the eye of Nova&#39;s mind

Yep, that's pretty much what they're saying. And, frankly, they're right, as I see it. Perhaps it's brutal, but a person has to be responsible for their own life and welfare. I consider our inability to buy hot coffee without a warning/ walk on a bridge without 8 ft fences a sign that we aren't capable of understanding and making determinations about dangerous behavior, and I think it will have the same effects on us as the antibacterial over-reaction, causing people to be weaker against allergens and bacteria later in life.

In canada, they actually have cliffs without signs or fences, y'know, unaltered. Crazy, ain't it?

From:

pigfish.livejournal.com

What are "unhelmeted" riders saying? "I have the freedom to kill myself"?

Not only this, but they're also saying "you better drive extra carefully around me, cuz if you hit me with your car, you'll still get prosecuted for vehicular manslaughter, even though if you had been wearing a helmet, you might not have died". If two cars collide, odds are no one will die. If a car hits a motorcycle, that cyclist is likely squished. The libertarian in me says it's nobody's business if i don't wear a helmet, but I sure as hell don't want to go to jail because someone ELSE didn't want to wear one.

From:

I don't know. I've never had a problem with seat belt laws. This is probably because when my sister was 16 and learning how to drive, I was nine and recognized immediately the usefulness of seat belts. This was before there were mandatory laws, even.

Perhaps it's brutal, but a person has to be responsible for their own life and welfare.

And society figures into that equation not at all?

Are you similarly opposed to airbags and other safety technologies?

From:

Yes. These people feel the same way.

From:

Oh, don't get me wrong, I use air bags, helmets, seat belts, etc. Just because I think mandatory self-safety laws (as requirements with civil or criminal penalties) are stupid does not mean I think societal solutions are wrong. Technically speaking, you can turn off at least the passenger side airbag (though clearly that's for another purpose entirely).

The point can be made that the same impulse that has people creating legal requirements for a person to wear a helmet when riding are the same that disallow any form of gay marriage - an assumption that one person has the right to determine what someone else can or cannot do with their own life, including throw it away.

I was told last night that swings may be disappearing from playgrounds due to danger concerns. Yes, swings. How long have -they- been around, again?

From:

I really wouldn't have that much of a problem with that position if people in America actually sat down and confronted their feelings about death. But they do not. The American culture is replete with items to distract the American person, to entertain hir, to keep hir from thinking about hir own mortality.

If people actually understood that riding helmetless meant taking one's life into one's hands, I wouldn't have a problem with it. But we live in a society where people feel that "it can't happen to me." "I won't get in an accident." People aren't actually taking the gravity of the situation into consideration.

From:

"People don't see that they're sinning and will go to hell for having sex with someone of the same gender. People aren't actually taking the gravity of the situation into consideration.'"

See what I mean?

From:

Eh, prove to me that sin exists. Then we can talk.

From:

You don't actually expect the pentagon to get facts straight, do you?

From:

Clearly, I don't believe the comment. The point isn't whether or not the consequence is actual or perceived, it is that people have the right and duty to determine their own fate and accept whatever consequences occur from those decisions, so long as they aren't making those same decisions for someone else.

(and yes, clearly there is a limit to this 'hard rule', because no action or person exists in a vacuum.)

From:

I would argue that riding helmet-less doesn't simply mean you're taking your own life in your hands, but you're freely giving it to other people. It's very easy for someone else to accidentally kill you through no fault of your own, if you choose to ride helmet-less. It's almost like giving a young child a gun and locking yourself in a room with them.

From:

They're not quite the same. This is how I see things.

You have a vehicle that has the same hazards as a convertible: no head protection. How do you deal with this?

Well, in a convertible, you just take it as a hazard. Personally, I'd go for the hardtop convertible, if possible. But as far as motorcycles go, well, there's a very easy way to protect oneself, and that's with a helmet.

Now, to make sure that everyone wears a helmet, we draft these laws that say that if you don't, you'll get a ticket. Wow! A fine!

A fine is perfectly reasonable weighed against the possibility of preventable death. (And not the death of a potential life, but a real, living, flesh and blood adult.)

I mean, if you're against these regulations, then why even have padded steering wheels or windshields or any of these items?

From:

One is a requirement we make of the automotive industry regarding their products, to make them as safe as reasonably possible. I say reasonably, because we could be driving cars that cap at 30 mph and have bumpers on all sides - as is, we accept that driving a car has a potential for fatality, just like playing baseball or ridiing a bike or anything else.

Why do we not wear helmets when driving convertibles? What makes it a less reasonable precaution in a vehicle that, as you have said (and I agree), provides very little head protection?

You're fining someone for not taking care of their own life, which should be their own responsibility. That's like making suicide a criminal offense. Oh wait, it is.

I don't agree that the "logical conclusion" of saying that safety is a personal responsibility is that all vehicles should come standard with the least amount of safety possible. If I had a motorcycle (and I've considered it), I'd be wearing true cycle gear with the armored spine and a full helmet, and I think someone's a fool for doing otherwise - I just think the choice is mine to make, whether I fully accept the potential consequence or not.

From:

Mm, that has some merit, but a head injury isn't the only way people die in motorcycle accidents, yet wearing shorts and no shirt is common enough.

The same issue of putting your life in the hands of other drivers is an everyday concern, whether you're driving a car or riding a motorcycle, helmetted or helmetless. People hit motorcyclists, and they will be more likely to die from it than if they were in another kind of vehicle, that is (I believe) a fact. We all have the potential to die because we get on the road with other people pushing thousands of pounds around at insane speeds. I don't think that it is what i'd call a safe or sane behavior.

Of course, I also agree that any lawsuits presented by the family of the deceased motorcyclist relating to his death would be/should be dismissed, as he made the choice to ride that way.

From:

I don't disagree that we all could die in car accidents. My point is that driving a car is a relatively low-risk behavior compared to riding a motorcycle with no helmet.

In any case, we're not discussing how a shirt could save the life of a motorcycle victim. It couldn't. Not a cotton or cotton/poly blend, anyway... ;)

From:

DON'T BESMIRCH COTTON!

Okay, just kidding. :) I'm saying we aren't required to wear spine protection, like many safe motorcyclists do. Something I consider very important to preventing spinal injury, and something I would want to be wearing if I was the motorcyclist. And that's beside the point.

The point is, who decides what is high risk behavior requiring regulation to protect us from ourselves, and what is low risk behavior where we can freely take our life into our own hands, and what is the defining reason for this "bright line"?

Or is it all relative? Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is certainly more dangerous than riding in a car, but it is less dangerous than other everyday tasks we accomplish with less fuss (shall I look for stats? We both know they're out there). Who is the decider, and what is the criteria?

From:

What every day tasks do we all accomplish that are more dangerous?

I do see your point. And I do think it is all relative. It isn't anyone's job to protect us from ourselves as far as anything we can do. We just have to hope that our parents taught us well. These rules generally only apply to people who would otherwise be too stupid or ignorant to know that they're not just risking their own lives, but others.

By the way, Lord knows I love cotton. But I don't expect it to protect me from pavement should I fall on it.

And people wear *spine* protection?!

From:

It's totally awesome.

Ask chuck to show you his.

protection, I mean.

This is just gettnig worse. :D

From:

cabell.livejournal.com

The other problem is that people don't always DIE when they're not wearing helmets/seatbelts/etc. Sometimes they just get seriously injured and cost a lot of money. As someone who would like to see national healthcare for all, even though we don't have it now, it wouldn't make much sense for me to be against safety laws.

From:

I wouldn't mind national health care - I'd pay more taxes for that.

From:

guttaperk.livejournal.com

I believe that seat belt laws are ethically supportable where the government pays for the costs of the injured (like in my country), and ethically over-restrictive otherwise.

From:

guttaperk.livejournal.com

{Shrug}

From their viewpoint, it is one.

From:

Well, I don't think riding in a convertible is similar to riding in a motorcycle. It's not like it's very likely that a convertible will flip over or turn on it's side...

From:

Clearly, you having ridden in a convertible unicycle.

From:

Are there any non-convertible unicycles?

From:

The question isn't whether one can get one that doesn't convert so much as finding one with a roof in the first place.

From: