Gravitymaster 0 #1 March 23, 2005 BRIAN DICKERSON: No brain our gain, Senate tells bikers March 21, 2005 BY BRIAN DICKERSON FREE PRESS COLUMNIST These are dark times for champions of the right to die. Jack Kevorkian is behind bars. Oregon's experiment with physician-assisted suicide is under siege by religious zealots in the U.S. Justice Department. And Congress is groping frantically for ways to interpose itself between brain-damaged Terri Schiavo and the husband Florida courts recognize as her legal surrogate. But fear not, libertarians: The right to die is alive and well in Michigan! All you need is a motorcycle license and, if you live elsewhere, a willingness to spend your last tourist dollars in the Great Lakes State. In an extraordinary display of bipartisan nincompoopery, the state Senate struck a blow last week for those who yearn to dash their brains out on Michigan highways. Eleven Republicans joined 10 Democrats in voting to repeal a state law requiring motorcyclists to wear helmets, a change the Senate's only physician, Kalamazoo Republican Tom George, said would double the number of annual motorcycle fatalities in Michigan. Ride free and die Not that those who supported the bill are cravenly kowtowing to bikers. In an amendment that explicitly recognizes the increased liability foisted on Michigan hospitals, the Senate also voted to require that every biker carry medical insurance. George and Sen. Bev Hammerstrom, R-Temperance, who opposed the repeal, had suggested that each cyclist be required to carry $350,000 in medical coverage. The Senate majority settled on $10,000, an amount that should more than cover the lifetime medical care most serious closed-head injury victims require -- as long as they don't live through the first night. But if the helmet law repeal seems likely to burden trauma centers and the taxpayers who subsidize them, it's also a boon to Michiganders awaiting vital organ transplants. In emergency rooms, where seriously injured riders are privately known as donorcyclists, the no-helmet crowd is prized as a rich source of youthful hearts, livers and kidneys, among other organs that remain well preserved long after brain death. If only lawmakers had thought to add a requirement that all helmet-less cyclists agree to donate their organs. And why not require donorcyclists to sign papers declining extraordinary lifesaving measures, so that that deserving organ recipients aren't kept waiting unnecessarily? A piece of the action Not everyone will buy the suggestion that repealing the helmet law advances the right-to-die agenda. Many lawmakers who can't abide the government coming between a man and his motorcycle wouldn't hesitate to get between Terri Schiavo and her physicians, if only the courts would let them. Allowing healthy people to dash their brains out on the open road is one thing; after all. Letting a brain-damaged woman die in privacy is quite another. For one thing, donorcyclists generate a lot more bar and restaurant revenue. According to those who want to repeal the helmet law, Michigan forfeits many of those dollars to states that don't mandate helmets. If our state wants its fair share of the biker market, they argue, it should worry less about the donorcyclists' skulls and more about their wallets. Of course, some of Kevorkian's champions used to argue that authorizing physician-assisted suicide would make Michigan a magnet for other states' terminally ill. There'd be jobs and tax revenues galore, an assisted-suicide clinic in every town big enough to have its own post office. The thing is, I always figured they were kidding. Contact BRIAN DICKERSON at 248-351-3697 or dicker@freepress.com. http://www.freep.com/news/metro/dickerson21e_20050321.htm Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,452 #2 March 23, 2005 I voted I don't support the repeal, because I only support it with adequate proof of ongoing adequate medical insurance. And if you have such insurance, well, I still reserve the right to roll my eyes when you drive past Yes, it's contradictory. Such is life. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #3 March 23, 2005 QuoteI voted I don't support the repeal, because I only support it with adequate proof of ongoing adequate medical insurance. And if you have such insurance, well, I still reserve the right to roll my eyes when you drive past Yes, it's contradictory. Such is life. Wendy W. I'll let you have your right to roll your eyes, but I really hate wearing helmets. Yes, I know it's stupid; yes, I know I should wear one, yada yada yada; I'm still not going to. I do have good health insurance, but evn I didn't, I still wouldn't wear a helment. It's just not the same riding ...This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #4 March 23, 2005 QuoteI voted I don't support the repeal, because I only support it with adequate proof of ongoing adequate medical insurance. And if you have such insurance, well, I still reserve the right to roll my eyes when you drive past Yes, it's contradictory. Such is life. Wendy W. I always ride with a helmet because it's the law in Virginia. Were the law ever repealed, I would ride mostly with a helmet but I want that to be my decision, not the Govt. I have no problem with providing proof of adequate insurance, but I think there should be minimum requirements whether on wears a helmet or not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,452 #5 March 23, 2005 I feel naked, the bad kind of naked, on my bike without a helmet. Heck, I'd even rather use a fullface than a half-shell. Used to jump a pro-tec until I got a fullface skydiving helmet recently. But, then, I've used my skydiving helmet -- had one break, had one dented. Glad it wasn't my head in either case. Nope, not consistent. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #6 March 23, 2005 QuoteI feel naked, the bad kind of naked, on my bike without a helmet. Heck, I'd even rather use a fullface than a half-shell. Used to jump a pro-tec until I got a fullface skydiving helmet recently. But, then, I've used my skydiving helmet -- had one break, had one dented. Glad it wasn't my head in either case. Nope, not consistent. Wendy W. But at least it's your decision........ for now. Would you support a required minimum medical insurance for skydivers? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markd_nscr986 0 #7 March 23, 2005 She should be allowed to die........without government intervention and/or intrusion if that was her intention And people should be allowed to make a choice regarding helmets I personally choose to wear one,and a Bell helmet that I was wearing some time back probably saved my life or at the very least prevented a serious head injury......... My concern with regards to those that choose not to wear a helmet,WE the taxpayer in a lot of instances, foot the bill for their "choice" should they incur a serious head injury and require long term care.If they take responsibility for their choice not to wear a helmet,they should also take responsibility for the possible consequences of that choice.My 2 cents worth.Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #8 March 23, 2005 Quote My concern with regards to those that choose not to wear a helmet,WE the taxpayer in a lot of instances, foot the bill for their "choice" should they incur a serious head injury and require long term care.If they take responsibility for their choice not to wear a helmet,they should also take responsibility for the possible consequences of that choice.My 2 cents worth. I wholeheartedly agree with that. I understand what I'm getting into and don't expect the public to may for my stupidity, which is why I got the best health plan my company offers. I think the same should go for everything else .... (ie: smoking) ... canada has the right idea there, tax cigarettes, and then use that tax to foot the medical bill for smokers.This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #9 March 23, 2005 QuoteShe should be allowed to die........without government intervention and/or intrusion if that was her intention And people should be allowed to make a choice regarding helmets I personally choose to wear one,and a Bell helmet that I was wearing some time back probably saved my life or at the very least prevented a serious head injury......... My concern with regards to those that choose not to wear a helmet,WE the taxpayer in a lot of instances, foot the bill for their "choice" should they incur a serious head injury and require long term care.If they take responsibility for their choice not to wear a helmet,they should also take responsibility for the possible consequences of that choice.My 2 cents worth. Fair enough. So, if tomorrow, the Govt. passed a law that dictated USPA set up an insurance program that was mandatory for all skydivers participate in, you would be in favor of such a law? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #10 March 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteShe should be allowed to die........without government intervention and/or intrusion if that was her intention And people should be allowed to make a choice regarding helmets I personally choose to wear one,and a Bell helmet that I was wearing some time back probably saved my life or at the very least prevented a serious head injury......... My concern with regards to those that choose not to wear a helmet,WE the taxpayer in a lot of instances, foot the bill for their "choice" should they incur a serious head injury and require long term care.If they take responsibility for their choice not to wear a helmet,they should also take responsibility for the possible consequences of that choice.My 2 cents worth. Fair enough. So, if tomorrow, the Govt. passed a law that dictated USPA set up an insurance program that was mandatory for all skydivers participate in, you would be in favor of such a law? How about changing the parameters slightly, to make it simply that all skydivers show proof of insurance. Wouldn't want to be a burden on the taxpayers, would we?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #11 March 23, 2005 Supporting Terri's right to die is different from what's going on right now. There is no tangible proof of her wishes. Her "right to die" cannot be properly evaluated or established. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #12 March 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteShe should be allowed to die........without government intervention and/or intrusion if that was her intention And people should be allowed to make a choice regarding helmets I personally choose to wear one,and a Bell helmet that I was wearing some time back probably saved my life or at the very least prevented a serious head injury......... My concern with regards to those that choose not to wear a helmet,WE the taxpayer in a lot of instances, foot the bill for their "choice" should they incur a serious head injury and require long term care.If they take responsibility for their choice not to wear a helmet,they should also take responsibility for the possible consequences of that choice.My 2 cents worth. Fair enough. So, if tomorrow, the Govt. passed a law that dictated USPA set up an insurance program that was mandatory for all skydivers participate in, you would be in favor of such a law? How about changing the parameters slightly, to make it simply that all skydivers show proof of insurance. Wouldn't want to be a burden on the taxpayers, would we? I'm O.K. with changing the parameters so USPA wasn't involved, but I fail to see how the taxpayers would be burdened either way. If anything, requiring skydivers at least have a catastrophic policy would unburden taxpayers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #13 March 23, 2005 Ride free and die or jump free and die: you should not be a burden on the American taxpayer. When I first started riding, I had an old biker tell me, "Helmets are good for an open casket". I was thinking about that the one and only time I hit 100 mph on my Roadking without a helmet. Over the years, I have met four people who claimed a helmet saved their life (they were well under 100mph). spell correctionDo your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BikerBabe 0 #14 March 23, 2005 I chose the top option. Terri Schiavo...that's been commented on enough. As for helmet laws...let Darwin do his work, I say. Sorry if it's harsh, but if you're not smart enough to wear a helmet, maybe you shouldn't be in my gene pool anymore. Sorry, unformed. My life and brain are much more important to me than "feeling the wind in my hair". Errr...besides, my hair would get way too tangled if I didn't wear a helmet...and it's all about how you look, right? The funniest thing I see is bikers out riding on a cold day, all bundled up....and not wearing a helmet. I wonder if they know how much warmer they'd be with something protecting their head and face? As for the idiot who wrote that article, he's obviously never been on a motorcycle in his life, and his use of the term "donorcyclist" (in an obvious attempt to be witty) makes me immediately discount his opinion. He obviously thinks all motorcyclists are tattooed, bearded leather-clad men who wear Hell's Angels T-shirts as they ride their bikes (with after-market straight pipes, of course) to the local watering hole every day to get rowdy and intimidate the passers-by with either sheer volume or ridiculously low idle speed...Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #15 March 23, 2005 QuoteSupporting Terri's right to die is different from what's going on right now. There is no tangible proof of her wishes. Her "right to die" cannot be properly evaluated or established. The details and legal aspects of her situation are being discussed in other threads. What I'm interested in hearing is how those who think a person has a right to determine their own fate, square that with imposing personal choice i regards to motorcycle helmets, seatbelt etc. The point is, at what point is Govt. intervention acceptable? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markd_nscr986 0 #16 March 23, 2005 QuoteFair enough. So, if tomorrow, the Govt. passed a law that dictated USPA set up an insurance program that was mandatory for all skydivers participate in, you would be in favor of such a law? Shouldn't have to get to that point........ less government the better in my bookif there was some way to make it part of the USPA membership dues,that would be best case scenario.If something like that was not feasible then government involvement as a last resort. It's OK for people to skydive,ride bikes without helmets,scuba dive to 200Ft,rockclimb,para-glide,etc. BUT if they are injured as a result of their choice of activity why should we feel obligated to pick up the tab? Dont you think people should take financial responsibility for their actions and the consequences of their actions?Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #17 March 23, 2005 QuoteI chose the top option. Terri Schiavo...that's been commented on enough. As for helmet laws...let Darwin do his work, I say. Sorry if it's harsh, but if you're not smart enough to wear a helmet, maybe you shouldn't be in my gene pool anymore. Sorry, unformed. My life and brain are much more important to me than "feeling the wind in my hair". Errr...besides, my hair would get way too tangled if I didn't wear a helmet...and it's all about how you look, right? The funniest thing I see is bikers out riding on a cold day, all bundled up....and not wearing a helmet. I wonder if they know how much warmer they'd be with something protecting their head and face? As for the idiot who wrote that article, he's obviously never been on a motorcycle in his life, and his use of the term "donorcyclist" (in an obvious attempt to be witty) makes me immediately discount his opinion. He obviously thinks all motorcyclists are tattooed, bearded leather-clad men who wear Hell's Angels T-shirts as they ride their bikes (with after-market straight pipes, of course) to the local watering hole every day to get rowdy and intimidate the passers-by with either sheer volume or ridiculously low idle speed... I personally agree with all your points. I just don't want the Govt to dictate it. I do admit to not wearing a helmet a few times whan I was in a state that didn't have helmet laws, but only when riding in rural, uncongested areas and/or at lower speeds. I wonder how many who are for a persons right to die and repeal of helmet laws are also supporters of assisted suicide? I also am interested in the justifications of those who support enforcement of helmet laws who are also against assisted suicide. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites unformed 0 #18 March 23, 2005 QuoteAs for helmet laws...let Darwin do his work, I say. Sorry if it's harsh, but if you're not smart enough to wear a helmet, maybe you shouldn't be in my gene pool anymore. Tongue Sorry, unformed. My life and brain are much more important to me than "feeling the wind in my hair". Errr...besides, my hair would get way too tangled if I didn't wear a helmet... Heh, I agree. That's why I shaved my head. QuoteThe funniest thing I see is bikers out riding on a cold day, all bundled up....and not wearing a helmet. I wonder if they know how much warmer they'd be with something protecting their head and face? To hell with that. I like riding, but I'm not riding in the cold or in the rain. Shit's painful. That's why I also own a car. The bike is for sunny days flying down country roads .... oh yeah, and taking down to the local watering hole and antagonizing the passersbys. This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #19 March 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteFair enough. So, if tomorrow, the Govt. passed a law that dictated USPA set up an insurance program that was mandatory for all skydivers participate in, you would be in favor of such a law? Shouldn't have to get to that point........ less government the better in my bookif there was some way to make it part of the USPA membership dues,that would be best case scenario.If something like that was not feasible then government involvement as a last resort. It's OK for people to skydive,ride bikes without helmets,scuba dive to 200Ft,rockclimb,para-glide,etc. BUT if they are injured as a result of their choice of activity why should we feel obligated to pick up the tab? Dont you think people should take financial responsibility for their actions and the consequences of their actions? I absolutely believe in personal responsibility. I also have a Medical Directive and insurance to cover me even if I'm injured skydiving. How many skydivers do you think would continue to jump if an insurance requirement cost $3000. per year? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #20 March 23, 2005 QuoteHe obviously thinks all motorcyclists are tattooed, bearded leather-clad men who wear Hell's Angels T-shirts as they ride their bikes (with after-market straight pipes, of course) to the local watering hole every day to get rowdy and intimidate the passers-by with either sheer volume or Whats wrong with those kinds of bikers? Personally I get a kick out of all the different biker cultures within the biker world. Oh, as a side note, my bike is LOUD but that has proven to be handy. Since putting straight pipes on my metric, I've yet to have someone try to run me over, its been over a month now like that (since I pulled the baffles). When even with aftermarket pipes and baffles it was a nearly daily occurance.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #21 March 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteHe obviously thinks all motorcyclists are tattooed, bearded leather-clad men who wear Hell's Angels T-shirts as they ride their bikes (with after-market straight pipes, of course) to the local watering hole every day to get rowdy and intimidate the passers-by with either sheer volume or Whats wrong with those kinds of bikers? Personally I get a kick out of all the different biker cultures within the biker world. Oh, as a side note, my bike is LOUD but that has proven to be handy. Since putting straight pipes on my metric, I've yet to have someone try to run me over, its been over a month now like that (since I pulled the baffles). When even with aftermarket pipes and baffles it was a nearly daily occurance. Plus, when someone cuts you off, loud pipes let you pull up along side them at the next light and growl at them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #22 March 23, 2005 QuotePlus, when someone cuts you off, loud pipes let you pull up along side them at the next light and growl at them. Don't need pipes for that. I'll tell them exactly what they did and let them know that I'm fairly upset about it. Usually they get the point.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Nightingale 0 #23 March 23, 2005 I think helmet laws should be repealed... simply because if someone wants to be stupid, let them be stupid. We have too many laws that protect individuals from their own stupidity and waste government time and resources on enforcement. I think the decision about Terri Schiavo should rest with her husband and it isn't anyone else's business. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites justinb138 0 #24 March 23, 2005 QuoteI think helmet laws should be repealed... simply because if someone wants to be stupid, let them be stupid. We have too many laws that protect individuals from their own stupidity and waste government time and resources on enforcement. I think there should be helmet laws, but similar to the ones in Texas. Helmets are mandatory, but exemptions are available. To get the exemption, a few criteria have to be met, one of them is a certain amount of insurance. I've never seen the laws actively enforced here. Most of the guys I've seen riding w/o helmets are usually doing 130mph down the highway, and probably don't even have a license to ride the damn things anyway.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites flyingferret 0 #25 March 23, 2005 I echo Wendy here, well....partially. I do not support the repeal of all helmet laws. I support the repeal with a few stipulations. Not because I think you don't have a right without stipulations, rather because I think it is a compromise and only fair to tax payers who are paying the bills whether they 'should' or not. I used to never ride without a helmet. Now I do at times. Honestly I like the feeling without a lot better, but it makes me nervous depending on the riding situation. Part of it is a risk you accept, just like skydiving. There are cases where if you go down, you are jacked, helmet or not, it will be BAD. I will not wear a full face. I am aware of the added face protection afforded by the chin piece, but it just kills the thrill. Much like full face skydiving helmets...I want to be connected to the wind or I wouldn't be in either sport. Edited: to add agreement with the above, which I meant to mention. I ride in Texas, I agree with the systems of exemptions and think it makes sense. The downside is enforcement. I dont have the exemption techinically, although I meet ALL criteria for qualifying, via insurance or instruction. But they will never pull you over to find out unless they have a BIG reason to do so.-- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Gravitymaster 0 #17 March 23, 2005 QuoteI chose the top option. Terri Schiavo...that's been commented on enough. As for helmet laws...let Darwin do his work, I say. Sorry if it's harsh, but if you're not smart enough to wear a helmet, maybe you shouldn't be in my gene pool anymore. Sorry, unformed. My life and brain are much more important to me than "feeling the wind in my hair". Errr...besides, my hair would get way too tangled if I didn't wear a helmet...and it's all about how you look, right? The funniest thing I see is bikers out riding on a cold day, all bundled up....and not wearing a helmet. I wonder if they know how much warmer they'd be with something protecting their head and face? As for the idiot who wrote that article, he's obviously never been on a motorcycle in his life, and his use of the term "donorcyclist" (in an obvious attempt to be witty) makes me immediately discount his opinion. He obviously thinks all motorcyclists are tattooed, bearded leather-clad men who wear Hell's Angels T-shirts as they ride their bikes (with after-market straight pipes, of course) to the local watering hole every day to get rowdy and intimidate the passers-by with either sheer volume or ridiculously low idle speed... I personally agree with all your points. I just don't want the Govt to dictate it. I do admit to not wearing a helmet a few times whan I was in a state that didn't have helmet laws, but only when riding in rural, uncongested areas and/or at lower speeds. I wonder how many who are for a persons right to die and repeal of helmet laws are also supporters of assisted suicide? I also am interested in the justifications of those who support enforcement of helmet laws who are also against assisted suicide. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #18 March 23, 2005 QuoteAs for helmet laws...let Darwin do his work, I say. Sorry if it's harsh, but if you're not smart enough to wear a helmet, maybe you shouldn't be in my gene pool anymore. Tongue Sorry, unformed. My life and brain are much more important to me than "feeling the wind in my hair". Errr...besides, my hair would get way too tangled if I didn't wear a helmet... Heh, I agree. That's why I shaved my head. QuoteThe funniest thing I see is bikers out riding on a cold day, all bundled up....and not wearing a helmet. I wonder if they know how much warmer they'd be with something protecting their head and face? To hell with that. I like riding, but I'm not riding in the cold or in the rain. Shit's painful. That's why I also own a car. The bike is for sunny days flying down country roads .... oh yeah, and taking down to the local watering hole and antagonizing the passersbys. This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #19 March 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteFair enough. So, if tomorrow, the Govt. passed a law that dictated USPA set up an insurance program that was mandatory for all skydivers participate in, you would be in favor of such a law? Shouldn't have to get to that point........ less government the better in my bookif there was some way to make it part of the USPA membership dues,that would be best case scenario.If something like that was not feasible then government involvement as a last resort. It's OK for people to skydive,ride bikes without helmets,scuba dive to 200Ft,rockclimb,para-glide,etc. BUT if they are injured as a result of their choice of activity why should we feel obligated to pick up the tab? Dont you think people should take financial responsibility for their actions and the consequences of their actions? I absolutely believe in personal responsibility. I also have a Medical Directive and insurance to cover me even if I'm injured skydiving. How many skydivers do you think would continue to jump if an insurance requirement cost $3000. per year? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #20 March 23, 2005 QuoteHe obviously thinks all motorcyclists are tattooed, bearded leather-clad men who wear Hell's Angels T-shirts as they ride their bikes (with after-market straight pipes, of course) to the local watering hole every day to get rowdy and intimidate the passers-by with either sheer volume or Whats wrong with those kinds of bikers? Personally I get a kick out of all the different biker cultures within the biker world. Oh, as a side note, my bike is LOUD but that has proven to be handy. Since putting straight pipes on my metric, I've yet to have someone try to run me over, its been over a month now like that (since I pulled the baffles). When even with aftermarket pipes and baffles it was a nearly daily occurance.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #21 March 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteHe obviously thinks all motorcyclists are tattooed, bearded leather-clad men who wear Hell's Angels T-shirts as they ride their bikes (with after-market straight pipes, of course) to the local watering hole every day to get rowdy and intimidate the passers-by with either sheer volume or Whats wrong with those kinds of bikers? Personally I get a kick out of all the different biker cultures within the biker world. Oh, as a side note, my bike is LOUD but that has proven to be handy. Since putting straight pipes on my metric, I've yet to have someone try to run me over, its been over a month now like that (since I pulled the baffles). When even with aftermarket pipes and baffles it was a nearly daily occurance. Plus, when someone cuts you off, loud pipes let you pull up along side them at the next light and growl at them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #22 March 23, 2005 QuotePlus, when someone cuts you off, loud pipes let you pull up along side them at the next light and growl at them. Don't need pipes for that. I'll tell them exactly what they did and let them know that I'm fairly upset about it. Usually they get the point.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Nightingale 0 #23 March 23, 2005 I think helmet laws should be repealed... simply because if someone wants to be stupid, let them be stupid. We have too many laws that protect individuals from their own stupidity and waste government time and resources on enforcement. I think the decision about Terri Schiavo should rest with her husband and it isn't anyone else's business. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites justinb138 0 #24 March 23, 2005 QuoteI think helmet laws should be repealed... simply because if someone wants to be stupid, let them be stupid. We have too many laws that protect individuals from their own stupidity and waste government time and resources on enforcement. I think there should be helmet laws, but similar to the ones in Texas. Helmets are mandatory, but exemptions are available. To get the exemption, a few criteria have to be met, one of them is a certain amount of insurance. I've never seen the laws actively enforced here. Most of the guys I've seen riding w/o helmets are usually doing 130mph down the highway, and probably don't even have a license to ride the damn things anyway.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites flyingferret 0 #25 March 23, 2005 I echo Wendy here, well....partially. I do not support the repeal of all helmet laws. I support the repeal with a few stipulations. Not because I think you don't have a right without stipulations, rather because I think it is a compromise and only fair to tax payers who are paying the bills whether they 'should' or not. I used to never ride without a helmet. Now I do at times. Honestly I like the feeling without a lot better, but it makes me nervous depending on the riding situation. Part of it is a risk you accept, just like skydiving. There are cases where if you go down, you are jacked, helmet or not, it will be BAD. I will not wear a full face. I am aware of the added face protection afforded by the chin piece, but it just kills the thrill. Much like full face skydiving helmets...I want to be connected to the wind or I wouldn't be in either sport. Edited: to add agreement with the above, which I meant to mention. I ride in Texas, I agree with the systems of exemptions and think it makes sense. The downside is enforcement. I dont have the exemption techinically, although I meet ALL criteria for qualifying, via insurance or instruction. But they will never pull you over to find out unless they have a BIG reason to do so.-- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
AggieDave 6 #20 March 23, 2005 QuoteHe obviously thinks all motorcyclists are tattooed, bearded leather-clad men who wear Hell's Angels T-shirts as they ride their bikes (with after-market straight pipes, of course) to the local watering hole every day to get rowdy and intimidate the passers-by with either sheer volume or Whats wrong with those kinds of bikers? Personally I get a kick out of all the different biker cultures within the biker world. Oh, as a side note, my bike is LOUD but that has proven to be handy. Since putting straight pipes on my metric, I've yet to have someone try to run me over, its been over a month now like that (since I pulled the baffles). When even with aftermarket pipes and baffles it was a nearly daily occurance.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #21 March 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteHe obviously thinks all motorcyclists are tattooed, bearded leather-clad men who wear Hell's Angels T-shirts as they ride their bikes (with after-market straight pipes, of course) to the local watering hole every day to get rowdy and intimidate the passers-by with either sheer volume or Whats wrong with those kinds of bikers? Personally I get a kick out of all the different biker cultures within the biker world. Oh, as a side note, my bike is LOUD but that has proven to be handy. Since putting straight pipes on my metric, I've yet to have someone try to run me over, its been over a month now like that (since I pulled the baffles). When even with aftermarket pipes and baffles it was a nearly daily occurance. Plus, when someone cuts you off, loud pipes let you pull up along side them at the next light and growl at them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #22 March 23, 2005 QuotePlus, when someone cuts you off, loud pipes let you pull up along side them at the next light and growl at them. Don't need pipes for that. I'll tell them exactly what they did and let them know that I'm fairly upset about it. Usually they get the point.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #23 March 23, 2005 I think helmet laws should be repealed... simply because if someone wants to be stupid, let them be stupid. We have too many laws that protect individuals from their own stupidity and waste government time and resources on enforcement. I think the decision about Terri Schiavo should rest with her husband and it isn't anyone else's business. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #24 March 23, 2005 QuoteI think helmet laws should be repealed... simply because if someone wants to be stupid, let them be stupid. We have too many laws that protect individuals from their own stupidity and waste government time and resources on enforcement. I think there should be helmet laws, but similar to the ones in Texas. Helmets are mandatory, but exemptions are available. To get the exemption, a few criteria have to be met, one of them is a certain amount of insurance. I've never seen the laws actively enforced here. Most of the guys I've seen riding w/o helmets are usually doing 130mph down the highway, and probably don't even have a license to ride the damn things anyway.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyingferret 0 #25 March 23, 2005 I echo Wendy here, well....partially. I do not support the repeal of all helmet laws. I support the repeal with a few stipulations. Not because I think you don't have a right without stipulations, rather because I think it is a compromise and only fair to tax payers who are paying the bills whether they 'should' or not. I used to never ride without a helmet. Now I do at times. Honestly I like the feeling without a lot better, but it makes me nervous depending on the riding situation. Part of it is a risk you accept, just like skydiving. There are cases where if you go down, you are jacked, helmet or not, it will be BAD. I will not wear a full face. I am aware of the added face protection afforded by the chin piece, but it just kills the thrill. Much like full face skydiving helmets...I want to be connected to the wind or I wouldn't be in either sport. Edited: to add agreement with the above, which I meant to mention. I ride in Texas, I agree with the systems of exemptions and think it makes sense. The downside is enforcement. I dont have the exemption techinically, although I meet ALL criteria for qualifying, via insurance or instruction. But they will never pull you over to find out unless they have a BIG reason to do so.-- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
