But to be fair, let’s have a new law and new insurance. We’ll have a special insurance policy & company that covers 100% of all injuries caused by motorcycle injuries without helmets- and* only* them. If you have such a policy, fully paid up; then you get to ride without a helmet. Otherwise, you have to wear one. Fair? Get the law on the ballot and I’ll vote for it.
Amazon Floozy Goddess- you’re in Canada, so it’s even worse for you- about 100% of all head injuries caused by failure to wear a helmet are paid by your tax dollars- and you (and us Americans too) have no choice at all over whether or not to pay those taxes. Thus, since I am forced (by law) to pay for idiots who get brain damage when they made that “adult choice” to not wear a helmet, bikers thus should be forced by law to wear the damn helmets.
But not if you get that law passed. Good luck on that.
Eh, that’s starting down a slippery slope, there. Should Canada ban smoking because the taxpayers have to pay to treat the resulting health problems? How about banning fast food and ice cream? What about motorcycles in general - they’re much more dangerous than cars, with few benefits.
You’re saying kids don’t understand that a head-on collision with the street can be harmful or fatal until they reach tenth grade? No offense, but it sounds like all the kids you’ve met are retarded.
Based on observation, many people of all ages don’t understand what happens when a high-speed head meets a rock-solid street or sidewalk. Or perhaps they just don’t see how a rapidly moving 2-wheel vehicle that’s weaving among traffic can possible tip over. Either way, they are dumb.
If printing emotionaly charged letters gets people to vote a certain way I think it would be illogical not to do so. The goal is to get votes. As long as you do so legaly without lying or being deceptive I support the tactic.
I’d support a pitting of dumbasses who allow emotional letters like that to prevent them from making a rational decision.
Or perhaps they see how it can happen, and what the consequences can be, but they just overestimate their own ability to prevent it from happening. (Not that it isn’t fun to make exaggerated guesses about people’s stupidity, but once in a while we should try to keep it real.)
[QUOTE=Mr2001]
Or perhaps they see how it can happen, and what the consequences can be, but they just overestimate their own ability to prevent it from happening. (Not that it isn’t fun to make exaggerated guesses about people’s stupidity, but once in a while we should try to keep it real.)[/QUOTE[
I didn’t exaggerate, and I didn’t say anything about anyone being stupid, did I? I drew a conclusion based on an observation.
You mean you actually meant that seriously? You think there are people out there who literally don’t understand what will happen when they fly into the street head on? What, do they think they’ll just bounce off without a scratch? Do they think they’ll punch right into the ground and tunnel through the earth all the way to China?
No, I think you were exaggerating. Not a big deal, we all do it. But most of us realize when we’re exaggerating and when we aren’t.
Actually, yes. You wrote “Either way, they are dumb.”
