Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

[iced_theater]

I ride a motorcycle and I always wear a helmet. I don't think it should be a law, but I also think your an idiot if you don't wear one. A guy I work with doesn't wear one and rides while intoxicated as well. He got lucky that he didn't hurt himself more after he had a low speed crash and busted up his face some.

Oh, by the way. The Hayabusa is no longer the quickest bike. That honor now belongs to Kawasaki's ZX-14. Even though both are limited to 186 mph now.

 

[senecaripple]

freedom of choice! repeal the seat belt law, and the helmet law!

 

[bfg9000]

The object of making it law is to save the taxpayers money. People in accidents without seatbelts frequently end up with a long stay at the county hospital on the taxpayers' dime.

OTOH, unhelmeted motorcyclists not only tend to die, but provide a valuable public service as a source of healthy young organs suitable for transplantation. So purely from a societal benefits standpoint, helmets should be optional.

 

[nerdgineer]

...unhelmeted motorcyclists...provide a valuable public service...

LOL. A while back I read a similar argument for smoking (I think in a tobacco funded study for Czechoslovakian government). It said smokers contribute to Social Security but tend to die off before they get to collect any of it, so having smokers makes for a financially healthier retirement system, and it shouldn't be discouraged.

That report was so inflammatory (perhaps because it had truth in it) that everyone (including the tobacco industry) backed away from it real fast and covered it up.

 

[Mike Painter]

I'm with the above poster. If you don't want to wear a helemt or seatbelt...don't make me pay the insurance costs for your medical bills. Let me pay the bills for those that are injured with all their safety equipment.

Exactly.
A year after the helmet law went into effect in California, a local hospital shut down a head trauma unit for lack of business.

ATV riders (some as young as six) are makeing up part of that business these days and if there were mor horse back riders it would still be open.
(You're about ten times more likley to be injured horse back riding then on a motorcycle.)

 

[KingSmono]

Re: Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

For folks who don't want to wear safety equipment, is it a matter of not really knowing the risks involved (death, being turned into a quadraplegic, serious maiming, having your face scraped along the road until it looks like hamburger, etc or just having a june-bug hit your face at 70mph), or a rational decision that these risks are worth the momentary pleasure of being unrestrained?

regards,
Steve K.

Well put Steve! That just about perfectly sums up the biggest question I have for those who choose not to wear helmets when riding motorcycles.

-Allen

 

[senecaripple]

The object of making it law is to save the taxpayers money. People in accidents without seatbelts frequently end up with a long stay at the county hospital on the taxpayers' dime.

OTOH, unhelmeted motorcyclists not only tend to die, but provide a valuable public service as a source of healthy young organs suitable for transplantation. So purely from a societal benefits standpoint, helmets should be optional.

well, dont worry taxpayers! because i work, i pay my taxes, i have insurances for both vehicles, my job provides me with decent health care and workman's comp in the event i am incapacitated, and i have so many days in my bank that i could be out for a whole year before i need to borrow more.
and i am an organ donor as stated in my drivers license. i'm not sure if my organs are any good, doubt hanibal lecther would even want them!

 

[chmsam]

Re: Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

I've got no problems with people riding w/o helmets or driving w/o seatbelts as a personal choice, except for the added medical and legal costs.

Your insurance premiums for your entire lifetime most likely wouldn't cover the financial burden of even one serious head injury case for a rider w/o a helmet. Everyone contributes to paying for medical care, long term care, and rehab, not to mention increased insurance premiums for all, for an injury that would either have been avoidable or significantly lessened by wearing a helmet.

It's not like an insurance company keeps a serparate account for each client and that's the only money being used for that case and the company then makes up the difference out of the goodness of their heart. It's not like they don't recoup their losses and then calculate how many other injuries are liable to occur in the population, and then finally add in a hefty cushion to be sure that they're still going to make a healthy profit.

Here's a pro athelete who will need extensive rehab, probably more plastic surgery, etc. As much money as he makes, he won't pay these costs out of his own pocket. That's what insurance is for. And that's just one reason why we all pay through the nose.

If you claim that you want to be responsible for your own behavior, you should also be responsible for paying more for the (potential) consequences of it and let everyone else off the hook at least a little bit.

 

[savumaki]

freedom of choice! repeal the seat belt law, and the helmet law!

RIGHT ON!!!!!! as long as you do NOT ride on public roadways; when you do, you also accept the responsibility for others (being that it is public.)

Karl

 

[bfg9000]

Some countries allow insurers to deny claims if the police determine the insured was not wearing a seatbelt. This prevents everyone's insurance from going up, but then guess who foots the bill at the public hospital?

Considering all the aged boomers with new Harleys around, perhaps we could require helmet use only by those people whose organs are too old to be useful?

We would then still have the advantages of stupidity removing itself from the gene pool, as well as the availability of organs

. Something tells me it'd be a hard sell.

 

[twentysixtwo]

OTOH, unhelmeted motorcyclists not only tend to die, but provide a valuable public service as a source of healthy young organs suitable for transplantation. So purely from a societal benefits standpoint, helmets should be optional.

A friend who works in a hospital once told me that they call them "Donor-Cycles"

 

[cyberhobo]

Re: Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

Has anybody noticed the increase in motorcycle riders in the past 8 years. I think Americans are looking for some freedom or independent thought that has been stolen from them. Or, is it a silent rebellion of sorts? Don't know, just a theory.

 

[Mike Painter]

Some countries allow insurers to deny claims if the police determine the insured was not wearing a seatbelt. This prevents everyone's insurance from going up, but then guess who foots the bill at the public hospital?

Considering all the aged boomers with new Harleys around, perhaps we could require helmet use only by those people whose organs are too old to be useful?

We would then still have the advantages of stupidity removing itself from the gene pool, as well as the availability of organs

. Something tells me it'd be a hard sell.

Since most of EMS calls motorcycles riders "organ doners", your idea would just confuse the paramedics. :duck:

On the more serious side medicine is using more and more organs once considered to old in people.

It was hard work back then but I donated my body in 1963.(I would have had to pay to have my body shipped if I was more than 50 miles away.) I hoped it would be a waste of time and so far so good.

 

[metalhed]

As Carlos Mencia would say, " De De-De ".

Or, as Robert Heinlein said,

"Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by legislation. Stupidity is not a sin, the victim can't help being stupid. But stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death, there is no appeal and execution is carried out automatically and without pity."

Big Ben was lucky. Hopefully he'll learn from this and not be so stupid in the future.

 

[markdi]

Re: Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

I have started riding a Bicycle again to get rid of some of my 40 year old baby fat.

this thread reminds me that as soon as I have the money -
I will buy a brain bucket.

I am to old for brain surgery.


Hayabusa move over - a new king

and I bet this foot ball player could afford one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTT_Turbine_SUPERBIKE

 

[markdi]

Re: Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

I think the state/police are more concerned about making
their walletts fatter than my safety.

If the money that they pulled in for seat belt/helmet violators went to charity then I would have a different opinion.

 

[Gene]

Re: Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

I may be wrong but wasn't it just revealed that he was drinking when he crashed? Boy, sorry but I just flat get irritated when I see how PC has invaded every crack and cranny in our society. I've ridden motorcycles continuously since 1963 when I bought my first bike and most of those years were without a helmet. That was also while commuting every morning and afternoon in rush hour when I lived in L.A. Ever since my communist state of Kalifornia enacted mandatory helment wear, I've worn one.

I ride very responsibly and if I'm stupid enough to not wear one, so be it. It ticks me off that I now don't have that choice anymore. I don't expect anyone to pay my hospital bills if I crash and get injured but by damn if I chose not to, it should be MY choice not some damn libs "looking out" for me. It's safer to wear a helmet but this life we live here on earth is full of risks. We all now want "someone" to protect us in every little thing we do. It'll be only a matter of time until the libs make us wear helmets in cars.

Like these high profile motorcycle crashes, everytime there's a shooting somewhere, stricter and stricter guns laws are enacted and the libs won't be satisfied until they take all our firearms away. Believe it or not, I WAS a liberal democrat in the '60's. That however was when liberals wanted the government OFF our backs where now they want the government to dictate every little thing we do. I want the government to stay out of my life!

I'm sure now with this high profile case that the screams to return to mandatory helmet wear in Pennsylvania will be heard and the law will be reenacted. Then everyone can sleep a little better knowing that the dumb, moronic, "murdercycle" riders have to wear helmets again in Pennsylvania.

 

[Mike Painter]

Re: Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

I think the state/police are more concerned about making
their walletts fatter than my safety.

If the money that they pulled in for seat belt/helmet violators went to charity then I would have a different opinion.

It goes into supporting the state/police by charging those who break the laws. If it went into a charity, you would either have less protection from the police or higher taxes.

And if you have ever been on the scene of a nasty accident, maybe one where a five year old was not strapped in and the car rolled over him and he died on the way to the hospital, you would probably write tickets even if it didn't "fatten" your wallet. (It was my ambulance.)

 

[markdi]

Re: Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

A five year old should be in a child safety seat - I did not think we were talking about a child's right to choose.

It should be my choice to use or not to use a seat belt or a helmet.

I use both - but I should not be forced to by agent's of the state I live in who's wallets get fatter if I forget.

 

[turbodog]

Re: Steelers QB (Roethlisberger) in serious motorcycle crash and wasn't wearing a helmet!

But you see, it IS your choice.

You can choose to

1. have unprotected sex with an std-infected person

2. ride w/o helmet or seatbelts


But you need to expect consequences for these actions. Getting an STD for #1 or getting ticketed or more seriously injured for #2.


But what's not apparent at ALL to you is this:

It's the united *states* of america. If oregon/ca/etc has a helmet law, then MOVE to a state that doesn't! And then be glad that the laws are state-sponsored instead of federal.

In the end, it's ALWAYS your choice.


But, to comment on the first post.... I mean really! Is anyone actually surprised that a pro-sports player did something stupid?

A five year old should be in a child safety seat - I did not think we were talking about a child's right to choose.

It should be my choice to use or not to use a seat belt or a helmet.

I use both - but I should not be forced to by agent's of the state I live in who's wallets get fatter if I forget.