Rollin without a helmet is loud and windy

[RockBottom]

I didn't talk about bicyclists, skiers, smokers etc because this is a thread about motorcyclists, not bicyclists, skiers, or smokers.

As a general principle, I favor maximum freedom for everyone in every endeavor so long as they accept personal reponsibility for it and don't expect any costs which their freedom entails to be spread among people who elect to not exercise the freedom.

Your argument seems to be that people other than motorcyclists do irresponsible things. That is true, but I don't think it changes or refutes my point about motorcyclists. It doesn't make sense to me to say we can't talk about risk and responsibility among motorcyclists because non-motorcyclists also act irresponsibly.

My argument actually asks, "why pick on motorcyclists?" I only point out that in is disingenuous to propose insurance restrictions only on a small set of the population that acts irresponsibly. Particularly when that small set is insignificant to the overall insurance pool. The insurance argument is often brought up as a way to persuade a group to make their risk assesments the way another group would like them to. If insurance costs were really a significant factor, there are a hundred other irresponsible activities that should be targeted ahead of the unhelmeted motorcyclist.

When you decide you want to make a special case for the unhelmeted motorcyclist, where does it end? I know actual people who suggest that the same restrictions be applied to all motorcyclists. After all, everyone knows how dangerous motorcycling is. Hence, my description of the only insurable people on the planet being a group of nuns in the midwest

As I said, I am a big proponent of helmet use. At the same time, I also like to participate in several activities that some people would consider risky or dangerous. I tend to get a bit defensive when folks start proposing "solutions" for my personal risk assesment.

We'll agree to disagree. Your point seems to be unless a way is found to hold everyone on earth who undertakes risky behavior responsible for it, then no one who undertakes risky behavior should be held responsible for it. I just don't buy that logic.

[RockBottom]

BTW- As I always do in these threads, I would like to remind everyone that I do wear a helmet 99.9% of the time and recommend that others do as well.

I wear a helmet 100% of the time in NJ, and not only because it is the law.

I do actually think it is pretty dumb not to take reasonable precautions and I think helmets are a part of reasonable precautions.

But people point to costs about healthcare and then they point to unhelmeted motorcyclists.... And well as Flynrider said, this is really insignificant in terms of costs compared to the number of people in the hospital every year for diabetes caused by being overweight for many years in a row or for that matter the number of people in the hospital because they choose to smoke for years on end.

When you list priorities for saving costs and lengthening the productive good years of life for people - motorcycling is small beans. The priority should be on things that affect large numbers of people, like diabetes and emphysema.

RhadamYgg

This is like saying we shouldn't arrest pickpockets because there are bigger thieves out there.

The reason I take the position I do is because I believe that as a general principle, people should bear the costs of their own decisions rather than spread the costs among a group, not as part of some overarching strategy to make the world a safer place.

[koji52]

BTW- As I always do in these threads, I would like to remind everyone that I do wear a helmet 99.9% of the time and recommend that others do as well.

I wear a helmet 100% of the time in NJ, and not only because it is the law.

I do actually think it is pretty dumb not to take reasonable precautions and I think helmets are a part of reasonable precautions.

But people point to costs about healthcare and then they point to unhelmeted motorcyclists.... And well as Flynrider said, this is really insignificant in terms of costs compared to the number of people in the hospital every year for diabetes caused by being overweight for many years in a row or for that matter the number of people in the hospital because they choose to smoke for years on end.

When you list priorities for saving costs and lengthening the productive good years of life for people - motorcycling is small beans. The priority should be on things that affect large numbers of people, like diabetes and emphysema.

RhadamYgg

This is like saying we shouldn't arrest pickpockets because there are bigger thieves out there.

The reason I take the position I do is because I believe that as a general principle, people should bear the costs of their own decisions rather than spread the costs among a group, not as part of some overarching strategy to make the world a safer place.

By your argument, the 98% of the US population who doesn't ride a motorcycle could say that if any biker gets into an accident - helmet or no helmet - they should not bear the costs of their hospital bill, should the rider have no insurance and not pay their bill. We all are taking unnecessary risks in riding motorcycles, why should the VAST majority of the population bear our costs? What about welfare and Medicaid? Some people make the choice to not work and apply for welfare, yet working tax payers end up footing the bill.

Your argument assumes some extreme and "ideal" capitalistic society where everyone pays for their own way of life. That's likely never to work out.

[Gummiente]

Hey, which oil should I use in my bike - synthetic or dino?

[t_bonee]

C'mon Gummiente. Everybody knows that you immediately drain the oil out of your bike when taking delivery and put in Amsoil.

[captinamerica]

why can we not be held resonsible to our selves. why does big brother have to step in a take care of us. Everyone on the street is suppsed to have insurance incase they destroy someone elses property or health. we dont need a bunch of politicians micro managing our lives. maybe they ban bikes alltogether. If you havent figured out they dont have us in mind you should get your head checked. especially if you live in Canada "the big nanny state" have the gun controll laws stopped one crime. according to statistics the answer is no. But here in texas where they installed an express lane to the death penalty and have a carry concealed law. violent crime is actually margenally down. thats according to the statistics. Big Brother dont know everything infact they are ussually way out of touch.

[goodies]

The helmet law is really no different than the seat belt law.

[Wrider]

Personally I don't like to ride without a helmet. It's quieter, you can hear vehicle/bike noises better, and I figure why not be protected... Other than that, Gummi, you of all people should know to mix it 50/50. That way you get the long lasting of synthetic and the lube qualities of dino!
Wrider

[dean owens]

The helmet law is really no different than the seat belt law.

i hate seat belt laws. don't try to protect me from myself. drivers, i understand a law there. but that's it.

back to the debate... both sides have points. i agree that a private company can charge what they want to charge for insurance. if they want to charge more for a "risky" behavior they have the right to do that. but keep in mind that everything is a slippery slope. many non-smokers didn't really care when "government" decided they should start taxing and creating laws to protect people from themselves. now some of the same stuff is happening to fast food. it's all over the place. government is not supposed to protect us from ourselves.

also, who here really thinks their premiums cover what you need? insurance is us paying a portion knowing that not everyone needs it until there is an emergency. we either do something stupid or someone does something stupid to us or a freak accident happens. at that point, our small amount (plus what everyone else pays into insurance) starts to pay for our treatment. right now i know i'm paying for someone else's treatment. and later, maybe someone else will be paying for mine. it's how it works.

[ChemicalTaste]

I wear a helmet because it looks cool.

No really.. a side effect of wearing a full faced racing helmet while riding a sport bike is that it looks cool. Like I said, its a side effect, not the primary reason I wear it.