Posted by B1ackwater on June 19, 2006, 7:08 am
(cnn)
MELBOURNE, Florida (AP) -- Motorcycle fatalities involving riders
without helmets have soared in the nearly six years since Gov. Jeb
Bush repealed the state's mandatory helmet law, a newspaper reported
Sunday.
A Florida Today analysis of federal motorcycle crash statistics found
"unhelmeted" deaths in Florida rose from 22 in 1998 and 1999, the
years before the helmet law repeal, to 250 in 2004, the most recent
year of available data.
Total motorcycle deaths in the state have increased 67 percent, from
259 in 2000 to 432 in 2004, according to National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration statistics.
Records, though, also show motorcycle registrations have increased 87
percent in Florida since Bush signed the helmet law repeal July 1,
2000.
. . . . .
Let's see now ... an 87 percent increase in riders but
only a 67 percent increase in fatalities. Frankly, that
looks as if repealing the helmet law SAVES lives. Why
does the article try to imply otherwise ? Writ by a
nanny-state 'liberal' no doubt ...
Now, in truth, the pavement is a LOT harder than your
head. Helmets are a big help and everybody ought to
wear one - but the whole "free country" paradigm says
it should STILL be YOUR choice.
The decrease in fatalities probably stems from two causes.
First of all, a lot more new riders are taking the motorcycle
safety courses. These teach some useful stuff. Secondly the
current popularity of "chopper" shows on TV have likely
increased the general AWARENESS of motorcycles amongst the
driving public.
Now if we could just get rid of the SUV-driving soccer moms
with their cell in one hand, their breakfast in the other,
make-up kit in the third hand and ..... well ... why don't
the nanny-staters pass laws against THEM ???
Posted by Joe on June 19, 2006, 7:21 am
Could be a fun thread...
Might be my only post...
If the increased insurance rates and other costs that are created by "free
choice injuries, deaths, and sicknesses" could be passed on to those
involved in the risky behavior, then I might actually agree that everyone
has a free choice to wear what they want, smoke what they want, and so on
and so forth... Every time someone winds up in the hospital with no
insurance and lung cancer or the government and/or insurance companies
support a family because someone fell over at a red light and bonked their
noggin' on the curb and died, my cost of living goes up.
Sometimes the needs of the many dilute the "rights" of the few IMHO.
Joe in Northern, NJ - V#8013-R
Currently Riding The "Mother Ship"
Ride a motorcycle in or near NJ?
http://tinyurl.com/5apkg
http://www.youthelate.com
Cheap and easy phone service: http://tinyurl.com/fjmoe
Posted by Bama Brian on June 19, 2006, 11:55 am
Joe wrote:
> Could be a fun thread...
>
> Might be my only post...
>
> If the increased insurance rates and other costs that are created by "free
> choice injuries, deaths, and sicknesses" could be passed on to those
> involved in the risky behavior, then I might actually agree that everyone
> has a free choice to wear what they want, smoke what they want, and so on
> and so forth... Every time someone winds up in the hospital with no
> insurance and lung cancer or the government and/or insurance companies
> support a family because someone fell over at a red light and bonked their
> noggin' on the curb and died, my cost of living goes up.
>
> Sometimes the needs of the many dilute the "rights" of the few IMHO.
That "free" hospital care only extends to Emergency Rooms - and they are
allowed to ship the patient off to someplace else just as soon as the
patient's condition has been stabilized. There's even one case on
record of the patient being dumped on a street corner by the cabbie who
was hired to transport him "elsewhere".
TANNSTAFL
Bama Brian
Libertarian
Posted by B1ackwater on June 19, 2006, 2:22 pm
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:21:15 GMT, "Joe"
>Could be a fun thread...
>Might be my only post...
>If the increased insurance rates and other costs that are created by "free
>choice injuries, deaths, and sicknesses" could be passed on to those
>involved in the risky behavior, then I might actually agree that everyone
>has a free choice to wear what they want, smoke what they want, and so on
>and so forth... Every time someone winds up in the hospital with no
>insurance and lung cancer or the government and/or insurance companies
>support a family because someone fell over at a red light and bonked their
>noggin' on the curb and died, my cost of living goes up.
Ah ... so the people who never USE their freedoms, the ones
who live only the dullest, blandest, inactive lives are the
ones who get to set the standard for what liberties the rest
of us can enjoy ??? That's a bean-counters mentality - and
that mentality should NEVER be applied to freedoms because
the consequences are terrible.
Not having put a microscope on YOUR life, I've no idea how
much YOUR persuit of happiness might be costing ME. I won't
ask. I'm subsidizing your freedoms, you're subsidizing mine.
It's all good.
On motorcycle helmets I'll split the difference with you, just
to be charitible - insist that people who ride without helmets
buy a special injury insurance package. Florida makes 'em buy
$10,000 worth ... and since most of that goes unused it
actually LOWERS your insurance price and any govt 'burden'
is more than covered. Yea, one guys wreck may cost $200,000 -
but MOST insured riders aren't gonna crash. Their payments
go into "the pot" and wind up covering those expensive cases
and then some.
Insurers often raise premiums on 'special risk' people - their
combined overpayment more than covering injuries to their class
of risk. There's potential for abuse there however - exploiting
'unpopular' risks such as smoking and HIV, gouging such people
because they think nobody will care.
Ya know, I don't think that skydiver is REALLY cutting too
deep into your wallet ... could just be you're a closet
nanny-stater or bean-counter and can't help but try to
make everyone elses life as dull as yours - "If *I* wouldn't
do it then NOBODY needs to do it !".
Sometimes the diff between 'life' and 'living' is the diff
between 'need' and 'want'. Live a little ....
>Sometimes the needs of the many dilute the "rights" of the few IMHO.
Didn't the Ayatollah say something like that - how western
freedoms were interfering with strict islamic purity and
thus ought to be eliminated .....
Posted by Joe on June 19, 2006, 7:26 pm
>>Sometimes the needs of the many dilute the "rights" of the few IMHO.
> Didn't the Ayatollah say something like that - how western
> freedoms were interfering with strict islamic purity and
> thus ought to be eliminated .....
Simply dismissing a statement because someone of questionable integrity
spoke it at one time or another is a poor way to set personal policy IMHO.
I didn't say I was right when I posted my stuff, I simply stated what I
believed. What amazes me is that there is such an underlying hatred - or
bitterness - or "chip-on-the-shoulder" that boils up against anyone who
disagrees with the helmet freedoms many cherish. It's never simply a
discussion of facts (or at least rarely), but almost always a defensive,
argumentive response that is received. Nobody learns well from a bully and
bully-ish responses simply make me think I might be smarter than others.
<GRIN>
Okay... Well, maybe the smarter part is incorrect, but the rest is my gut
feeling on the subject. I neither lobby for or against helmet laws... I
know I might not have all the facts... But there are so many people who
simply think they know all they need to know and that is the first step to
idiotic behavior.
Joe in Northern, NJ - V#8013-R
Currently Riding The "Mother Ship"
Ride a motorcycle in or near NJ?
http://tinyurl.com/5apkg
http://www.youthelate.com
Cheap and easy phone service: http://tinyurl.com/fjmoe
XML Sitemap
>
> Might be my only post...
>
> If the increased insurance rates and other costs that are created by "free
> choice injuries, deaths, and sicknesses" could be passed on to those
> involved in the risky behavior, then I might actually agree that everyone
> has a free choice to wear what they want, smoke what they want, and so on
> and so forth... Every time someone winds up in the hospital with no
> insurance and lung cancer or the government and/or insurance companies
> support a family because someone fell over at a red light and bonked their
> noggin' on the curb and died, my cost of living goes up.
>
> Sometimes the needs of the many dilute the "rights" of the few IMHO.