Darwinian Irony

 

1. They introduced the mandatory crash helmet law in Britain sometime in 1973. I grew up wearing one and wouldn’t dream of not wearing one. Even when I lived in the US where it wasn’t law I still wore one. However I disagree with compulsion in the same way I dont think it is the governments business telling people to wear seat belts. If you are too stupid to belt up then you deserve what you get but I dont wnat big brother telling me how to live my life.

   Posted by LyndonB       07/03/2011  at  02:06 PM  



2. As for the UK wearing a helmet often meant broken neck and not brain damage, guess which one is cheaper for the NHS? I would guess thats the reason for the law! not safety, that was before the nanny state too.

   Posted by Chris Edwards       07/03/2011  at  08:01 PM  



3. I would agree LyndonB with the ‘disagree with compulsion’ - IF America would do like Germany and LIMIT the monetary limits in an accident, IF you aren’t buckled up. It makes a whole world of difference in this Legal Lottery world.

   Helmets however - on motorcycles on highways most especially - I think it’s just common sense - it’s the kiddies on bikes with training wheels with helmets & pads that is just so over-the-top.

   It all is just the ‘nudge’ and first steps into people accepting the Nanny State/Big Gov socialist/whatever ist you want to call it.

   People die every day - if they want to die because of their own behavior - more power to them. And if they don’t die - let their families pay the tab. It’s their fault, not mine.

   But that isn’t allowed today - because that would make people accountable, responsible and just ‘harsh their mellow’.

   Bite Me.

   Posted by wardmama4       07/04/2011  at  07:52 AM  



4. As Americans, don’t we have the right to be stupid and die if we want to?  Isn’t that what the protest was really about?

   Posted by grayjohn       07/04/2011  at  01:59 PM  



5. I agree grayjohn. Nothing is more inimical to liberty than ‘I’m doing this for your own protection.’

   This is a clear case of private property/fiscal rights. A motorcyclist has a fatal accident. If his insurance requires the wearing of a helmet, and he didn’t wear one, insurance doesn’t have to pay. Ditto if I’m driving a car and get killed while not wearing a seatbelt. Simple. The police accident report will show who was using available protective gear. We really don’t need mandatory seatbelt/helmet laws. This can all be taken care of in the private sector.

   It’s gotten so bad that now a six-year-old on his bicycle has to wear a helmet. I’ve never worn a helmet, on a bicycle or a motorcycle. I never will. Stupid? Probably. But it’s my choice to be stupid.

   Posted by Christopher       07/04/2011  at  02:49 PM  



6. Happened about 3 miles from my house.  Word has it that the guy’s shoelace got caught in the chain, he panicked and hit the front brakes hard.  This is mostly speculation because as soon as the troopers started interviewing his buddies they all very quickly got on their bikes and left leaving a void of info.

   I wear a helmet and always will other then “what’s that noise” rides around the neighborhood.  As far as helmet laws go as long as I don’t have to pay for your stupidity in anyway I don’t care.  If your insurance pays for..... you in a coma in the hospital for years, your kids college, diapers, food, mortgage, etc..... feel free to tuck your locks in your bandana and ride.  If your stupidity is gonna costs me money put on the helmet.

   Posted by balaams_ass       07/05/2011  at  01:32 PM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.