Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: VTenigma

“I must respectfully disagree,if you can prove that you indemnify the public from your bad choices and risk taking, then by all means ride with no helmet.”

Again, I think this is the wrong argument. The problem is that we have a nanny state that protects people from their potential and actual poor decisions at great cost to taxpayers.

This nanny-state is failing, so we get a win-win - more personal responsibility and less government.

I think most folks who choose to ride helmet-less would be more influenced by the potential for directly burdening loved ones should they survive an accident with severe disability than by a government telling them what’s good for them.


102 posted on 07/03/2011 10:07:33 AM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]


To: RFEngineer
>>I think most folks who choose to ride helmet-less would be more influenced by the potential for directly burdening loved ones should they survive an accident with severe disability<<

Then the person needs to give up riding motorcycles all together. Helmet or no helmet, this is an inherently dangerous activity that could lead to severe injury or death regardless.

Personal liberty. If your actions do not infringe on another, you should not be subject to scrutiny of others, especially Uncle Sugar.

To be clear, my position is that helmets have saved countless lives. Safety equipment should be used at all times no matter the activity, but should not be mandated by the government as if to have big brother government babysitter.

114 posted on 07/03/2011 10:28:15 AM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson