Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 10

 

2011-07-07 05:39:16
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5598|London, England

Spark wrote:

Could be though if he's hit by a small rock or something at high speed.
That's what the bikes wind screen is for.

I have about 50,000 miles of riding under my belt and I've never been hit by anything but bugs.

Last edited by Jay (2011-07-07 05:41:25)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-07 05:41:15
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:


They arent endangering anyone but themselves.
Yeah they are, an out of control bike flying through your windscreen isn't a joke.
I've seen a biker lose control, let go of his bike and it went on to total a car.
And it was caused by him not wearing a helmet?
It was caused by him overtaking on a blind bend in pouring rain and being too fat for his bike.

Not wearing a helmet is an obvious safety risk, to the rider if he comes off and because its more likely that if something hits him in the face or head he'll lost control.

Maybe people shouldn't goggles when welding, govt can't make them and they can stick it to govt by not doing so
Fuck Israel
2011-07-07 05:43:43
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5598|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


Yeah they are, an out of control bike flying through your windscreen isn't a joke.
I've seen a biker lose control, let go of his bike and it went on to total a car.
And it was caused by him not wearing a helmet?
It was caused by him overtaking on a blind bend in pouring rain and being too fat for his bike.

Not wearing a helmet is an obvious safety risk, to the rider if he comes off and because its more likely that if something hits him in the face or head he'll lost control.

Maybe people shouldn't goggles when welding, govt can't make them and they can stick it to govt by not doing so
You're making two separate arguments. Is it wise to wear a helmet or safety goggles? Yes. Should it be required? No. They arent hurting anyone but themselves.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-07 05:47:43
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX
Potentially the biker could hurt anyone he hits, hence he should follow a minimum safety standard.

Most countries require people to have minimum tread on tyres, windscreens, brakes and lights in good condition, bikers to wear helmets and so on.
Its in everyone's interests, so the govt mandates it.

My point really was doing something obviously moronic just to "stick it to the man" is moronic - as the guy in the OP found out.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-07-07 05:49:01)

Fuck Israel
2011-07-07 05:50:28
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5598|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Potentially the biker could hurt anyone he hits, hence he should follow a minimum safety standard.

Most countries require people to have minimum tread on tyres, windscreens, brakes and lights in good condition, bikers to wear helmets and so on.
Its in everyone's interests, so the govt mandates it.

My point really was doing something obviously moronic just to "stick it to the man" is moronic - as the guy in the OP found out.
Oh, so him smashing into someones car with his bare noggin is going to do more damage than a helmet would? Lolololol
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-07 05:50:32
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5418|Sydney
No government will repeal seatbelt, helmet or other similar safety laws. You're either an idiot without a helmet but because you have to wear one by law then your rights are being removed? I don't buy it.
2011-07-07 05:52:28
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|7015|Moscow, Russia
disregard jay. he speaks of stuff he knows nothing about again.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2011-07-07 05:53:34
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Potentially the biker could hurt anyone he hits, hence he should follow a minimum safety standard.

Most countries require people to have minimum tread on tyres, windscreens, brakes and lights in good condition, bikers to wear helmets and so on.
Its in everyone's interests, so the govt mandates it.

My point really was doing something obviously moronic just to "stick it to the man" is moronic - as the guy in the OP found out.
Oh, so him smashing into someones car with his bare noggin is going to do more damage than a helmet would? Lolololol
A 200kg bike hitting a car compared with not hitting one at all is obviously worse, duh.

I'd say people have greater chance of having an accident if they're not wearing a helmet than if they are.
Stones, bugs, birds etc.
Fuck Israel
2011-07-07 05:55:14
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5598|London, England

Jaekus wrote:

No government will repeal seatbelt, helmet or other similar safety laws. You're either an idiot without a helmet but because you have to wear one by law then your rights are being removed? I don't buy it.
You live in a nanny state and are used to it. I don't and will never accept one being installed. Cultural difference between our nations. You trust your politicians have your best interest in mine. We despise ours and assume they are screwing us no matter how benign the legislation might seem. I prefer our culture tbh, I already have a mom to tell me when I'm fucking up.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-07 05:56:01
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5598|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Potentially the biker could hurt anyone he hits, hence he should follow a minimum safety standard.

Most countries require people to have minimum tread on tyres, windscreens, brakes and lights in good condition, bikers to wear helmets and so on.
Its in everyone's interests, so the govt mandates it.

My point really was doing something obviously moronic just to "stick it to the man" is moronic - as the guy in the OP found out.
Oh, so him smashing into someones car with his bare noggin is going to do more damage than a helmet would? Lolololol
A 200kg bike hitting a car compared with not hitting one at all is obviously worse, duh.

I'd say people have greater chance of having an accident if they're not wearing a helmet than if they are.
Stones, bugs, birds etc.
provide proof, not speculation.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-07 05:56:09
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6915|Canberra, AUS
In the end it probably is an infringement of rights and overstepping, but given that if you don't wear a helmet you are no more than a colossal, colossal moron, I can't find it in me to complain about it. Find something better to moan about.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2011-07-07 05:57:44
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6915|Canberra, AUS

Jay wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

No government will repeal seatbelt, helmet or other similar safety laws. You're either an idiot without a helmet but because you have to wear one by law then your rights are being removed? I don't buy it.
You live in a nanny state and are used to it. I don't and will never accept one being installed. Cultural difference between our nations. You trust your politicians have your best interest in mine. We despise ours and assume they are screwing us no matter how benign the legislation might seem. I prefer our culture tbh, I already have a mom to tell me when I'm fucking up.
Not true. Our culture is more along the lines of

I can't find it in me to complain about it. Find something better to moan about.
Aussies are exceptionally apathetic to standard ideological debates regarding role of government. No one really could be bothered.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2011-07-07 06:00:24
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5418|Sydney

Spark wrote:

Jay wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

No government will repeal seatbelt, helmet or other similar safety laws. You're either an idiot without a helmet but because you have to wear one by law then your rights are being removed? I don't buy it.
You live in a nanny state and are used to it. I don't and will never accept one being installed. Cultural difference between our nations. You trust your politicians have your best interest in mine. We despise ours and assume they are screwing us no matter how benign the legislation might seem. I prefer our culture tbh, I already have a mom to tell me when I'm fucking up.
Not true. Our culture is more along the lines of

I can't find it in me to complain about it. Find something better to moan about.
Aussies are exceptionally apathetic to standard ideological debates regarding role of government. No one really could be bothered.
Pretty much.

And I don't know anyone who trusts politicians.
2011-07-07 06:00:53
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:

You live in a nanny state and are used to it. I don't and will never accept one being installed. Cultural difference between our nations. You trust your politicians have your best interest in mine. We despise ours and assume they are screwing us no matter how benign the legislation might seem. I prefer our culture tbh, I already have a mom to tell me when I'm fucking up.
We think the consequences of the stupidity of the dumbest idiots need to be limited.

You elect them to the White House.

Your move.


Really, "sticking it to the man" by not wearing a seatbelt or crash helmet is about as childish as I can imagine.
Fuck Israel
2011-07-07 06:01:38
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Jaekus wrote:

I not sure what lowing is arguing here.

On one hand he's saying people are dumb for not wearing a helmet, and yet he's vigorously defending their right to be stupid, and potentially endanger other people.

lowing - championing idiocy since 2006
THey are 2 different issues Jaekus. I also "champion" a smokers right to smoke, a drug abuser to abuse drugs, a person to pay a prostitute for sex. None of these things I do, but they are things people should have the right to do.
2011-07-07 06:03:55
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5598|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

You live in a nanny state and are used to it. I don't and will never accept one being installed. Cultural difference between our nations. You trust your politicians have your best interest in mine. We despise ours and assume they are screwing us no matter how benign the legislation might seem. I prefer our culture tbh, I already have a mom to tell me when I'm fucking up.
We think the consequences of the stupidity of the dumbest idiots need to be limited.

You elect them to the White House.

Your move.


Really, "sticking it to the man" by not wearing a seatbelt or crash helmet is about as childish as I can imagine.
I always wear a seat belt. My car beeps at me if I don't. I also always wear a helmet. I just don't feel that its something we should be using our cops to enforce. Especially when the primary benefactor is insurance companies.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-07 06:07:18
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6915|Canberra, AUS

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

You live in a nanny state and are used to it. I don't and will never accept one being installed. Cultural difference between our nations. You trust your politicians have your best interest in mine. We despise ours and assume they are screwing us no matter how benign the legislation might seem. I prefer our culture tbh, I already have a mom to tell me when I'm fucking up.
We think the consequences of the stupidity of the dumbest idiots need to be limited.

You elect them to the White House.

Your move.


Really, "sticking it to the man" by not wearing a seatbelt or crash helmet is about as childish as I can imagine.
I always wear a seat belt. My car beeps at me if I don't. I also always wear a helmet. I just don't feel that its something we should be using our cops to enforce. Especially when the primary benefactor is insurance companies.
Meh. Doing so saves a lot of lives given the stunningly large proportion of the population with the foresight of a brick, and the negative consequences are by and large theoretical. In a perfect, libertarian world then I'd say we don't need it but in the real world, it's something I'm completely fine with.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2011-07-07 06:08:43
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX
And by extension your insurance premium is lower, for car insurance and medical presumably.

But aren't there plenty of people who still don't wear a seatbelt as a protest?
Fuck Israel
2011-07-07 06:11:35
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5598|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

And by extension your insurance premium is lower, for car insurance and medical presumably.

But aren't there plenty of people who still don't wear a seatbelt as a protest?
Not necessarily out of protest. A lot of people just feel uncomfortable with them on. Or they assume the air bags will save them. We're not all biologically identical while seat belts are.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-07 06:12:28
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

I not sure what lowing is arguing here.

On one hand he's saying people are dumb for not wearing a helmet, and yet he's vigorously defending their right to be stupid, and potentially endanger other people.

lowing - championing idiocy since 2006
They arent endangering anyone but themselves.
Yeah they are, an out of control bike flying through your windscreen isn't a joke.
I've seen a biker lose control, let go of his bike and it went on to total a car.
and bikers with helmets never lose control? so with your argument we should outlaw motorcycles, because there is all kinds of shit that can force a biker to lose control of their motorcycle, and I will bet a june bug is low on that list.
2011-07-07 06:13:50
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6915|Canberra, AUS

lowing wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:


They arent endangering anyone but themselves.
Yeah they are, an out of control bike flying through your windscreen isn't a joke.
I've seen a biker lose control, let go of his bike and it went on to total a car.
and bikers with helmets never lose control? so with your argument we should outlaw motorcycles, because there is all kinds of shit that can force a biker to lose control of their motorcycle, and I will bet a june bug is low on that list.
...

It's about risk minimization.

I'm really amazed that such a minor issue could elicit such debate. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2011-07-07 06:14:11
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6891|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


Yeah they are, an out of control bike flying through your windscreen isn't a joke.
I've seen a biker lose control, let go of his bike and it went on to total a car.
And it was caused by him not wearing a helmet?
It was caused by him overtaking on a blind bend in pouring rain and being too fat for his bike.

Not wearing a helmet is an obvious safety risk, to the rider if he comes off and because its more likely that if something hits him in the face or head he'll lost control.

Maybe people shouldn't goggles when welding, govt can't make them and they can stick it to govt by not doing so
Not about sticking it to the govt. It is about person freedom when what you do does not affect anyone else.
2011-07-07 06:14:16
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|7015|Moscow, Russia

Spark wrote:

In a perfect, libertarian world then I'd say we don't need it but in the real world, it's something I'm completely fine with.
that's it right there, man. those who beat their chest while chanting that "liberty and pursuit of happiness"-mantra of theirs are not living in the real world but in something they imagined for themselves.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2011-07-07 06:15:01
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5598|London, England

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


Yeah they are, an out of control bike flying through your windscreen isn't a joke.
I've seen a biker lose control, let go of his bike and it went on to total a car.
and bikers with helmets never lose control? so with your argument we should outlaw motorcycles, because there is all kinds of shit that can force a biker to lose control of their motorcycle, and I will bet a june bug is low on that list.
...

It's about risk minimization.

I'm really amazed that such a minor issue could elicit such debate. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
It's part of a larger pattern.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-07-07 06:17:17
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6346|eXtreme to the maX

lowing wrote:

and bikers with helmets never lose control? so with your argument we should outlaw motorcycles, because there is all kinds of shit that can force a biker to lose control of their motorcycle, and I will bet a june bug is low on that list.
No we should just take obvious steps to reduce the risk of an accident.

Most countries have regulations on cracks in windscreens and condition of wipers, not because its important that everyone should have a nice car but because if you can't see where you're going you're more likely to hit someone or something.

Granted the primary reason for requiring riders to wear helmets isn't prevention of accident, it was probably never part of the thinking. Given the speed bikes go it seems obvious to mandate it for third party safety alone.
Not about sticking it to the govt. It is about person freedom when what you do does not affect anyone else.
As we've pointed out, it can easily affect someone else.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-07-07 06:19:18)

Fuck Israel

 

Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 10

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard