> In your effort to argue your nanny state point, you failed miserably to respond to Paleo.
I disagree: it was dispatched in full. But for the avoidance of doubt, Paleo’s assertion is “everyone is an idiot who doesn’t wear a helmet.” I do not wear a helmet. I am not an idiot. Therefore, Paleo’s point is false.
> A person who fails to wear a helmet on Hollister is both a law breaker and an idiot.
I can dispatch your assertion with equal ease. Your assertion is that anyone riding a Hollister is a law breaker and an idiot. As a matter of Principle, I would not wear a helmet while riding a Hollister even if I knew what a Hollister was. I am not an idiot. And there are no laws requiring me to wear a helmet whilst riding a Hollister (I checked). Therefore your assertion is false, too.
> As a youngster I had two bike accidents that resulted in concussion and one unconsciousness
The occasional concussion is educational for boys. That is how we learn not to get hit in the head. Pity the poor coddled lad that has no experiential learning in that department! He will grow up genteel and sissified.
> As an older and wiser curmudgeon, I wear the helmet and set a good example for all the true boys in the neighborhood.
That should be your prerogative, not your duty as a law-abiding Citizen.
What evidence do you bring forward that you are not and idiot ?
Admitting to not wearing a helmet is prima fascia evidence that you are
I'm curious, is genteel considered a pejorative associated with emasculation in New Zealand? I for one, would take being considered genteel as an extreme compliment, and wouldn't associate it with sissification at all.