Re: I believe in 'freedom' from government -- COLORS

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:36:37 11/01/00 Wed
Author: Goldwing Tom
Subject: Re: I believe in 'freedom' from government
In reply to: Raven 's message, "I believe in 'freedom' from government" on 00:28:21 10/25/00 Wed

I don't like the government telling me what I can and cannot do. Helmet laws save lives but not money. It is a restriction of freedom that is based on presumed monetary factors that don't pencil out. Money should not be more important than freedom.

What this restriction has resulted in is a black market for substandard helmets and phony DOT stickers. Unquestionably, more people wear quality helmets because of the law, but many of us wore helmets even in the days one was not required. I also buckled up before it was required.

Not only have helmet laws created a black market, they merely increase the number of people who survive bike crashes. If that sounds cold blooded, it is arguable that increasing the severity of the accident which can be survived on a motorcycle costs us money.

A guy I met a while back who was severely brain damaged from a motorcycle wreck. He was wearing a helmet when he tried running from the cops, and lost control of his Kawasaki 900 at high speed. Those who know their bikes know the Kawi 900 is a very fast bike. One in good shape can probably go 0 to 120 in about seven or eight seconds. It's very likely he crashed at 80 or 90 MPH. His helmet was cracked badly in the accident. His skull would have been shattered without it.

He was trached, put on life support, pulled off life support, and came out of the coma about a month later. Today, he is alive, but his SSI disability check only covers his rent and beer and cigarettes for about ten days. After that, he relies on friends, and people whose path he crosses, for handouts.

Now we also have the social problem of him getting an unlivable income and inadequate attention.

I would rather not sacrifice the freedom for money when it really doesn't save us money, and creates a criminal element. It's more like passing on an opportunity to increase the quality of the gene pool.

> regulation. Most of it anyway. Unfortunately sometimes
> "dumb" people have to be told what to do for their own
> safety. And that of others. Like you said, no common
> sense. It would be fine with me that if these people
> who choose to ride without a helmet, were finacially
> secure enough to pay their own way if involved in a
> lengthy hospital stay. But we wind up paying for their
> "choice". So doesn't that give us a "choice" in the
> matter?
>
> And that is just a matter of money. What of those they
> leave behind? And their own lives which hopefully will
> not end up in a wheelchair? Leaving them to wonder for
> the remainder of their years, "what would my life be
> if only I had.......".

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

You're right, it does sound cold -- Raven, 02:18:04 11/05/00 Sun