of weeding out the people too stupid to be allowed to procreate.  Don’t’cha just love survival of the fittest at work?

Regards…

“I don’t see where your concern over my head possibly getting cracked should trump my desire to ride without a helmet.”

That’s not my position at all. I’ll come to it below…

Anyway, I was about to say that you have forgotten that I live in a country where the general public has to meet the costs of medical treatment for head-crackers… but you beat me to it -

“the idea that my personal choices may affect your bottom line is an argument against a system of health care that makes you responsible (at least in part) for my choices, not an argument for limiting my personal freedoms.”

I agree, almost entirely. The only reason I make the leap from your eminently sensible position to compulsory contributions to a health system is to avoid the ‘free-rider’ problem - that is to say, people who choose not to pay their contribution in the hope, or knowledge, that their lives will be saved anyway as a result of human compassion.

The compromise position I think we should adopt in this country is to tax activities proportional to the overall costs they incur. For example (to take the subject of this post) I think people should be free to ride without helmets. But they should just pay more for the pleasure of doing so - because they will, taken as a whole, cost our health service more than helmet-wearers.

Mark, you may be right(OK, probably are), but I’d still like to see someone giving it a try instead of re-hashing the standard argument “if you don’t you’re dumb.”

Even if it didn’t raise voluntary helmet use, it might be useful to put at least a veneer of civility to our insult-happy society, no?

Robert -
Sorry, I agree with you, I was just being flippant…

Well, here in America motorcyclers do pay more.  You should see my insurance bill when I activate my motorcycle insurance for the summer.

Anyway, I just don’t think things like helmet laws are the way to go.  Rather than limit personal choice we should be focusing on fixing the system.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Anyway, I just don’t think things like helmet laws are the way to go. Rather than limit personal choice we should be focusing on fixing the system.

Precisely the same logic applies with drugs. People should be free to do to their bodies whatever they want to.

I think you and I are in broad agreement - we just differ as to whether the costs should be met by higher specific taxation, or by higher specific insurance.

Though it would be amusing to see someone getting insurance for their hedonistic drug-fuelled lifestyle…

Well, when it comes to outlawing illegal drugs I take it on a case-by-case basis.  We’ve talked about this exhaustively already here on SA in the past, but I maintain that some drugs are so virulent that the users of them can’t help but be a danger to society.  Not so much from the impact on their health but rather from the fact when high on a drug like meth you’re a danger to everyone around you.

I’ve had some experience living down the street from a bunch of tweakers.  It wasn’t any fun.

I think marijuana should be legal, and I’m willing to listen to arguments for legalizing other drugs individually (I’m not much of an expert on drugs so I can’t name any others outside of marijuana that I think should be legal), but a blanket legalization of all narcotics would be foolish.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I maintain that some drugs are so virulent that the users of them can’t help but be a danger to society

True. Equally some drugs are so highly addictive that the notion of ‘free choice’ diminishes rapidly.

But I think marijuana, ecstasy and cocaine don’t really suffer from either of these problems and should therefore be legal. Although it’s pretty easy for some people to get addicted to anything…

Although it’s pretty easy for some people to get addicted to anything…

Tell me about it...(as I obsessively check my blog for new comments for the 100th time today after posting what is the fourth of probably a dozen posts...)

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

If marijuana was legal it would be fun to be a farmer…

No apology was needed, Mark--I was trying to be lighthearted in my response as well, don’t know whether I communicated that.

With regards to “should we legalize dope,” I’d be amenable to the “softer” illegal drugs if I could be assured that public intoxication (especially if operating, say, 2 tons of metal with 250hp) would be punished.

I have to say, I live in Florida, so I’m used to our “laws.” I was once pulled over when I was 13 for running a stop sign on my bicyle. Yes, a cop pulled me over . . . in my neighborhood for running a stop sign on a bicycle. Much the same for not having a headlight on your bike, and the not wearing a helmet. Now, I can sensible say why each of these are a good thing . . . but do we really need to make it a law?

Well, yes, if we’re to make money to pay people to come up with these laws.

I play paintball, every weekend matter of fact, and I always try and get new people to play. Their first comment is, “but it hurts.” And I have but one response, “then don’t get shot!”

I personally don’t care if Joe Blow doesn’t wear a helmet . . . if he’s stupid and weaves in and out of cars then fine, so be it. I think what these statistics fail to inform you of is WHY these riders died. Yes, statistics can be fun and all, but most of you are being lied to.

First, the state of Florida has undergone a huge surge in population (and house prices) in the past couple of years. With that, many new residents and motorcycle riders. Secondly, how many of those deaths were Florida residents? What? You don’t know! Why do you care? Well, Florida is home to one big Bike Week a year plus many small bike fetivals and clubs. I have seen several new motorcycle clubs forming and thousands of motorcycle visitors.

Is that a fair sample? Not really. They’re artificially inflating the number of deaths and relating it to the number of registered Florida riders. That’s like saying the sea level rose a foot because I poured a gallon of water down the drain.

Fact is, more people are riding in the state. More people who owned bikes are riding more often. Add that in with the people who are getting themselves killed and it looks bad for everyone.

So I say don’t pass the law unless they plan to make money for it. But of course, not as many people will want to ride anymore. If they leave it helmet free, in a few years we won’t have to worry as much . . . all the stupid ones will have killed themself off. Yes, Darwin at work.

For the riders who didn’t kill themselves off through stupidity, well, honestly, they’re just as likely to die any other way. So we’ll continue to invent newer things say we can continue our “head cracking lifestyle” until we find something new.