It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Buckle up in your car or get a ticket, yet motorcylists don't have to wear helmets?

page: 8
2
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
As a 2 time Motorcycle accident recipient I would suggest 2 things..

First was a Cadillac pulling out in front of me on his red light.. I smashed him with my 750 Virago at 40 mph.. I flew through the crossing and landed on my back and banked my head off the asphalt (wearing a helmet). I was fine aside from wearing a denim coat ( road rash from hell ).

Second was a 2am crash were some drunk pulled out from a local pub ( was a corner mini-mall with 2 exits .. she came out the wrong one at the wrong time ). I was on my 550 Yamy Vision .. she stopped infront of me when seeing the other rider pass in front of her.. I slid right into her Suzuki SK ..slid right off the bike and was standing after the crash.

I was NOT wearing a brain bucket at that crash..but If I was ..the Doc said the extra OZs of the helm would have caused more serious injury to my neck ..

At the time I was in a "Right to wear" state ( meaning you didnt Have to wear a helmet ).

This has already been posted in this thread..Ins. Co. Dont want to lobby mandatory Headgear for Motos because it increases the cost of Major rehab for bike riders..

Let them die because its less expensive to let the Life Ins. pay then there 200k policies ..

If you don't already know....If you ride .. your Dead on the policy.. ( unless you are taking out a 2m policy on your husband
).

Jadu.




posted on May, 30 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Reading the OP, I can tell that you do not ride a motorcycle.

First of all, most of North America has manditory helmet laws (which I hate). Where it gets TOO HOT to wear helmets, they become optional.

When I am on my bike, I can avoid serious accidents... bikes are a lot more agile than cars plus we are much better drivers (aware).

I love the posts where people are like "I LOVE TPTB for making us wear them!" If they were such 'assholes', they would have kept the cars solid steel (with no crumple zones) and would have never put those seatbelts into vehicles in the first place. Is it not obvious that TPTB love you very, very much? Very.

P.S. I ride a bike and If I want to die, I don't need the help of car drivers to help me kill myself. So please stop cutting us off just to be pricks because we get ahead of you in traffic. Want to get places faster? GET A BIKE... stop being deuchebags. Next time I'm on the shoulder and someone cuts me off... I will park my bike, reach to your ignition and throw your f'n keys accross the highway. Good luck being on time for work that day.

P.P.S. Most drivers in North America need to GROW SOME EYEBALLS!



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
There have been at least one group that has lobbied against helmet laws for the sake of choice . I just can't remember their name.
Bikers have been very vocal against helmet laws and it's hard to argue that helmets make the roads safer for anyone but the user. I wonder if there was enough "noise" made about seat belts while they were voted on if they would have passed in most states.

Too late now, I doubt you could get them repealed because of the revenue they provide.

My guess is that as a greater percentage of people turn to 2 wheels instead of 4 due to rising gas prices, there will be another look at helmet laws before long, and they won't listen to the people this time who said they didn't want to wear one.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by illuminatitanimulli
Lots of times helmets cause deaths in motorcycle accidents. It should be up to the rider.


Same with cars and seat belts, what's your point?



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   
How many people here are "depopulation" theorists? I'd like to hear an explanation for seat belts if TPTB are trying to kill us off. Seriously...explain this to me.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   
It's because of the insurance industry lobby. They want fewer people to die so they can pay out less in benefits while keeping insurance rates the same. Seat belts DO save lives, and the insurance industry likes it that way. Seriously, it's about the money first and foremost. If they started paying out lots and lots of claims to motorcycle fatalities, you bet they'd push for helmet laws across the board. And they'd get them.

I rode a bike for several years almost exclusively, and I wore a helmet, flak jacket, etc. every time. I sold it. Why? Because people in cars have no respect for motorcycles, and they can't even see them a lot of the time. I had so many close calls due to other people's negligence that I decided I didn't want to spin that roulette wheel any more. I had the skills to get out of the way, and to mitigate the threat by riding defensively, but still.. too much risk. Most motorcycle accidents are due to operator error anyway - excessive speed, inexperience - it's usually something the rider did to put themselves in a situation where they wrecked.



edit on 30-5-2011 by AwakeinNM because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by romanmel
 


To me that's exceeding their boundaries when enforcing laws. It's a clear set-up to bring in money for the state. That's the problem I see with the seat belt law. Anyone can forget to buckle-up even those people that have a habit of doing it. It only take one slip up for an officer who wants to be a prick to pull you over and ticket you. Shouldn't our police officers enforce more important laws than this cash cow law?

I'm all for enforcing children to be buckled-up because their are parents out their that really shouldn't be parents. Too many kids having kids and many of them don't want to be bothered with taking care of them.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons
 


There's no money in busting kids who break into cars.......There is only money in murder cases when the victim's family puts up a reward....



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by romanmel
 


To me that's exceeding their boundaries when enforcing laws. It's a clear set-up to bring in money for the state. That's the problem I see with the seat belt law. Anyone can forget to buckle-up even those people that have a habit of doing it. It only take one slip up for an officer who wants to be a prick to pull you over and ticket you. Shouldn't our police officers enforce more important laws than this cash cow law?

I'm all for enforcing children to be buckled-up because their are parents out their that really shouldn't be parents. Too many kids having kids and many of them don't want to be bothered with taking care of them.


Hate to say this but it is a CONTROL issue. It is about money for sure, but it is more about governmental control and YOU not finding out that YOU are the power behind the government!! If you knew that your auto is your private property and you did not NEED a license to use it and that you didn't have to have tags on it, or use a seatbelt if you did not want to, then what would the government have control over? WE control the cops, they are SUPPOSED to protect and serve us and enforce "corporate ordinance" and fine comapnies for misuse of the roadway, because they use it FOR PROFIT and you and I don't. BUT, the government then would not be able to control everything if they couldn't control what WE do day to day. Get it?



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by zookey


What is the main cause of deaths / injuries in crashes?

Speed.

Why do you NEED to speed?



More tosh.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Thanks for swallowing all the propaganda though.


Originally posted by MegaMind
reply to post by cheesyleps
 


"laying down a bike" in my experience of hearing the expression really means having an accident in which the bike is no longer standing


I think people like the way it sounds as opposed to "I had a motorcycle accident"

BTW I had to "lay the motorcycle down" once - I ran too fast into a curve, froze up and went off the road into a grassy field. Whew! What luck! - only grass rash
- I was young and inexperienced. Saying I "laid the bike down" (so gentle sounding isn't it?) was a lot better for the ego than saying I crashed.


A helmet is a good idea. Road rash on the face or head wouldn't be fun. BTW what is up with these guys wearing shorts and flip flops while riding? My guess is they haven't come off their bikes yet and with the kind of reasoning and decision making they demonstrate in their choice of motorcycle gear it is probably just a matter of time before they do. Ouch! It isn't going to be nearly as pretty as they think they look while riding.
edit on 30-5-2011 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-5-2011 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)


I had thought of that, but in 90% of cases where I have heard the expression used it is implied that it was done purposely as an attempt to avoid hitting an obstacle. Maybe just pride at work I suppose.

Completely agree. Wouldn't wish an accident on any biker, but I wish they knew what the aftermath of a crash is really like. Would soon make them wear proper gear.

Sounds quite similar to the first time I "laid my bike down" came round a blind bend way too fast to find a Land Rover pulling out of a gate and blocking the road. Somehow managed to miss the car and go in the ditch. I came off and rolled for a bit, the bike somehow managed to land on its right and then pick itself up and drive straight on into a hedge. So she only actually lay down for a split second



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join