Skip to comments.
Virginia May Drop Motorcycle Helmet Law
WXII ^
| 8:49 am EST February 6, 2006
Posted on 02/06/2006 1:20:14 PM PST by martin_fierro
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-35 last
To: SFC Chromey
"I can actually see better because I am not squinting while zipping along at 90+ "No tears at 130.
21
posted on
02/06/2006 2:45:45 PM PST
by
spunkets
To: martin_fierro
You are perfect Martin F. ~ don't change a thing. :):)
22
posted on
02/06/2006 2:46:38 PM PST
by
blackie
(Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
To: spunkets
LOL, yea I had a good pair of shades in the past, but turned to see what was behind, and they went flying down the road. Not good. I wear my dark Oakleys with a dark tint shield, and even riding into the sun I can see great!
RIDE FAST AND SWERVE!
23
posted on
02/06/2006 3:37:08 PM PST
by
SFC Chromey
(We are at war with Islamofascism)
To: mtbopfuyn
Donorcycles You sir are a comic genius! You've grafted the word donor as in "organ donor" to the second half of motorcyle creating a New Word which cleverly links motorcyles to organ donors in only 4 syllables. Never having heard that hilarious combination, I am overcome with mirth. Hats off to you!
24
posted on
02/06/2006 3:58:37 PM PST
by
gigo
To: martin_fierro
Hmmm.. I'd have to think long and hard before taking my helmet off. I wear a beanie (DOT approved) which is about as close as you can get to a compromise of safety and the freedom of no helmet at all. I do understand the attraction of no helmet though.
25
posted on
02/06/2006 5:35:54 PM PST
by
Dubya-M-Dees
(Mary Mapes was the first in the MSM that had to participate in an election by the people... she lost)
To: LizardQueen
In principle I agree with you, but the problem is is that the gov't will pick up costs for the uninsured via Medicaid. Just a WAG, but I would think that the average injury cost for someone wearing a helmet would be higher than for someone not wearing a helmet. Which costs more, after all--treating someone who wears a helmet and breaks his spine, or treating someone who doesn't wear his helmet and gets killed outright?
26
posted on
02/06/2006 7:00:37 PM PST
by
supercat
(Sony delenda est.)
To: martin_fierro; blackie; JoeSixPack1; uglybiker; pt17; Tijeras_Slim
For once in my life, I'm going to keep my mouth shut and post motorcycle porn instead . . .
27
posted on
02/06/2006 7:06:03 PM PST
by
BraveMan
To: BraveMan
Hey, I saw that same bike at Hollister a year or two back!
Lemmee root around for the photo.
To: BraveMan; martin_fierro; blackie
2004 FLORIDA TRAFFIC CRASH STATISTICS
Traffic crashes 252,902
Drivers involved 376,111
Average crashes per day 691
Mileage Death Rate (per 100 million VM) 1.66
Fatalities 3,257
Fatal crashes 2,936
Injuries 227,192
Injury crashes 142,388
Property damage only crashes 107,578
Alcohol-related fatalities 1,093
Alcohol-related injuries 17,580
Alcohol-related crashes 23,013
Alcohol-related fatal crashes 998
Alcohol-related injury crashes 11,002
Pedestrians killed 504
Pedestrians injured 7,551
Pedestrian crashes 8,084
Bicyclists killed 119
Bicyclists injured 4,820
Bicycle crashes 5,203
Motorcyclists killed 388
Motorcyclists injured 6,558
Motorcycle crashes 7,367
http://www.hsmv.state.fl.us/reports/crash_facts.html
It looks like pedestrians need helmets more than bikers!!!!!
To: longtermmemmory
I live in Kansas, currently. Here, it is legal to ride sans helmet. I have to admit I cringe whenever I see someone cruising down the highway at or above 70mph without a helmet.
I understand the safety versus legality issue. Personally, I have decided it's much better for me to wear the helmet - My first accident showed me the value (and I landed on hardpack sandy soil on the side of the road, not on the asphalt).
Just my humble opinion - binding only on myself. ;-P
30
posted on
02/07/2006 4:39:24 AM PST
by
MortMan
(Trains stop at train stations. On my desk is a workstation...)
To: iPod Shuffle
that is the problem,"likely has no health insurance." implies that health insurance is an american right. can can't have true freedom without allowing certain bad things to happen to people who choose to have bad things happen to them.
31
posted on
02/07/2006 6:36:59 AM PST
by
postaldave
(democrats=traitorous b*st*rds)
To: JoeSixPack1
Roger that, Joe!
It also looks like alcohol consumption plays a big roll in traffic accidents.
Gee ~ I wonder why. ;);)
32
posted on
02/07/2006 10:33:41 AM PST
by
blackie
(Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
To: BraveMan
Well, I dug around for the photo but couldn't find it.
But I KNOW I've seen that bike elsewhere, and that I snapped a picture of it. This is gonna drive me nuts until I find it.
To: MortMan
Strange they want to let people ride motorcycles without helmets but ban smoking. I don't get it. Where are their brains? Isn't this a complete contradiction?
I agree about helmets, and insurance company policies should be all the incentive one needs to wear a helmet. I've seen a few accidents. But then, what sense does it make to ban smoking????? I haven't smoked in 30 years, but this just drives me nuts.
34
posted on
02/17/2006 9:20:12 PM PST
by
vharlow
(http://www.vventures.net)
To: vharlow
Helmets Law are unconstitutional period, since California passed it law back in 1992, it made loads of published cases used throughout the States and those challanges were used in different States that even had a unconstitutional ruling based from it or modified a helmet law because of the mass interests of what came from California. If California never passed the helmet law, it would of had less impact on several areas through Congress and the courts, something the California legislature didn't realize when they passed the helmet law it would benefit in repealing helmet laws in other states but always other countries due to the massive data collected and written or sparked interests (protests).
Now we have a helmet law that has been declared unconstitutional, not once but a dozen times in California as the court will turn it over because the CHP violated it and continued to violate the law when there would civil ruling placed.
There is nothing dumb with riding without a helmet as there are many other dumb things you can compared what you could do as well so don't judge a lidless rider compared to something similar that is also dumb you do.
The California helmet law has reduced DMV registrations by more the 68%, it has impacted State taxes and so forth due to the protest of disliked law that forced people to stopped riding. It screwed up the spot completely as this law is now taking off the books. There was nothing saved in hospital costs from headless injuries, there is no data only data exist is less registrations, it killed the motorcycle population is what it did because of the hate of helmets.
Thank you Richard Quigley for fighting the CA helmet law for 14 years, now we have our freedoms back. God bless you
Scott Marcott
San Luis Obispo, California
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-35 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson