Posted on 05/30/2002 8:59:36 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
Edited on 04/12/2004 5:37:07 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
SACRAMENTO (AP) - A bill to exempt motorcyclists over age 21 from having to wear helmets failed in the Assembly on Thursday.
Already defeated once, bill author and motorcycle rider Assemblyman Dennis Mountjoy, R-Monrovia, resurrected AB2700 to argue once again that the state is taking away individual freedom by requiring drivers to wear helmets. His effort failed on a 34-33 vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Sounds like you have been here. Shining Venice, where the sewer meets the sea.
Regards
I (rightly) assumed you didn't give a damn about my insurance rate. I also assumed that the chief concern regarding this post is how other's insurance rates are negatively impacted by head-injury related fatalities of helmetless motorcycle riders. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't that the core point of the posted article?
You may, however, find it interesting that MY insurance rate for the coverage on my Harley Davidson is one-third the cost of my insurance for my Chevy Van, in spite of the fact that my HD is worth three times as much AND the HD policy carries TEN TIMES the amount of liability and medical coverage.
My insurance agent "gets it". Do you?
Not far from here is a place called Shriners. They treat burn victims (mostly children) for free. What I hope this says is that the private sector and private donors can and are, willing not to let someone's body lie broken in the gutter.
we live in a Christian culture, where each and every human being has immense worth and value in the eyes of the vast majority of the populace.
Yes, we do, however our government has stepped into the act of providing for others while the private sector is being nudged out. I would agree with much that you've attributed to us as a people, yet our charity and compassion in a private sense have been replaced by government mandates that limit our ability to perform as we might in the absence of government controls. Let's not even discuss government efficiency in delivering services.
Yeah, its cute alright; but the "Clickit or Ticket" is actually a rrogram that originated with the Feds. They offer the states bonus money if they can increase seat belt usage through stricter "primary" enforcement. Extra points are given to the state fascist for developing creative or inovative programs with catchy names to "ecourage" usage.
It started out that way, but I think that it is now a primary offense in CO. Not sure, anybody know?
Hope you are okay. Are you being facetious about the nose ring? Either he or she stopped to help you, or you didn't keep your eyes on the road.
No, the cost of doing business as usual (and growing) prevents people from making more of their descretionary incomes available for charitable causes. One example: over $600. for the privaledge of driving my truck for one year on California's roads. There are more, but I won't bore you with them.
Keeping your eyes solely "on the road" while riding a motorcycle is a good way to commit suicide.
I've made life saving, (or at least accident saving), decisions by reading the look in some cagers eyes.
Which is a good reason to not wear a helmet. Sometimes the slightest sound or bit of vision saves your ass.
This was very eloquent and all, but isn't it a moot point? The bill in question would only allow people to ride w/o helmets if they had insurance. Now, if the injured person has insurance then "we" get paid back (by the insurance company) for doing all this Christian stuff, so the whole "But it costs Society!" argument doesn't fly at all.
So what, then, can be your objection to the bill?
I said I favored the bill, Dr. F.
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.