So much gear up top , so little protection down below...

Message

swatter555 · #31 Post by **swatter555** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 5:18 pm

Zoo, I wonder if you were to work as an EMT in Florida during the summer months would change your opinion? I love hearing stories about how minor accidents turned out to be fatal because a helmet was infringing on that riders freedom....

But hey, live your own life.

#32 Post by **Jamers!** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 5:59 pm

ZooTech wrote:
And besides, this is one of the few bike forums that hasn't banned me yet!

good thing too, wouldnt have half as many intresting and insightful posts to read if ya werent here. Not to mention wed all miss out on the pictures of that nice bike you post every now and again.

JWF

Ninja Geoff · #33 Post by **Ninja Geoff** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:08 pm

I wish there was a way to go helmetless, but still have the protection of the helmet. Helmetless FTW! But safety FTW too. I guess I'll take a helmet plz.
mmph "procreating" cages and damn crashing, if it weren't for those things, and the ocasional june bug/stick/rock/mc donald's cup, flip-flops would be considered too much gear.

Gummiente · #34 Post by **Gummiente** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:31 pm

ZooTech wrote:Ahhh, Gummi, my favorite TMW member!

Gotta burst your bubble here, 'cause the feeling just ain't mutual.

ZooTech wrote:I see you haven't lost your talent for missing the point and coming after me. I'm flattered.

And you haven't lost your talent for obscuring the point under a smokescreen of defensive comments when taken to task. And you should be flattered, you know I don't normally waste my time on lost causes. You're just too zany to resist sometimes.

Gummiente wrote:Spend just five minutes browsing the Soap Box and it will become clear that a good 90% of the folks here are liberal in their thinking. "It's their body", "It's their right to choose", and "It's nobody's business" are just a few of the things you'll hear while reading through those threads. However, God forbid someone spots a motorcyclist who's missing even one of the aforementioned items, because that would necessitate the creation of an entire thread (there are dozens of them every week) for everyone to join in with the name calling (i.e. squids) or other judgemental behavior.

Welcome to the big, wide, bad world of the Internet, Zoomie. It's a place where many people are free to post their own opinions about anything. Maybe some day you'll realise that not everyone sees the world through your eyes (I thank your God for that!).

ZooTech wrote:It's just a double-standard, Gummi. Now, have fun twisting this all around like you do, and don't forget to add some witty quip at the end about how you find me entertaining or whatever. It's good stuff. Like, Dave Chappelle caliber material.

It's a talent I've learned from you on all topics ranging from motorcycles to religion and beyond. But, ok, we'll skip all that and go right to the part where you attempt to further twist the whole conversation to make it look like you're the victim while you back down. Don't forget to say things like "I was just offering my subjective opinion" and "unless you have something else witty to say, I consider the matter closed".

Gummiente · #35 Post by **Gummiente** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:36 pm

ZooTech wrote:Being a mere "motorcyclist" yourself, you probably wouldn't understand...

This coming from a guy who considers motorcycles as a "luxury item".

Ok, Zoomie, here's the question - pay attention, now - if SweetTooth is by your definition a "mere motorcyclist", what do you consider yourself to be? I am SO waiting to hear the answer on this one!

The question, one more time, in case you missed the point:

if SweetTooth is by your definition a "mere motorcyclist", what do you consider yourself to be?

Mintbread · #36 Post by **Mintbread** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:52 am

ZooTech wrote:It's an elitist mentality that permeates this entire forum. A lot of people here live in non-helmet-law states and take advantage of it. Swing by Ohio if you ever get the chance and attend ANY motorcycle event. You'll find that the vast majority shows up in jeans, t-shirts, and sunglasses (and a big ol' smile!). Those folks are known as "bikers", not "squids". Being a mere "motorcyclist" yourself, you probably wouldn't understand...

I would love to see you eat your words shortly after you eat some gravel. To consider yourself better than people who wear protective gear rates right up there as one of the most nonsensical, illogical pieces of tripe I have had the displeasure of reading on this board. Keeping in mind I have read just about every post Verm has made, you have excelled.

Sev · #37 Post by **Sev** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:05 am

Zoo has more fun not wearing gear then I do when I wear gear.

Because I am scared to die, and he is not. That is why I wear gear. Because I am scared.

Loonette · #38 Post by **Loonette** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:29 am

I'm glad this hasn't boiled over yet. Just take it easy, guys.

When I see someone in the type of gear that Sweet Tooth described, I do view it as a curiosity. And the type of judgment I feel isn't the type where I believe that the person is less than me, or that they should somehow be punished by the cosmos for what they are doing (to themselves), but rather I'm able to observe them and realize that I wouldn't be comfortable at all without my helmet. When I see someone without a helmet, I cringe inside. But only because I'm thinking of how being helmetless would make me feel. Thinking about the other rider is, again, more of a curiosity to me. Then the feeling passes, and I ride on.

Some here have discussed how it's not cool to have a passenger in less gear than the rider - wouldn't want to bring preventable harm to the passenger. What about not having a passenger at all? Aren't you taking full responsibility for their safety once they hop on the seat? My kids are already talking about riding with us, and there's a part of me that can picture summers full of road trips with the family, but another part of me realizes that once they're on the bike, there's a new element of unnecessary risk in their lives - and I would be the one allowing it.

Making choices about how to take care of ourselves and others is very difficult. Those of us with kids might understand this a bit more (and parents are judged harshly in all arenas of life). I usually don't wear much more than jeans on my legs. So I'm taking a pretty good risk of massively f'ing up my legs in some way. Maybe bad enough that I can't do much with them. And I don't need to see someone else with a mangled limb to better understand what could happen. I know what could happen. So even I am inconsistent with my standards.

Cheers,
Loonette

-Holiday · #39 Post by **-Holiday** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:41 am

I really really like cheesecake.

BigChickenStrips · Fri Apr 21, 2006 4:03 am

not trying to fan the flames but my oppinion is: i do think insurance is a valid point. im not trying to open the "helmets can cause head trauma because they are heavy" debate again. im simply stating, people who wear safety gear are to SOME DEGREE less likely to be injured as badly in certain common types of accidents. and if i pay for insurance (be it car/motorcycle/life/health) i will end up paying more because some people didnt want to wear gear that could have saved them.

im not saying gear will save you or even help in all crashes

im not saying i think im better than you because i wear gear

i am saying it isnt "just about personal freedom" because what you do or dont do does affect my checkbook.

all that being said, if you dont want to wear a helmet, thats your choice and other than the big "O Ring" checks i (with a clean driving record) have to write for insurance it doesnt affect me.