Helmet vs No helmet

[cbigclarke]

Do you have an alternate point of view you can actually express?

Don't have to. Everyone else is doing just fine holding the line.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Younggun]

I know, right? A simple question and folks get mad and rather than counter with valid arguments, they attack and ask questions.

No one has yet answered the simple question I posed. Seems like it struck a nerve.......

Please tell me which question I have failed to answer.

 

[cbigclarke]

So I'll say it a different way.

Should those who fry turkeys for thanksgiving sign a waiver the the F'D does not have to respond if their house catches fire.

Your whole base argument relies on the assumption that no one will pay the medical bills. Do you have some source you can cite that shows evidence that motorcycle riders with out helmets don't pay their bills?

I have to say, this is the most ridiculous thing you've ever posted.

B I N G O

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[txinvestigator]

So I'll say it a different way.

Should those who fry turkeys for thanksgiving sign a waiver the the F'D does not have to respond if their house catches fire.

Your whole base argument relies on the assumption that no one will pay the medical bills. Do you have some source you can cite that shows evidence that motorcycle riders with out helmets don't pay their bills?

I have to say, this is the most ridiculous thing you've ever posted.

Actually it is not about medical bills, per se. And stop with the attacks. If you cannot argue without them I am done.

here is the point. You fry a turkey at your home. You drive that MC on public roads, roads we all pay for and share. Shall we eliminate all laws governing behavior on the roads? If you wanna ride your bike on your property or any other private property, then the govt should stay out of it. However, go upon the publicly owned, taxpayer funded roads and now you are fairly and properly subject to regulation. Can we at least agree one that basic principle without being specific?

 

[TxDad]

Last time I read, (and it was well over 10 years ago) there was a minimum amount of life insurance you were supposed to have. Or one other option that eludes me at the moment.

 

[txinvestigator]

Don't have to. Everyone else is doing just fine holding the line.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

So no, you don't. You object to my premise viscerally, and rather than form an opinion to express you make a facetious statement meant to ridicule.

I see....

 

[txinvestigator]

Last time I read, (and it was well over 10 years ago) there was a minimum amount of life insurance you were supposed to have. Or one other option that eludes me at the moment.

Yeah, Texas still has a helmet law. You must wear one unless you maintain minimum amounts of insurance or have taken an approved Motorcycle Safety Course. That fact is what prompted my question.

 

[Sugar Land]

Refresh my memory. What was the question again?

 

[Younggun]

Actually it is not about medical bills, per se. And stop with the attacks. If you cannot argue without them I am done.

here is the point. You fry a turkey at your home. You drive that MC on public roads, roads we all pay for and share. Shall we eliminate all laws governing behavior on the roads? If you wanna ride your bike on your property or any other private property, then the govt should stay out of it. However, go upon the publicly owned, taxpayer funded roads and now you are fairly and properly subject to regulation. Can we at least agree one that basic principle without being specific?

The last line of my post was a comment, not an attack. I'm surprised something like this would come from you. Don't be so sensitive about it, you have made similar statements to others for much less.

As to public roadways and tax funding. We have regulation and laws, no one is arguing that. You said yourself however, that no one is trying to ban anything. If it is such a problem they could simply require helmets for everybody.

You keep claiming its the tax payers footing the bill yet I have been the one to foot all the bills for my wife and children, with the help of insurance that I pay for. How is that on the tax payer? Do EMS not get payed unless they get a call? Do they not send a bill for that call?


You say frying a turkey is done on private property so it does not apply. Would they not respond until the fire spread to the neighbors house?

Your equations just aren't adding up and when applied equally to other activities you seem to be backing away.

 

[craigntx]

going to the store maybe not.
much furter yes I wear a lid

 

[TundraWookiee]

There really is no argument as to whether or not you should wear a helmet. It's very obvious that a protective barrier is safer than nothing. Now whether or not you wish to wear one is a call each person makes for themselves. Personally I wear a full face no matter what and think its pretty reckless for anyone not to but I don't believe in dictating how people choose to live or die. I think its ridiculous that I'm required to wear a seat belt in my car but have the option of wearing no protective gear on my bike. I want the option. How about we give people the opportunity to just make the right choices? Sure there are some that won't but that's just life.

Brought to you courtesy of Tapatalk

 

[txinvestigator]

Are you folks who don't want the govt to make you wear a helmet willing to sign a waiver allowing first responders and medical types to not be utilized if you suffer a head injury?

Please tell me which question I have failed to answer.

 

[txinvestigator]

Are you folks who don't want the govt to make you wear a helmet willing to sign a waiver allowing first responders and medical types to not be utilized if you suffer a head injury?

Refresh my memory. What was the question again?

lol

 

[Younggun]

That answer would be no.

It would seem our answers should be obvious based on the responses you've gotten.

 

[txinvestigator]

As to public roadways and tax funding. We have regulation and laws, no one is arguing that. You said yourself however, that no one is trying to ban anything. If it is such a problem they could simply require helmets for everybody.

So we agree on the basic premise that people operating vehicles on public roadways are subject to regulation, right?

 

[cbigclarke]

So no, you don't. You object to my premise viscerally, and rather than form an opinion to express you make a facetious statement meant to ridicule.

I see....

You got me..

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Dred]

Specifically what option? Who pays for the EMS, fire and police to respond? Your insurance?

Only had an ambulance respond once when my brother was hit by a car. Family was billed for that ride. Never had an emergency responder turn up as a result of my actions, so don't know if folks still get billed for these services.

Police and Fire are paid for. In fact I've worked up a fair bit of credit in 46 years of not using the services.

 

[RACER X]

Which wouldn't exist if they were wearing a helmet?

Either way they will have bills to pay. Just the ambulance showing up will be expensive. Will they wait to dispatch an ambulance until they can verify that the rider is wearing a helmet?

Shame it didn't work that way

Wonder which cost less to fix. An injury or a vegetable.

sent from my cell phone, far far away

 

[Younggun]

Shame it didn't work that way

Wonder which cost less to fix. An injury or a vegetable.

sent from my cell phone, far far away

Either way, it is on the responsible parties to pay the bill. If they do not it is not the fault of any other parties who are not involved.

Such is the reasoning for the life and medical insurance requirements.

 

[Younggun]

So we agree on the basic premise that people operating vehicles on public roadways are subject to regulation, right?

Shall we play games or will you make your point?