 |
  |
| Visit the FMH Swag Store & support FR! | |
| Send FReepmail if you want on/off FMH list | |
| The List of Ping Lists | |
Posted on 10/11/2007 6:07:27 AM PDT by cll
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — Tropical Puerto Rico will require motorcycle drivers to wear protective jackets, gloves, long pants and boots as part of a strict safety law signed by the governor of the U.S. commonwealth on Wednesday.
Augmenting an existing helmet law, the new law also sharply lowers the maximum allowable blood-alcohol level for motorcycle and scooter enthusiasts below levels tolerated for automobile drivers.
The law's sponsors said it was prompted by a sharp increase in motorcycle and scooter accidents, but some bikers argued that adults should be allowed to decide such matters for themselves.
In a last-ditch effort to stop the law, hundreds of motorcyclists on Monday revved their engines in protest while riding past Gov. Anibal Acevedo Vila's residence in San Juan.
Puerto Rico, which before had less stringent rider regulations than most U.S. states, now has the most restrictions of any of the 50 states, said the Ohio-based American Motorcyclist Association.
"There's really no place under the U.S. flag that has restrictions that are as strict as Puerto Rico," said association spokesman Lance Oliver.
In addition to the heavy protective gear, drivers of two-wheeled motor vehicles on the island now must wear reflective vests after dark. The legal blood-alcohol limit is now .02 percent for bikers, down from .08 percent, which will remain the tolerated limit for car drivers.
It was not immediately clear what the penalties for infractions would be.
Placemarker
ciclo de donante
I guess this strict law will keep me from riding my Harley from Mississippi to Puerto Rico...
Kevlar Speedo. check.
Extra cigars. check.
Windproof lighter. check.
Cash for dancers. check.
Credit card for vendors. check.
Round key for gas cap. check.
Deodorant smudged into arm pits. check.
Fingerless gloves. check.
Cellphone charged. check.
Looked up in sky for clouds. check.
Took BP meds, arthritis meds, pain meds, coffee. check.
Start bike. check.
Back out of driveway, fall over. check.
Crawl out from under bike, push helmet off, let fall and break, self brain scan for excess pain. check.
Go inside, remove kevlar speedo. check
Watch football till 8 guys come over and help stand bike up. check.
What does that have to do with me? And how does that sad fact give you authority to demand more laws?
So you're like the Cindy Sheehan of motorcycle gear?
You cannot take the inherent danger out of motorcycle riding. By chasing the pipe dream of safe motorcycling you are doing exactly that.
|
|
| Visit the FMH Swag Store & support FR! | |
| Send FReepmail if you want on/off FMH list | |
| The List of Ping Lists | |
That’s gonna leave a mark. :)
Before anyone grips about my stance, I am not looking to ban or restrict the riding of bikes at all. I have had too many family members and friends injured and killed on bikes. One thing I know is that there is risk involved in riding, but I also know that anyone that doesn’t wear the safety gear is a sever injury or death looking for a place to happen.
I think everyone should wear airbag suits when they drive that way no one would die, AND it would be “common sense”.
Common sense is never legislated. The heavy hand of government doesn’t know what that means. They only subscribe to what the insurance companies are lobbying for.
By the way, please explain how a light is designed to keep me safe in a crash. That is the FIRST time I’ve heard of that! Not all crashes end in sever injuries. Some crashes are severe, but then others are actually very minor. I’ve had over 30 crashes in the 20 years of riding, with no crashes in over 10 years. Not once did I break a bone, let along get road rash. Your relatives were probably drinking and riding, because statistics show most people that die on motorcycles are drinking when they die.
Nothing designed into a bike can say the same thing. So requiring safety equipment is not out of line.
Gee...hmph...what would make you think that lecturing others about how we all need to conform to your personal prefered limitations of freedom of choice on a conservative discussion forum would get you flamed (or “grips”)?
I just don’t understand!
And before anyone grips...I think everyone should ride naked! So...um...NO gipping!
Either that or we should all be MANDATED to wear Michelin man sized nerf suits (when it’s 96 degress in the hot Florida sun)! And all cars should be nerf cars...that way when we had accidents we’d all just laugh about it! It’d be great! Nerf cars with naked bikers bouncing off of them.
Yeah...that’s it...bikers get to ride naked and cars, trucks and all fixed objects must be multi-layered in Nerf foam. Now THAT is a flash of common sense! heck EVERYONE would want to ride a motorcycle. And we wouldn’t have to listen to the socialist motorcycle clothing police lecture us all on how what they prefer should be mandated for everyone...yeah...just think...a world with no more motorcycle thread nannys...no more “donorcycle” posts...It’d be splendid!
And then you could go around lecturing those who haven’t yet wrapped their property in nerf foam, instead of pointing your finger at the bikers WHO HAPPEN TO MAKE PERSONAL CHOICES THAT ARE DIFFENRET FROM YOUR OWN LEGALISTIC PERSPECTIVE!
FRegards!
=0)
nerf suits LOL!
A few years ago, I rode my bike for the very first time without a helmet and other safety gear (other than immediately after doing some work on my bike, and then just up and down the street to hear it better). I decided that I wanted to head over to the local Mickey D's for lunch. It was only 3 blocks away: It seemed to me that putting on my helmet, jacket, and gloves was a pain for such a short drive. So I went and came back, with no problems. However, I never felt so uncomfortably naked and exposed in all my life. It's not something I'll ever do again.
Mark
Watching a traffic intersection anywhere in Puerto Rico around noon will delight you with the most amazing display of gridlock you’ll ever see. It’s a beautiful thing to behold.
But ride there? Are you kidding me?! You can’t possibly wear enough protective gear to protect you there; it simply doesn’t exist. Better to go with Joe’s Plan B . . .
what I am is a person that has seen 4 members of his own family hurt and two friends killed on bikes. both killed would not have been killed if they were wearing helmets, which is the law in michigan. 2 who were injured would have died without their helmets, and all 4 would have had much less sever injuries if they had been wearing protective gear beyond the helmet.
What I am is a person that has lost too much to these machines.
As for what I am, I have voted conservative every election since 1976, the first year I could vote. I will challenge anyone on this forum on my voting record.
The concept that the state has the right or power to dictate the condition for utilization of the motorways is founded in the concept of commerce. This is legal concept dating back to the founding of the country. As for motor vehicles, it dates back to the early 20th century.
You have no Right to drive a motorcycle, car, truck, or any vehicle on state or federal highways. That is a privilege granted by the states.
Your point is a fine one, but I will grant it to you.
In fact, the state has to defer tot he federal government based on utilization of roadways when the state and federal systems overlap. Where in we have no federal laws in the area of helmets and protective gear, we do have national safety standards that have repeatedly been upheld by conservative and liberal judges alike.
do we allow those that drive to decide if their car has safety glass windows, or windows at all?
do we allow those that drive decide if the dash is padded or there are front airbags? or seat belts?
do we allow the boated to decide if they will carry life vests and if they will be used by those under 12?
do we allow the pilot to fly his or her plane without it yearly safety inspection?
the answer is no to all of these. The idea of allowing the biker to decide is stupid in the extreme.
I will cravat that one point. If each biker and their riders are willing to put up a $50,000 cash bond to cover the costs to the rest of us when, not if, they crash their bike. Health care is expensive. and i don’t want to pay for idiots that dont want to wear basic protective gear.
horse feathers on a duck.
nothing, absolutely nothing, on a bike is designed to protect you in case of a crash. avoidance is good, protecting the body is even better.
I can walk away from a 30 mph crash in a car; seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, roll over protection. At 30 mph. you are a bag of meat tumbling down the road. You will be injured, period. With out a helmet, you are dead. with the right gear, you will live, hopefully to be able to live a good life.
Yo may be the best rider in the world, you may never do anything wrong yourself, but in that crash that is likely to happen, you will be that bag of meat.
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.