medstudent30 Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Well I'm going to say my 2 cents worth on this, and please do not take it as bashing any particular person. Pittsburgh Steelers Quarterback Ben Roethlesberger was in a motorcycle versus vehicle MVC in Pittsburgh earlier today. As much as I am a fan for Helmet's and their proper use, I do not agree with his choice in the matter of not wearing one. From reports on the news, I gather that Ben is very lucky with the injuries that he has sustained. Someone was definately out there watching him. My question is to all of you here.........do you think that all states/provinces, etc. should have a standardized helmet law, just like the seatbelt laws that are there? I realize that no safety belt could have assisted Ben with his accident, but if he only had a helmet on, his injuries I'm sure wouldn't have been as bad as they were. [/font:7fe73e6d50] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPINFV Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 As long as tax dollars are going to pay for treatment that are a result of injuries sustained from accidents, the government, acting in the best interests of the tax paying public, should be able to legislate reasonable laws that reduce the financial liability from accidents, including seat belt and helmet laws. Now, if the law said that you would be fully liable for any costs that are a result of medical care rendered because you were not wearing a helmet or seat belt (without the ability to hide under bankruptcy protection), then by all means make those safety devices optional to use. Besides, in this case it's a football player. It's not like one more knock to the head would do any damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yummymedic05 Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 My opinion is yes. Now on that same note, i have never ridden a motorcycle, doubt i ever will, heck i've never even sat on one. I've had friends tell me crap like helmets are uncomfy, and they weigh u down, make your neck hurt. But my opinion is yes because i've had to clean up folks that have ridden and wrecked without one on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCMed124 Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 there's an old saying amongst the <cough> smarter riders out there... $10 helmet means a $10 head. ... so what's a $0 helmet mean? Social Darwinism if you ask me. If you're stupid enough to ride without a helmet, get the hell outta my gene pool. Problem is I still gotta clean up after you. my first due has some REAL nice bike roads... long, windy roads along the river... beautiful. Until, get this, they pull outta the local watering hole (significant AOB) and race in a pack of 8 or so bikes up the road and 2 of them wind up running over the guy that just laid down his ride. Helmet-less trauma + getting ridden over = groovy ride on a helicopter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medic429 Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 personally--i wear one. i don't feel they are heavy or hurt my neck. and yes, i agree....why a seatbelt and no helmet?? however, it is a choice here and some choose not to. i guess it's a lot of the "it would never happen to me, i'm a safe rider" thing..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Plain Ruff Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Here's one to think on, If we are going not going to mandate helmets, let's mandate organ donation laws. That way when the moron on the bike who didn't wear a helmet crashes and dies then we can pare down our long list of organ donation recipients. no helmet laws + mandatory organ donation = more transplants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridryder 911 Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 We used to have a mandated helmet law. INMHO allow them not to wear the helmet, but sign a disclaimer in case of accident insurance would not cover them. On an anecdotal not, there are very few incidences that I have seen that speeds > 60 mph, that it made a difference. R/r 911 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaceMedic Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Ruff i like your thinking but with the way most riders out there ride, do you honestly think that there would be anything left to donate???? as for my opinion, Half the time i don't wear my seatbelt, when i was riding motorcycle i did have a crash and could have been very bad had i not had my helmet on. But still i do not advocate the government or their little special intrest groups and lobbiests telling me what and where to do things. so no i do not agree with helmet laws. I guess i look at it like this now. No helmet usually means they wont be doing that anymore. And the best helmet in the world will do little to help save more than the eyes if these idoits are drinking then getting back on the bikes and racing off. in my area we have great raods for top speed racing. Long, straight, flat i have personally attempted many land speed titles out here. lol . 185 mph is my personal best so far. and will have to stand as i no longer own a motorcycle. You all have to agree that at speeds like that all a helmet is going to do is help with identification. your still going to have to call fire out for a washdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whit72 Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 In my opionion the helmet dosent make much of a difference if the head is no longer conected to the body. In my experience with motorcycle accidents if you are traveling at 100mph and you crash the only thing that helmet is going to assure is maybe an open caskett. I love the little sticker inside some of them that states "this helmet is not for protectve purposes." I think it should be personal preference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 It isn't the government's right to say what you can or can't do with someone's organs....so the donation thing is out of the picture. Second, in the State of Texas you have to carry a $10,000 personal insurance policy incase you have an accident and don't have one on. Yeah it sucks when they do because it is a drain on the tax payers or other payers of that insurance company (becuase they will just pass it onto other customers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts