Motorcyclist's "beanie" helmuts finally banned


#juan
#1
In British Columbia motorcyclists are now banned from wearing so called "beanie"

or "skullcap" helmets. Violators will risk a $138 ticket.

G.F. Strong Hospital in Vancouver, houses hundreds of paraplegic and quadriplegic

motorcyclists who didn't think it was "manly" to use a proper helmet.

Who pays for their medical care? We do. I think the fine is too low considering

what the medical costs could be.
Last edited by #juan; Jul 6th, 2012 at 10:36 AM..
 
lone wolf
#2
The only advantage I've found in half-helmets was hearing anything over the bike....
 
Colpy
+2
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

In British Columbia motorcyclists are now banned from wearing so called "beanie"

or "skullcap" helmets. Violators will risk a $138 ticket.

G.F. Strong Hospital in Vancouver, houses hundreds of paraplegic and quadriplegic

motorcyclists who didn't think it was "manly" to use a proper helmet.

Who pays for their medical care? We do. I think the fine is too low considering

what the medical costs could be.

It is, after all, THEIR head.

Medicare should not be used as a bludgeon to force societal norms on people.
 
JLM
+1
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

In British Columbia motorcyclists are now banned from wearing so called "beanie"

or "skullcap" helmets. Violators will risk a $138 ticket.

G.F. Strong Hospital in Vancouver, houses hundreds of paraplegic and quadriplegic

motorcyclists who didn't think it was "manly" to use a proper helmet.

Who pays for their medical care? We do. I think the fine is too low considering

what the medical costs could be.

thumbs up!
 
TenPenny
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

It is, after all, THEIR head.

Medicare should not be used as a bludgeon to force societal norms on people.

That is true. I'd be in favour of eliminating seat belt laws, helmet laws, etc, and let people fend for themselves.
 
jariax
+1
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

In British Columbia motorcyclists are now banned from wearing so called "beanie"

or "skullcap" helmets. Violators will risk a $138 ticket.

G.F. Strong Hospital in Vancouver, houses hundreds of paraplegic and quadriplegic

motorcyclists who didn't think it was "manly" to use a proper helmet.

Who pays for their medical care? We do. I think the fine is too low considering

what the medical costs could be.

A great first step towards a safer society.
I am looking forward to the day that skydiving, rockclimbing, all contact sports, motor vehicles, and any food that exceeds recommended daily calorie intake are also banned.

Freedom is a small price to pay to increase our life span by 2.1%
 
lone wolf
#7
If I throw myself at the ground and miss, hug a rock, body check or get body checked into bliss or eat myself into blimphood, how am I making society less safe - unless I don't miss and society happens to be in my landing zone?
 
EagleSmack
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by jariax View Post

A great first step towards a safer society.
I am looking forward to the day that skydiving, rockclimbing, all contact sports, motor vehicles, and any food that exceeds recommended daily calorie intake are also banned.

Freedom is a small price to pay to increase our life span by 2.1%

For real?
 
Nuggler
+2
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

For real?


Everyone ran out of purple ink today.
 
#juan
+1
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

It is, after all, THEIR head.

Medicare should not be used as a bludgeon to force societal norms on people.

Societal norms??? Ever seen G.F. Strong hospital? Their large parking lot is usually full
of motorcycles. I think it could be said that these turkeys are using the medical system to
bludgeon the rest of us. The high cost of their surgeries and rehab treatment is made even
higher because few of these people pay any medicare premiums. My wife and I pay around
$180.00 per month and we don't drive a bloody motor bike. If you can't afford to pay medical
premiums you shouldn't ride a motorcycle.
 
EagleSmack
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by Nuggler View Post

Everyone ran out of purple ink today.

Yes I was wondering that. The new ones probably don't know about the purple font=sarcasm rule.
 
lone wolf
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

Societal norms??? Ever seen G.F. Strong hospital? Their large parking lot is usually full
of motorcycles. I think it could be said that these turkeys are using the medical system to
bludgeon the rest of us. The high cost of their surgeries and rehab treatment is made even
higher because few of these people pay any medicare premiums. My wife and I pay around
$180.00 per month and we don't drive a bloody motor bike. If you can't afford to pay medical
premiums you shouldn't ride a motorcycle.

Price of gas? Maybe that's how they can afford theirs....
 
Colpy
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

Societal norms??? Ever seen G.F. Strong hospital? Their large parking lot is usually full
of motorcycles. I think it could be said that these turkeys are using the medical system to
bludgeon the rest of us. The high cost of their surgeries and rehab treatment is made even
higher because few of these people pay any medicare premiums. My wife and I pay around
$180.00 per month and we don't drive a bloody motor bike. If you can't afford to pay medical
premiums you shouldn't ride a motorcycle.

$197.15 a month here.......but that is private medical insurance, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the debate......

The problem is that socialized medicine can (and is) used as an excuse for ever-increasing government intervention in our lives: first motorcycle helmet laws, then seat belt laws, then bicycle helmets, then helmets for skiing, then laws against salt, trans-fats, unhealthy snacks, then sugar, then the private possession of firearms, then fast cars, and motorcycles themselves.......and don't laugh, I have seen medical costs used as an argument for government regulation for ALL the above.

One wonders how long it will be before the gov't is forcing us to take part in morning calisthenics, a la Orwell's 1984. After all, it would radically lower medical expenses.....

Personally, I don't think the gov't has any legitimate role in personal risk assessment.
 
TenPenny
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

Societal norms??? Ever seen G.F. Strong hospital? Their large parking lot is usually full
of motorcycles. I think it could be said that these turkeys are using the medical system to
bludgeon the rest of us. The high cost of their surgeries and rehab treatment is made even
higher because few of these people pay any medicare premiums. My wife and I pay around
$180.00 per month and we don't drive a bloody motor bike. If you can't afford to pay medical
premiums you shouldn't ride a motorcycle.

People smoke.
People eat poorly.
People drive motorcycles.
People go rock climbing.
People swim in pools.
People get pregnant and have kids.

What would you like to outlaw for the sake of lower medicare costs?
 
Colpy
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

People smoke.
People eat poorly.
People drive motorcycles.
People go rock climbing.
People swim in pools.
People get pregnant and have kids.

What would you like to outlaw for the sake of lower medicare costs?

Good Lord! I forgot the ridiculous smoking laws.........see how insidious this stuff is??? How easily government control of our lives creeps in, and becomes the accepted norm, always for the good of society??
 
EagleSmack
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

People smoke.
People eat poorly.
People drive motorcycles.
People go rock climbing.
People swim in pools.
People get pregnant and have kids.

What would you like to outlaw for the sake of lower medicare costs?

Well said. When is swimming going to be banned? Or sports in general. Sport and fitness injuries simply have to be a drain.

My son has done the following while playing sports..

1. Broken Finger (football)
2. Concussion (football)
3. Broken Hand (football)
4. Sprained Wrist (baseball)

The other son
1. Broken arm (monkey bars)
2.Twisted ankle (track)

I suppose they should have stayed inside playing video games
 
#juan
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

People smoke.
People eat poorly.
People drive motorcycles.
People go rock climbing.
People swim in pools.
People get pregnant and have kids.

What would you like to outlaw for the sake of lower medicare costs?

If a person volunteers to increase their risk by rock climbing, driving motorcycles, etc.
they shouldn't expect the rest of us to pay when they are turned into a cripple....or a vegetable...
 
TenPenny
+1
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

If a person volunteers to increase their risk by rock climbing, driving motorcycles, etc.
they shouldn't expect the rest of us to pay when they are turned into a cripple....or a vegetable...

People volunteer to play hockey, mow lawns, walk down the street, eat fatty food, drive on congested highways, use sharp knives to cut up food, use power tools, etc etc.

Which of these things should result in non-coverage by medicare?

Don't forget that getting pregnant is, for the most part, voluntary as well.
 
#juan
+2
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

People volunteer to play hockey, mow lawns, walk down the street, eat fatty food, drive on congested highways, use sharp knives to cut up food, use power tools, etc etc.

Which of these things should result in non-coverage by medicare?

Don't forget that getting pregnant is, for the most part, voluntary as well.

Let me guess, you don't want hockey players to have to wear helmets either..

There is some danger to getting pregnant as well......not the least of which is the
threat of fathering another turkey who wants everything free and easy and uncontrolled.
 
TenPenny
+1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

Let me guess, you don't want hockey players to have to wear helmets either..

I didn't say that. I want hockey players to wear helmets, and the league enforces those rules. Not our government.

There's a difference. You want to use medicare as a bludgeon to control what people are allowed to do. What is the limit? Will you allow people to get pregnant? Should people be allowed to engage in dangerous activities such as shovelling snow in winter?
 
#juan
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

I didn't say that. I want hockey players to wear helmets, and the league enforces those rules. Not our government.

There's a difference. You want to use medicare as a bludgeon to control what people are allowed to do. What is the limit? Will you allow people to get pregnant? Should people be allowed to engage in dangerous activities such as shovelling snow in winter?

You can bet that if the league didn't enforce the wearing of helmets, the government would....I certainly hope they would..

Shoveling snow.....I've promised myself I would not shovel snow anymore and I haven't for two years.

..
 
JLM
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

People smoke.
People eat poorly.
People drive motorcycles.
People go rock climbing.
People swim in pools.
People get pregnant and have kids.

What would you like to outlaw for the sake of lower medicare costs?

Your list is a good start, you can add river rafting, smoking dope, skate boarding, walking alone after dark, consorting with hookers.

Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

You can bet that if the league didn't enforce the wearing of helmets, the government would....I certainly hope they would..

Shoveling snow.....I've promised myself I would not shovel snow anymore and I haven't for two years.

..

That can be done safely if done sensibly, like take a one minute break for every two minutes of shovelling.
 
TenPenny
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

That can be done safely if done sensibly, like take a one minute break for every two minutes of shovelling.

You realize that people are capable of riding bicycles and motorcycles without helmets and not being automatically injured, right?

And that it is possible to drive a car without wearing a seatbelt and not be automatically maimed?
 
#juan
+1
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

You realize that people are capable of riding bicycles and motorcycles without helmets and not being automatically injured, right?

And that it is possible to drive a car without wearing a seatbelt and not be automatically maimed?

I've been driving for well over fifty five years and in the first half of that time there were no seat belts. By today's standards,
the cars we drove fifty years ago were absolute pigs as far as handling and braking were concerned. We were probably better
drivers though.
 
JLM
+1
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

I've been driving for well over fifty five years and in the first half of that time there were no seat belts. By today's standards,
the cars we drove fifty years ago were absolute pigs as far as handling and braking were concerned. We were probably better
drivers though.

Actually #Juan, there were seatbelts 50 years ago, they were standard equipment in the early 60 models. You're right about the drivers though, People are in far more of a hurry today to get somewhere, I wish there was an automatic $2000 fine & six month driving suspension for tailgating, it is one of the most pointless violations because if you do arrive safely you get there one second sooner.
 
#juan
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

Actually #Juan, there were seatbelts 50 years ago, they were standard equipment in the early 60 models. You're right about the drivers though, People are in far more of a hurry today to get somewhere, I wish there was an automatic $2000 fine & six month driving suspension for tailgating, it is one of the most pointless violations because if you do arrive safely you get there one second sooner.

Right JLM.
While seat belts were standard equipment in the sixties, mandatory use of seat belts
didn't come in until 1977 in B.C.
 
TenPenny
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

Right JLM.
While seat belts were standard equipment in the sixties, mandatory use of seat belts
didn't come in until 1977 in B.C.

And yet, you survived.

You probably should be retroactively fined $57,000 for not wearing seatbelts before they were mandatory.
 
#juan
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

And yet, you survived.

You probably should be retroactively fined $57,000 for not wearing seatbelts before they were mandatory.

Hell, I knew people who connected the seat belts under the seats to keep them out of the way. One of my early cars
was a Volvo 544, one of the first cars with decent seat belts, and I used them.

$57,000.00 ???? was more than all of my cars cost in those days. In 1957 you could buy a new Chevy for about three grand.
 
TenPenny
#29
So you agree that seatbelt laws are silly.
 
#juan
+1
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

So you agree that seatbelt laws are silly.

Hell no. The early seat belts were a joke. Modern seat belts save thousands of lives, but you have to use them.