Michigan Helmet Law

[Yammer Dan]

Now lets leave MickyD's out of this. That ain't fair!! Moderator! Moderator!!

[reddevilmedic]

i forgot Yammer...wash it down with a fifth of Jack and a 12 pack of Pepsi! lol...

[twigg]

Originally Posted by reddevilmedic

i guess youre right. i might as well quit surfing, parachuting, skiing, mountain biking, skateboarding, fishing, hunting, riding, driving, running, and walking. i will just sit at home and eat McDonalds, Doritos,and smoke a couple packs of cigs a day... Those activities are much safer...and they certainly dont burden society, friends and family, or insurance company premiums...

Really?

And I imagine you protest just as strongly against all the aviation laws designed to keep you safe while parachuting, and working on your sarcasm?

Same tired old arguments.

What is curious about this is that the Helmet Law was in place, for public safety, and protection. It's a good law, that is why they passed it. It is a law that most of the developed world, and many parts of this country concurs with.

I wonder what kind of Legislature it is that can reduce the safety of citizens, and burden them with increased costs.

It certainly has nothing to do with freedom.

[reddevilmedic]

i think it would be interesting to compare the number of deaths of sober people not wearing helmets to those that die from lung cancer, obesity, diabetes, cirrhosis. if you think that motorcycle accidents are driving up youre premiums....think again. yet, i can partake in all those unhealthy activities, at any time, without Legislation. same old tired response....

[reddevilmedic]

Motorcycle and bicycle helmet use laws


April 2012

• Laws requiring all motorcyclists to wear a helmet are in place in 19 states and the District of Columbia
• Laws requiring only some motorcyclists to wear a helmet are in place in 28 states
• There is no motorcycle helmet use law in 3 states (Illinois, Iowa, and New Hampshire)
• Some bicyclists are required by law to wear a helmet in 21 states and the District of Columbia
• There is no bicycle helmet use law in 29 states

The history of motorcycle helmet laws in the United States is characterized by change. In 1967, to increase motorcycle helmet use, the federal government required the states to enact helmet use laws in order to qualify for certain federal safety programs and highway construction funds. The federal incentive worked. By the early 1970s, almost all the states had universal motorcycle helmet laws. Michigan was the first state to repeal its law in 1968, beginning a pattern of repeal, reenactment, and amendment of motorcycle helmet laws. In 1976, states successfully lobbied Congress to stop the Department of Transportation from assessing financial penalties on states without helmet laws.


and so they repeal it too...

[twigg]

lol ...

There will never be any persuading some to simply do the right thing.

Death tends to concentrate the mind though, and if it takes a law to prevent needless deaths of idiots, then it is a good law.

Yeah, idiots. Irresponsible people who should not be allowed on a motorcycle due to their apparent inability to take basic safety precautions.

Pointing out to me that people do other stupid things will not persuade me that it is okay to excuse this one

peace.

I'm done with this now.

[reddevilmedic]

well then, i guess the "idiots" in the 30 US states that dont have helmet laws may disagree...

[reddevilmedic]

The federal government in 1967 stated that states must enact a universal motorcycle helmet law to receive funding for highway safety. Oklahoma, like most states, complied but in 1976 opted to repeal its universal motorcycle helmet law.

"Subsection G of this section as enacted by laws 1967, c. 140, s 3, requiring all operators and riders of motorcycles to wear a crash helmet while operating a motorcycle was unconstitutional since it had no relationship to general public health, safety and welfare. Op.Atty.Gen. No. 68-267 (Dec. 31, 1968).

?????????

[flb_78]

Originally Posted by twigg

lol ...

There will never be any persuading some to simply do the right thing.

Death tends to concentrate the mind though, and if it takes a law to prevent needless deaths of idiots, then it is a good law.

Yeah, idiots. Irresponsible people who should not be allowed on a motorcycle due to their apparent inability to take basic safety precautions.

Pointing out to me that people do other stupid things will not persuade me that it is okay to excuse this one

peace.

I'm done with this now.

Many people consider long distance riding to be stupid but I don't want a law against it because some "idiot" doing an iron butt crashed. Didn't someone die in the last rally?

This was a fairly civil conversation until you entered it and started calling people stupid and idiots and it's responses like yours that keep us from being able to discuss other "controversial" topics on this board.

It would be nice if everyone could just express their opinion without it becoming childish and personal.

[twigg]

Methinks a few folk are feeling a tad defensive.

Please read back ... I did not call anyone stupid or idiotic. I described the act of riding a motorcycle without a crash helmet, as both.

However, most of my ire is and was directed not against people here, but against a State Legislature that abandoned it's responsibility for the safety of it's citizens, by rolling back important legislation.

Yes, I believe that riding a motorcycle without head protection is both stupid and idiotic, however, if you feel it more civil I would happily exchange those pejorative terms for "grossly irresponsible".

Defending such actions as part of our "Freedoms" is simply nonsensical. Clearly you are free to choose, in a State that allows such choices, but it isn't an exercise of "Freedom". Freedoms are fought for, and died for. Irresponsible behaviour should not be equated to this.

I said nothing to all the folk who had previously declared that they made a personal choice to willingly put themselves in danger of death, or more severe injury. They make that choice, it's a matter for them.

However, it is also a fact (like it or not), that extended hospital stays, and years of rehab are not paid for just by your insurance premiums, they are paid for by us all, and I am perfectly entitled to point that out without the sarcastic reply which has drawn no comment and must be, therefore, be your definition of "civil".

It's not mine.

As I said before ... Talk among yourselves. I expressed a view, and I am done with this subject now

[OldBear]

Originally Posted by twigg

Methinks a few folk are feeling a tad defensive.

Please read back ... I did not call anyone stupid or idiotic. I described the act of riding a motorcycle without a crash helmet, as both.

However, most of my ire is and was directed not against people here, but against a State Legislature that abandoned it's responsibility for the safety of it's citizens, by rolling back important legislation.

Yes, I believe that riding a motorcycle without head protection is both stupid and idiotic, however, if you feel it more civil I would happily exchange those pejorative terms for "grossly irresponsible".

Defending such actions as part of our "Freedoms" is simply nonsensical. Clearly you are free to choose, in a State that allows such choices, but it isn't an exercise of "Freedom". Freedoms are fought for, and died for. Irresponsible behaviour should not be equated to this.

I said nothing to all the folk who had previously declared that they made a personal choice to willingly put themselves in danger of death, or more severe injury. They make that choice, it's a matter for them.

However, it is also a fact (like it or not), that extended hospital stays, and years of rehab are not paid for just by your insurance premiums, they are paid for by us all, and I am perfectly entitled to point that out without the sarcastic reply which has drawn no comment and must be, therefore, be your definition of "civil".

It's not mine.

As I said before ... Talk among yourselves. I expressed a view, and I am done with this subject now

Also, please remember that the $20K in medical coverage required by this law is, literally, Nothing. A helicopter ride to the ER and the first 30 minutes of treatment will take care of that, from then on..... I agree that people have to make their own choices, but please, for you own sake and the sake of those who care about YOU, "think" before you ride. Ride safe and watch out for the cages!!

[wes0778]

"Those convinced against their will are of the same opinion still."

[reddevilmedic]

sorry twigg, but you did call people who ride without their lids "idiots". dont backpeddle your stance now....if you put a helmet on a wreckless human, you still have a wreckless human. i would bet that the intelligence of the rider has nothing to do with the amount of riders who die in accidents. i would guess that the accident, probably, occured because of several other reasons. like, faulty equipment, rider fatigue, or dui. the fact is, that people ride like that ,with or without their helmets. and, as a result of those conditions, they are more likely to be involved in an accident, greatly increasing the likelyhood of serious injury or death. regardless, of whether they wear a lid or not. so maybe the point should be about education, not legislation.

[Yammer Dan]

If I had stayed at home the morning of my accident I may have missed it!! I'm stupid enought to want to go to work. I will not voice my opinion on this any more!!


But without this I have no doubt I would have been DEAD!! All I've got to say.

[Venturous]

Originally Posted by Yammer Dan

But without this I have no doubt I would have been DEAD!! All I've got to say.

Well, at least you are not brain dead, well.........at least not completely, anyway.
RandyA