• All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 100.00 credit to your HoP account.
 
Page: 12345
Doc Lightning
GOLD Member since May 2001

Doc Lightning

HOP Mad Doctor
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA

Total posts: 13920
Posted:So in the last week, I have seen two children in horrible bike accidents. Neither was wearing a helmet.

One is 15. He's going to need some occupational therapy and he's going to be confused for a while (it's been about a week now). But he'll probably be more or less back to his baseline. He was an honors student.

The other honors student is a 10yo boy who I was kind of hoping would die. His brain looks like someone scrambled it with a fork. The swelling is so bad that they've had to remove a piece of his skull. He has a shear injury to his brainstem and can't even control his body's temperature correctly. He's going to be severely mentally and neurologically disabled if they ever get him out of this. The rest of his body is totally fine save a dislocated ankle. And yeah... horrible. From his school picture he was a really adorable kid. And he was an honors student. frown

Folks, please wear your helmets for biking and skating and climbing. I know they're uncomfortable, but severe brain damage is far worse. And parents, the rule with your kids should be: "If I ever catch you riding or skating without a helmet, you will do neither for one year."


-Mike )'(
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella

"A buckuht 'n a hooze!" -Valura

Delete Topic

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Hey now here we got a positive idealist and I already thought they were on the endangered species list... wink

Sure it's frustrating to the extent of infuriating, Nat... fully side that.

Some could say similar about our hobbies too.

 Written by : Nat

I'm a person that gets frustrated when I spend three hours with a patient discussing how smoking will harm their unborn baby, them agreeing with everything I say and making the choice to change and then find them puffing away outside an hour later. (on hospital grounds which IS illegal)



Smoking is an addiction, Nat. It has little to do with reasoning. You got friends who (ab)use drugs?

I don't want to sound snippy or point out possible double standards, but how much right do we actually have to force (scientifically backed) views and opinions on other people?

 Written by : Nat

But as a PERSON, not as a health profession related person... I would welcome legislation that could increase the general health of the population, even if it may take some of my liberty.



Dunno, may I now have to picture you on festivals, preaching to people not to smoke and to trash their stash, are you inferiously promoting highly cleansed paraffin as fuel for firespinning etc.? Just trying to get my picture right. wink

You're saying that

 Written by : Nat

If I knew that by bringing in legislation that all women must wear headscarfs (just hair, not full face, and no restrictions on other clothes) would definitely prevent anyone anywhere to be raped ever again, I would wear one.



And here lies the devil in the detail... if I knew... problem is that we'll never really know unless we try and life seems not to work on a conditional basis. I faced that problem in the gun-thread: "If the bad guys were to surrender their (illegal) guns first, I'd happily surrender mine the very next day." [sigh] shrug

What we could do is to surrender our guns and liberties and then put our faith in ....[add appropriate term of a supernatural being/ faith] and see how far we get with it...

How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go? wink


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

natasqi


natasqi

addict
Location: Perth

Total posts: 489
Posted: Written by :Tom


I don't want to sound snippy or point out possible double standards, but how much right do we actually have to force (scientifically backed) views and opinions on other people?


As a community, we have the right to choose the rules by which we live. majority rules. Murder is illegal, smoking in pubs is illegal.
I'm not aiming to force my opinions on people, I'm aiming to convert others to the opinion so that it is the majority.

 Written by :Tom


Smoking is an addiction, Nat. It has little to do with reasoning. You got friends who (ab)use drugs?



Yeah, but we convinced him, with the help of his mother, to give up on his twentyfirst bday.
So I think it can be reasoned out of people... it just takes time. I just don't like people lying to me...

 Written by :Tom


Dunno, may I now have to picture you on festivals, preaching to people not to smoke and to trash their stash, are you inferiously promoting highly cleansed paraffin as fuel for firespinning etc.? Just trying to get my picture right.




:P I try to keep my battles to those I may win, except for the internet ones which can be purely academic.
If someone is smoking on hospital premises, near the doorway, which is not only banned, but means hospital staff and other patients have to breathe the muck, I'll say something to them, and if they mouth-off at me, I'll tell security.

At fire festivals, well I've only been to WA's yearly firecamp, but I'd try to focus to make sure everyone is spinning safely, making sure there are towels/bucket around...

There are too many messages, stop smoking, eat healthy, free the whales, educate the poverty-stricken, exercise for at least 30 minutes a day... I don't preach.
i discuss with those who want to discuss, and fix when people are being illegal and possibly harming others... otherwise I leave people alone...


Delete

Stone
GOLD Member since Jun 2001

Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne

Total posts: 2830
Posted:Lightning, I think the slippery slide stops when we start talking about the use of public roads. Roads are already a regulated environment, and most would acknowledge that road rules are necessary for the safe and efficient management of traffic.



In most countries, motor cyclists are required to wear helmets, and helmets for bicyclists is really just an extension of that regulation. Road rules change, as necessary. So to me, compulsory helmets is just another change in the road rules. Though, I can how some sections of society, perhaps bicyclists, who might not be used to obeying the road rules, might find obeying road rules a bit of a shock wink



As far as the age of majority goes, its obvious that some adults do need nannies when it comes to using the road. Adults should be able to regulate themselves, but there are areas where they need to be protected from themselves. Driving under the influence is a good example. For many, the more they drink the better they think they can drive. Clearly, this was an area where adults have had to be regulated, because self-regulation does not work.



So, when does it become necessary to regulate adult road users? Id say, when people, like you, start speaking out against preventable injuries:



 Written by Lightning

So in the last week, I have seen two children in horrible bike accidents. Neither was wearing a helmet.



Folks, please wear your helmets for biking and skating and climbing. I know they're uncomfortable, but severe brain damage is far worse.





In my State, the reason given for enforcing adults, as well as children, to wear helmets was because the police said the law would be impossible to enforce if it only applied to children. I know it sucks, but when you think about it, it does make sense. Enforcement would be difficult in an environment where some are wearing helmets and other are not wearing helmets.



Adults set the example for kids, and if helmet laws means that less kids suffer head injuries, then why wouldnt you support helmet laws? After all, giving up a liberty is a small price to pay for reducing the number of kids with head injuries.



Fire Tom, nice photo. Im convinced helmet head is the best, and only valid reason against helmet laws ubblol



 Written by Fire Tom

As a car/ truck driver it's easy to say: Let's make helmets compulsory - but I'll continue speeding and turning, underestimating anything that moves on two (wheels).





For sure, there are a lot of bad drivers out there. Even more reason to wear a helmet wink The unbalanced approach is not limited to car and truck drivers. Even so, when I see a cyclist with out a helmet I think what and idiot.



 Written by Fire Tom

And I believe in the maxime that unless I endanger your personal safety or pose a direct threat to your property you have no right to tell me what to do with my life.





Let Those Who Ride Decide! Its a great feeling riding with the wind in you hair, and your feet liberated on highway pegs. But there are costs to society.



Natasqi has covered these costs extremely well, especially when people have take to the "high moral ground".



A bit from Wiki:



 Written by Wiki

Most states in the United States have managed to retain laws forbidding riding a motorcycle without a helmet or driving without seat belts, on the grounds that accidents cost the entire society in the form of publicly-provided health care costs. These laws are resented among certain segments of the motorcycle-riding public, in particular those that regard riding a motorcycle as an expression of personal freedom, as opposed to riding around in a car.





I agree 110%, no one has the right to tell you what to do with your life. And hey, when you build your own roads you can do what you like. Until then, its up to the people who own the public roads to decide the road rules, not you!





 Written by OWD

Could be any number of things- my opinions are that-



1. the more cyclists there are, the more motorists get used to their presence

2. the more understanding occurs between the two groups

3. the more the two groups come to see themselves as, not enemies, but, fellow road-users





Good to see you didn't put your opinions up as facts. I think the opposite will probably happen, in the short term at least.



Rouge has already said she thinks Australian drivers are anti-bike, so more bikes could mean more aggression towards bicyclists. Especially, as in the other thread on bicycles, bicycle safety literature encourages cyclists to break the law and hit motorists.



The bit about having a pulse was to indicate that helmets have saved my life. Sorry you find that laughable.

EDITED_BY: Stone (1213495350)


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

natasqi


natasqi

addict
Location: Perth

Total posts: 489
Posted:I think the reason some Australians are anti-bike are highly publicised events like this...
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/coroner-lashes-cyclists/2007/03/28/1174761567956.html
It's because there are these groups (in Perth too) of lycra-clad 'bikie gangs' who don't obey speed limits, or stop for pedestrians and who frighten walkers and drivers.

You're driving along and there's a group of ~twenty riders in front of you, who are all single file. You start to pass them when they suddenly bunch up, four across. And then there's the times you're completely surrounded by them at the lights, and don't want to pull off too fast, or too slow...

Singular bicycle riders I don't have any feelings good/bad towards, they're just a part of the road and I've been taught to always check my left blind spot when turning left, because of that small possibility of someone being there...

But the huge groups of riders is what makes motorists nervous because one rider will always stay left, while many often pass each other, ride next to each other...

And I think it's also that these groups use the road, going 40kph in 60kph zones when there is a specially designed bike path next to them... and some motorists are VERY impatient, even when people are doing the speed limit.

I think this may be where Australia gets its 'anti-bike' feelings from


Delete

Doc Lightning
GOLD Member since May 2001

Doc Lightning

HOP Mad Doctor
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA

Total posts: 13920
Posted: Written by :Stone


In most countries, motor cyclists are required to wear helmets, and helmets for bicyclists is really just an extension of that regulation. Road rules change, as necessary. So to me, compulsory helmets is just another change in the road rules. Though, I can how some sections of society, perhaps bicyclists, who might not be used to obeying the road rules, might find obeying road rules a bit of a shock wink



Right. And I am opposed to that. I believe that massive public campaigns are a great thing, but to answer Natasqi's question about whether I'd be willing to give up freedom to stamp out preventable illness.

HELL NO!

Preventable illness will be stamped out the day that every man, woman, and child WILLINGLY makes the decisions that they need to make to prevent injury and illness. You can pass all the laws you want. It's Illegal to drink under age 21 in the U.S. Think that law gets followed? It's illegal to smoke under 18. Think that gets followed? It's illegal to smoke pot. Think THAT gets followed?

I'm vehemently pro-helmet and pro-seatbelt. But I am not willing to try to force others to do it. As long as you aren't directly endangering anyone else and you aren't damaging the environment, then you should be allowed to do what you want.

Even be a total flippin' idiot who rides a motorbike without a helmet.


-Mike )'(
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella

"A buckuht 'n a hooze!" -Valura

Delete

Lurch
BRONZE Member since Nov 2003

Lurch

old hand
Location: Oregon

Total posts: 929
Posted: Written by : Firetom

In my State, the reason given for enforcing adults, as well as children, to wear helmets was because the police said the law would be impossible to enforce if it only applied to children. I know it sucks, but when you think about it, it does make sense. Enforcement would be difficult in an environment where some are wearing helmets and other are not wearing helmets.



*that* has got to be one of the lamest excuses I've ever heard for sucking up your liberties.

 Written by :natasqi

I would welcome legislation that could increase the general health of the population, even if it may take some of my liberty.



And *that* has got to be one of the scariest statements ever uttered on this forum.

It may not be worth arguing anymore Doc, maybe it's just us American's that treasure our freedoms and our right to choose as much as possible.. We don't like giving up such things easily. Look at how much trouble prohibition caused here in the 20's


#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored frown

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:umm certainly that quote cannot be attributed to me, Lurch. help Please, errm PLEASE! check again... thankx wink And stop to lump me together with Stone - we are two different people (opposing guns) :P

And could the helmettis PLEASE STOP put names on the bareheaders? rolleyes

Yupp, I'm one of those who like to drive fast on their bike. And I'm one of those who don't and won't wear a helmet. That makes you question my intelligence? Well then.

Stone: Roads have been built by taxpayers money. We all own the roads - in equal shares, rights and duties. More so, if you come to my country you're free to use my share of the roads here, without paying toll. We happily provide our roads to you. Even if (for the first time in your life) you rent an Audi A8/ Porsche/ Ferrari and decide to travel at speeds exceeding 240kph.

I'm not happy that some tourists decide to play Gran Tourismo on our highways - yet as a society we decided not to have speed limits on much of our Autobahn. That applies to any car and motorbike rider using it.

You couldn't ride a bicycle on them as in Italy (it might have to do with the Giro tradition there).

We got a lot of cyclists in our cities, that gives us more understanding of each other. The number of cyclists increase by the amount we got to pay for petrol. We do have bike paths and people use them. We do have cyclists who don't - and I will be one of them at speeds >20k's of that average on the path. I will be prepared to stop. But I will also continue to x a red with my bicycle if there is no traffic coming.

 Written by : Stone

In my State, the reason given for enforcing adults, as well as children, to wear helmets was because the police said the law would be impossible to enforce if it only applied to children. I know it sucks, but when you think about it, it does make sense. Enforcement would be difficult in an environment where some are wearing helmets and other are not wearing helmets.

Adults set the example for kids, and if helmet laws means that less kids suffer head injuries, then why wouldnt you support helmet laws? After all, giving up a liberty is a small price to pay for reducing the number of kids with head injuries.



Well the police says a lot of things - it's their job to give you a ticket if you cross a red light. Even if you do it very carefully ---- at 3:30am in the middle of no-where. Fact is they have to because they assume that if you were not to notice them, you wouldn't have been noticing others. Still I believe it's ridiculous.

As previously hinted: Following your analogy, adults should be prohibited watching other than PG movies, no booze, no smoke, not even riding a car (because how can you prohibit kids from driving illegally if they see adults do it (legally)?), btw: no sex(*)... In this statement simply replace "helmets" with "condoms"... See where this is going? Please get back to reason.

(*) Adult sensual activity is the reason for STD's spreading over this planet (and infecting children at birth), thus adults have proven incapable of acting responsible, thus they should be banned from performing this activity all together (as children are not legally having intercourse too) - artificial fertilisation shallt be imposed on all of us wink [/irony]

I'm happy that you wore a helmet and still have pulse - but you behave like a typical ex-smoker when it comes to helmets now. [/can of worms]

Nat: Maybe "peer pressure" (at festivals or traffic lights) is more of the issue. There's a lot of energy behind this yet I'm happy you're not one of those standing in the middle of Kao Sarn Road/ Bangkok, with a bible in their hands, exclaiming: You're ALL sinners! and I side your stance against those who smoke on hospital premises.

Yet if I were to present you with a study that proves the burka to prevent sexual harassment (in the middle East) - would you start wearing one and promoting it (in Perth)?

I learned: Freedom is a good thing to keep and to defend by peaceful means. I wouldn't surrender my common sense because politicians and lobbyists want me to. I wouldn't hand over my responsibility to letters on a paper and a bulb in a lamp.

Amongst other things I wouldn't
attempt to swallow a sword just because other people do it and I think it's 'cool'. cross a green light 'just because others have a red one'. insist on my right (of way) if it obviously endangers my life.

People die every day, that doesn't make me aim for legislation opposing life.


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Lurch
BRONZE Member since Nov 2003

Lurch

old hand
Location: Oregon

Total posts: 929
Posted:Hah, I apologize FireTom, I get so used to bickering with you wink It was in the middle of a long post I didn't see the name/avatar while i was copying



I'm glad to see you're willing to defend your freedom, although slightly saddened to see you're not willing to fight for it.


#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored frown

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:I just received an apology from Lurch ubblove wink



Even though I'm opposing firearms because I believe that there is a line to draw as in what kinds of weapons should be available to the general public, even though I do have faith in our government - I'm not blind.



As long as my behaviour does not directly endanger other peoples lives (and excuse me, you still should look for yourself when x-ing a road even though you got a 'go') or puts them at a high risk (which I would believe the possession of a gun will) - nobody has the right to come into my living room and tell me to stop (whatever I'm doing).



Now to the outside world: Yes I usually do wear clothes when leaving the house in summer even though I wouldn't have to have to.



I will certainly oppose *any* legislation that forces women to wear a Burka or to dress up in any particular manner - as not to attract those looneys who perceive women as willing objects for rape. If I would see someone trying to harass a woman (for any reason) I will help her. If that means I have to get into a fight (for her freedom to wear hotpants and tank tops) - I will.



I will certainly oppose *any* legislation that prohibits Sikh to wear a Turban, Muslim women to wear a Burka or other races to walk in public. If I were to witness them becoming victim of violent assault, I would help them - and yes, I would be ready to fight for their freedom to do so.



(btw: the picture is not of my head. whoever is interested in how big my head really is, check here wink)



@Nat: No personally I would only support those opting for helmets where they would not pose a greater danger to their environment by doing so. In my case a (motorbike) helmet limits my vision, makes me turn my head less and gives me severe headache after a short term. This is why in Germany I opt for a helmet that is not safe, as to obey the law and still be safe according to my personal means.



Re. emergency medical service, police and splattered brains on pavements: I agree that it should not require a butchers mentality to conduct these jobs... hence it will always be a part of their job, even if everybody wears a helmet.



 Written by : Nat

I'm aiming to convert others to the opinion so that it is the majority.





That's what is called democracy - and this is what President Bush also hails to.[/provocative statement] wink



As long as your persuasion is gentle and doesn't involve name calling, you got my approval wink



Unfortunately those

EDITED_BY: FireTom (1213520501)


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

onewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield

Total posts: 3252
Posted: Written by :



The bit about having a pulse was to indicate that helmets have saved my life. Sorry you find that “laughable”.



Read the posts-

 Written by : stone


 Written by : OWD

How would you tell? How did you tell? Was it anything more than a safe feeling you got from wearing a helmet?



I still have a pulse, I’m alive.




 Written by : my reply


Sorry mate- but that is laughable.

Think of the multitudes of non-helmet wearers who also have a pulse and are alive- they could use your exact reasoning to prove their (opposite) argument.




Clearly, what I found laughable was not the fact that you have a pulse, it was your 'reasoning'.


"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!

Delete

natasqi


natasqi

addict
Location: Perth

Total posts: 489
Posted: Written by :Lurch


 Written by :natasqi

I would welcome legislation that could increase the general health of the population, even if it may take some of my liberty.



And *that* has got to be one of the scariest statements ever uttered on this forum.





Well, for example... the polio vaccine. If this was given at birth by law, in all countries, polio could be eradicated.
Now to be FORCING it on people at birth could be seen as taking away liberty/choice/freedom. But in my mind, I think it's about greater good.
There was a group of 'new aged/hippy/stereotype' people living in Busselton/Dunsborough which is South of Perth who all decided not to immunise their children.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200605/s1631321.htm
This is all I can find on it.. frown
But here, parents are putting children at risk (I guess, like why some people argue children should have to wear helmets and adults not)
And outbreaks of polio in developing countries are often linked to a government official telling people it's Western medicine to make people sterile...

Vaccines are mostly done when you're young and it's not like when you turn 18, you suddenly ask your parents whether you're vaccinated or not. Most people wouldn't know, or would just assume they are. And then don't realise that when they're going traveling, other countries have epidemics of these diseases that can cause death...

 Written by : Tom


Yet if I were to present you with a study that proves the burka to prevent sexual harassment (in the middle East) - would you start wearing one and promoting it (in Perth)?



Well, it would have to be cost-benefit analysis... I'm pretty sure the study would say that a total society would have to wear the burka, and that one single person would not make a difference. and it would be that culture that has grown up with that law etc etc..
But if you found a study to say that in a Western society (to reduce confounding factors and bias), that by bring in a law to make all women wear burkas, and by all women doing so, there was no sexual harrassment at all, no rape etc etc, and no increase in other unwanted factors (racial/discrimination etc)... I would seriously consider supporting the introduction of such a scheme.

It would still have to be democratic vote, and I would have to consider whether I believe that the benefits outweigh the risks. Such as an increase in Vitamin D deficiency because there is no regular contact with sunlight.
Other things to consider is sunstroke, the fact burkas would be very hard to exercise in and therefore general health would be affected.
And the sexual inequity that results could encourage discrimination at workplaces etc...

 Written by :Nat


If I knew that by bringing in legislation that all women must wear headscarfs (just hair, not full face, and no restrictions on other clothes) would definitely prevent anyone anywhere to be raped ever again, I would wear one.



I would wear one when the legislation is brought in..(thought I'd clarify that). There would be no point only me wearing something, if it wasn't going to make a difference...

So, I would change my behaviour and accept legislation that I believe increases the health of the population.

But everyone's beliefs are different. So some people here don't think that helmets increase the health of the population, they are free to their opinion.
It's the people who say "helmets increase health but I will not accept legislation as such" that I don't understand.

Question for all.
If there was a law that, helmets are not law, but if you are not wearing a helmet, then you do not get public health care (for bicycle related accidents), you have to pay for it yourself... would you still ride without a helmet?


Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:I like your attitude, Nat. But Polio has a different problem than just Hippies and anti-western scaremongering.

Life has proven to be very imperishable and it's virtually impossible to force vaccines to all 357,055 babies born/day.

 Written by : University of Michigan

Polio virus is transmitted through feces, via poor sanitation or fecal-oral contact from poor hygiene.



Vaccines alone are not going to do the job. Global development might.

Re. Burkas: you yourself already are putting so many conditions on the (unlikely) even of promoting/ wearing a Burka, that I could respond: If you were to credibly prove that me wearing a helmet would automatically stop any child in the world suffer from accidentally imposed brain traumas, I would (for that sake) start to wear one and side you, promoting that legislation.


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

natasqi


natasqi

addict
Location: Perth

Total posts: 489
Posted:Sorry.. the link wasn't about Polio.. it was about measles. :P
So that's about people coughing near you... It's kinda hard to prevent transmission, other than everyone being forced to wear gas-masks...

[qoute:Tom]
If you were to credibly prove that me wearing a helmet would automatically stop any child in the world suffer from accidentally imposed brain traumas, I would (for that sake) start to wear one and side you, promoting that legislation.



How about any bicyle related brain trauma... would you then?

Why were stackhats outlawed? Were they not as safe as the ones now or is it fashion...?


Delete

Doc Lightning
GOLD Member since May 2001

Doc Lightning

HOP Mad Doctor
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA

Total posts: 13920
Posted: Written by :natasqi


Well, for example... the polio vaccine. If this was given at birth by law, in all countries, polio could be eradicated.
Now to be FORCING it on people at birth could be seen as taking away liberty/choice/freedom. But in my mind, I think it's about greater good.



I support mandatory vaccination. This is because this meets the litmus test of "endangering others." Failure to vaccinate makes herd immunity fail. Thus, coverage approaching 100% is necessary to eradicate the illness.

And FireTom, vaccination alone WILL eradicate polio. It worked with smallpox. Poliovirus only infects humans, so there is no animal reservoir.

 Written by

There was a group of 'new aged/hippy/stereotype' people living in Busselton/Dunsborough which is South of Perth who all decided not to immunise their children.



Happened when I was in medical school in Ann Arbor. Kid came in with a life-threatening disease called epiglottitis, which is prevented by the HiB vaccine. I consider it medical neglect. Remember, you're talking about children here. So that's the other place where the litmus test fails. It's not an adult making an informed decision about themselves, it's an adult making a decision for a child who cannot consent to avoid vaccination.


 Written by


But if you found a study to say that in a Western society (to reduce confounding factors and bias), that by bring in a law to make all women wear burkas, and by all women doing so, there was no sexual harrassment at all, no rape etc etc, and no increase in other unwanted factors (racial/discrimination etc)... I would seriously consider supporting the introduction of such a scheme.


Eww.

 Written by

Question for all.
If there was a law that, helmets are not law, but if you are not wearing a helmet, then you do not get public health care (for bicycle related accidents), you have to pay for it yourself... would you still ride without a helmet?



I would support such a law in theory, but in practice it wouldn't work. A man comes in with severe head trauma. You can't refuse to treat him because the government isn't going to pay you. And then he winds up going on to become an invalid...or a corpse. Now who pays for his care? His family? Because this adult was an idiot, his wife and kids now have to pay?

Doesn't strike me as fair.


-Mike )'(
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella

"A buckuht 'n a hooze!" -Valura

Delete

Rouge Dragon
BRONZE Member since Jul 2003

Rouge Dragon

Insert Champagne Here
Location: without class distinction

Total posts: 13215
Posted: Written by : Doc

Doesn't strike me as fair.



Interesting, because I don't think it's fair for my taxes to pay to treat someone who wilfully placed themselves in danger by not wearing a helmet. My taxes are already paying for more tollways which I can't use to be built.


i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...

Delete

natasqi


natasqi

addict
Location: Perth

Total posts: 489
Posted:OK, so you support vaccines... even though it takes away the choice forever...

If there was a injection, that when given to the mother during prgnancy, made the skull develop to be twice as thick, which is then proven to reduce/prevent head injuries on bicycles... (I know, many flaws, how will such a head get through the birth canal... the fact there will still be shear forces on the brain etc etc, but just go with it here )
Would you support this?
It's not about endangering others at all, just for that one child's protection.
But as a child they can't chose...

Also, if a vaccine came out now for... Neisseria or Multiresistance Staph or VRE...
I'm guessing you would support this for children, as per your argument above...
But since it JUST came out... would you support all adults have to have the vaccine as well? To eradicate these bacteria in one year?

( I know, many problems, other countries wouldn't have it etc.. but just go with it!)


Delete

Doc Lightning
GOLD Member since May 2001

Doc Lightning

HOP Mad Doctor
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA

Total posts: 13920
Posted: Written by :natasqi


OK, so you support vaccines... even though it takes away the choice forever...



Because it endangers others when you are not vaccinated AND a child has a right to protection.

Bike helmets neither protect nor endanger anyone else AND in the case of an adult, no child is involved.

And if a mythical, say HIV or MRSA vaccine came out, I would not support making it mandatory for adults. I would support an education campaign and mass availability, but I do not believe in forcing adults to do things like that. Especially because you can't eradicate MRSA due to non-human carriage. With HIV it's a bit more nebulous.


-Mike )'(
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella

"A buckuht 'n a hooze!" -Valura

Delete

Stone
GOLD Member since Jun 2001

Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne

Total posts: 2830
Posted:Natasqi, I agree about the group rider thing, but I feel there is also a lot of aggression generated by single cyclists towards motorists.



Lightning, that day when people willing take responsibility for their own lives could be along time coming, in the mean time helmets and seat belts make a lot of sense. Just because you dont see some laws working is not a reason to abandon the process.



 Written by Lurch

Hah, I apologize FireTom, I get so used to bickering with you It was in the middle of a long post I didn't see the name/avatar while i was copying.





Lurch, Im going to raise you on this one. Equally, you could have been in the middle of a long ride or drive and lost concentration. Its like Stout said, one minute you are driving/riding along, and the next minute you going are going over and over and over. What flashes through the mind is, Im glad Im wearing a seat-belt/helmet. And hey, some days wed just forget to put on our heads, if they werent screwed on.



 Written by Lurch

It may not be worth arguing anymore Doc, maybe it's just us American's that treasure our freedoms and our right to choose as much as possible..We don't like giving up such things easily. Look at how much trouble prohibition caused here in the 20's.





Amen! You hit that one on the head. Perhaps you should explore the impact of your pioneering spirit on the American dream. Its not like you have a choice either, because every time someone wants to introduce something new its blocked as a perceived threat to a personal liberties. So, in reality you are locked in the past unable to move forwards.



 Written by Fire Tom

Stone: Roads have been built by taxpayers money. We all own the roads - in equal shares, rights and duties. More so, if you come to my country you're free to use my share of the roads here, without paying toll. We happily provide our roads to you. Even if (for the first time in your life) you rent an Audi A8/ Porsche/ Ferrari and decide to travel at speeds exceeding 240kph.Fire Tom, the roads have indeed been built by taxpayers money.





Fire Tom we have, or had up until recently, roads with no maximum speed limit.



When you say Id be free to use your share of the road, presumable I would be able to do what I wanted. But then, your have already said that I couldnt ride a bicycle on the roads. Id also be surprised if I could ride a motor bike without a helmet or drive a car without a seat belt on the autobahns.



 Written by Fire Tom

And. Hey nobody has the right to come into my living room and tell me to stop (whatever I'm doing).





I agree, nobody has the right to come into your living room and tell you what to do. But we are talking public roads, not your living room, and people in authority do have the right to tell you what to do on public roads. That includes not speeding and running red lights.



 Written by Fire Tom

@Nat: No personally I would only support those opting for helmets where they would not pose a greater danger to their environment by doing so. In my case a (motorbike) helmet limits my vision, makes me turn my head less and gives me severe headache after a short term. This is why in Germany I opt for a helmet that is not safe, as to obey the law and still be safe according to my personal means.





Fire Tom, its one thing if you have a physical problem with helmets, and if that is the cases you might be able to get an exemption from a Doctor. Otherwise, you should be able to get a high tech light weight helmet that could help you reduce headaches. Ive never found a full face helmet reduced visibility to the extent that it becomes a problem. Using your mirrors will prevent you having to look back all the time. You could also trying different bars or a different seat.



The Burka is a different discussion.


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Lurch
BRONZE Member since Nov 2003

Lurch

old hand
Location: Oregon

Total posts: 929
Posted: Written by :

Lurch, Im going to raise you on this one. Equally, you could have been in the middle of a long ride or drive and lost concentration. Its like Stout said, one minute you are driving/riding along, and the next minute you going are going over and over and over. What flashes through the mind is, Im glad Im wearing a seat-belt/helmet. And hey, some days wed just forget to put on our heads, if they werent screwed on.



Thats a far cry from the same on that one Stone, even for you. Most of my "arguments" have been with FireTom, so I put his name in from force of habbit, not because I "forgot". I can't say that I've ever "forgot" to put on a helmet or my seatbelt.

 Written by :


Amen! You hit that one on the head. Perhaps you should explore the impact of your pioneering spirit on the American dream. Its not like you have a choice either, because every time someone wants to introduce something new its blocked as a perceived threat to a personal liberties. So, in reality you are locked in the past unable to move forwards.



You know what? Can't argue with you there. But it's not just perceived to be a threat to my personal liberties, it most certainly is a threat to my personal liberties. I'm not locked into *anything* because I have the right to choose what I want, I haven't been forced into a corner like you would like me to walk into.

Sorry, but I'm with Doc on this one. Vaccines are required for children because we make a choice for them before they are able to. Once you're an adult, it shouldn't be required. That said, my state has a mandatory helmet law for motorcycles, I don't exactly agree with it, but I'll enforce it, and I'll still wear my helmet simply because it's the smartest thing to do. But I won't dismiss someones opinions, or tell them they're wrong if they don't think it should be a requirement.


#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored frown

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted: Written by :Rouge Dragon


I don't think it's fair for my taxes to pay to treat someone who wilfully placed themselves in danger by not wearing a helmet.



Sorry to partially disagree. By not wearing a helmet I'm not wilfully place myself in danger. I would do so by committing a dangerous activity along, like speeding down the hill with 60kph or riding against a traffic jam.

When riding on the wrong side of the street I'm aware that I do, will pay even more attention and drive slower.

If legislation exempts me from medical treatment because I chose not to wear one, so be it. If legislation legally claims the money spent on my treatment because I didn't wear a helmet, so be it. It's okay with me.

Stone: Just because we have no speed limit on parts of the track doesn't mean we have no rules at all. Seat belts and helmets on motorcycles are mandatory, even though you wouldn't get shot or put in jail for not wearing one.

Speeding and running red lights are against the law, true. I still continue to think for myself - and if that means I will occasionally break the laws, I'll bear the risk of getting caught and the consequences thereof.

I said that full face helmets reduce *my* field of view - maybe with you it's different. Looking into the mirrors alone is dangerous. I've been driving trucks - you could hide a full house behind them. I try to turn my head *every time* I make a turn or change lanes.

Some rules are made so people don't have to think for themselves anymore - applies to cops as well. I respect them wherever I regard them valid and whenever doing otherwise would (IMO) endanger someones life and property, bow to them wherever there's no reason for me to break them/ where cause and effect have no reasonable correlation - but I will continue to disobey where I feel the above is not applicable.

A healthy disobedience is my tradition.


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Doc Lightning
GOLD Member since May 2001

Doc Lightning

HOP Mad Doctor
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA

Total posts: 13920
Posted: Written by :Stone


Lightning, that day when people willing take responsibility for their own lives could be along time coming, in the mean time helmets and seat belts make a lot of sense. Just because you dont see some laws working is not a reason to abandon the process.



No, freedom to do with one's own body what one chooses is more important.

Tell me, how many of you have had unprotected sex? How many of you have had sex outside of a committed relationship where both partners waited six months after a negative HIV and other STD tests before engaging in sexual activity? Well, I don't think it's fair that my tax dollars pay to treat your STD's. So anyone who comes in with an STD for reasons other than rape should have to pay a fine on top of their own medical bills.

It's the same logic. In fact, my argument makes more sense because it takes (at least) two to have sex, so you are endangering others by being sexually active before life-long monogamous marriage.

I don't like the line of reasoning you propose because it can be used to nanny too many people and it will never work any more than drug laws stopped me from smoking pot in college.


-Mike )'(
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella

"A buckuht 'n a hooze!" -Valura

Delete

BansheeCat
BRONZE Member since Jul 2005

veteran
Location: lost

Total posts: 1247
Posted:For the most part, I agree that people should have the right to do what they will in decisions concerning their own bodies- though I am also concerned about the amount we spend on community health dealing with some of the ridiculously bad decisions made... I would agree to in some way limiting free or subsidized medical support for people practicing certain behaviours that are most obviously dangerous and taxing to the medical system.

But the most important aspect is for me, the burden you place on the people who have to deal with the consequences of your choice.

Yeah, by not wearing a helmet, you risk your own head. But when your head smashes, someone else deals with it. On all levels. I have been there to pick up the peices, and it is not pretty.

The idea that we are all autonomous , separate beings with complete right to govern self denies the powerful connections of community and relationship. We can do better than simply legislating though. We can strenghten relationships so people can see the connections between their behaviour and others lives, and assume the responsibility naturally, because they care. And because it is the common acceptable standard of the community they live within.

There will always be those that dont, but many people do respond to education, and the gentle culture pressures of a community standards.

A simple example is seat belt wearing in Canada. I dont know of anyone that does it because of fear of fines. Almost everyone does it unconsciously now, because it has become standard car safety behaviour.


"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."

Delete

natasqi


natasqi

addict
Location: Perth

Total posts: 489
Posted: Written by :Doc Lightning



Tell me, how many of you have had unprotected sex? How many of you have had sex outside of a committed relationship where both partners waited six months after a negative HIV and other STD tests before engaging in sexual activity? Well, I don't think it's fair that my tax dollars pay to treat your STD's. So anyone who comes in with an STD for reasons other than rape should have to pay a fine on top of their own medical bills.




AGREED!!

Just because it's commonplace to sleep willy-nilly, or to have unprotected sex.. doesn't mean it's right or the best thing for our health.

I know that I haven't endangered myself in this way... (probably because sexual health lectures have scarred me for life, and seeing anal warts getting burnt off... *shivers* well, lets just say I'm very very very careful)

In this way, you still have freedom to do what you want, but just have to face and pay for the consequences. How is that not fair? It's not like we're BANNING sex.. :P


Delete

Stone
GOLD Member since Jun 2001

Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne

Total posts: 2830
Posted:Lightning, I think you are confusing the issues of road laws and with sexuality.

You enter into an agreement to use public roads. You agree to obey the speed limits, stop at red lights and give way as required etc. So, you loose some of your personal freedom as a requirement to use the public roads. Seat belts and helmets laws are just an additional requirement to use the roads. It is a regulated system.

You asked earlier Should I suffer a consequence for choosing to be sexually active? And the answer is No. The Australian governments have made it illegal to discriminate against a person on the grounds of their health status, including having HIV/AIDS. Its a criminal offense to knowingly transmit AIDS in Australia, and people have been prosecuted. It is also a criminal offense for sexual workers to transmit a STD.

 Written by Lightning

I don't like the line of reasoning you propose because it can be used to nanny too many people and it will never work any more than drug laws stopped me from smoking pot in college.



I think there is a difference between self-inflicted victimless crimes like smoking and bad eating habits and having to wear a seat belt or helmet. Arguably, wearing a seat belt or helmet is as much about protecting people from other road users, and much as themselves.


Lurch, Im impressed you always wear you helmet or seat belt. Most of us arent as diligent, and thats one reason why seat belt laws were introduced. A small price to pay for the community.

Anyhow, how is wearing a seat belt a threat your personal liberties? What are you giving up, nothing much except the right to be selfish?

 Written by Fire Tom

When riding on the wrong side of the street I'm aware that I do, will pay even more attention and drive slower.



Fire Tom, you are riding on the wrong side of the road, and you see nothing wrong with that! Enough said.

 Written by Fire Tom

Some rules are made so people don't have to think for themselves anymore - applies to cops as well. I respect them wherever I regard them valid and whenever doing otherwise would (IMO) endanger someones life and property, bow to them wherever there's no reason for me to break them/ where cause and effect have no reasonable correlation - but I will continue to disobey where I feel the above is not applicable. .



It is true that road rules are made for the lowest common denominator. That doesnt mean we dont have to think about them when we are on the road. Only respecting the rules you think are valid is rather a immature approach to using a shared road. Its like you somehow think you are above the law. What if everybody made up their own road rules, it would be chaos.


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:??? Dude, you should get yourself to Europe. In cities like Amsterdam or Berlin - or my hometown, Munich. Many people ride on the (bikepath) along the wrong side of the road. No - there is nothing wrong with that, because all people need to use their heads when in traffic, not just confine them and enjoy that fake feeling of safety... actually that [fake safety] is the fabric many accidents are woven from.



I'm not above the law, my friend. But handing over responsibility to a sign, a bulb in a lamp or the letters on a piece of paper is what I'd call immature.



ubblol And if you "dream of riding an Enfield in India" - with your kind of attitude - keep it a dream.



 Written by : Stone

You enter into an agreement to use public roads. You agree to obey the speed limits, stop at red lights and give way as required etc. So, you loose some of your personal freedom as a requirement to use the public roads. Seat belts and helmets laws are just an additional requirement to use the roads. It is a regulated system.



You asked earlier Should I suffer a consequence for choosing to be sexually active? And the answer is No. The Australian governments have made it illegal to discriminate against a person on the grounds of their health status, including having HIV/AIDS. Its a criminal offense to knowingly transmit AIDS in Australia, and people have been prosecuted. It is also a criminal offense for sexual workers to transmit a STD.





You enter into an agreement when engaging in sexual activity too. What you are uttering is what keeps sexually active ppl from frequently checking up on their their status (and road users from checking). By thinking about HIV, using condoms - by using a seatbelt or wearing a helmet you believe to be safe? umm That's an illusion, let me tell you that much. At the most you're safer than by not doing so.



Actually the whole HIV/Aids/STD sidetrack we're taking now is a different sidetrack entirely with a different background and different aspects. I don't really like to compare apples and oranges anymore...



offtopic



We follow road rules as to insure a smooth steady flow of traffic. Funny enough in a mostly unregulated system like that in India, it still works.



Andrea: If you dislike to pick up skull fragments, then please don't do it. I like you the way you are - no need to vulgarize your artistic spirit by doing what is not your job. Speaking of that: everyone chooses their own profession. If I commit myself to scratch ppl off the pavement, then that is my decision -I wouldn't expect your compassion for that.



 Written by : Andrea

The idea that we are all autonomous , separate beings with complete right to govern self denies the powerful connections of community and relationship. We can do better than simply legislating though. We can strenghten relationships so people can see the connections between their behaviour and others lives, and assume the responsibility naturally, because they care. And because it is the common acceptable standard of the community they live within.





Whilst we are all interconnected, we do get a good remainder of mortality and what this body is made of (IMO the reason why at some stage men were not admitted to their women giving birth was because the shock of watching that process was feared to alienate them from their women (apart from them fainting)). If we don't keep in touch with what is reality [birth, living and dying], with what is natural, we enter/ continue a dream stage. Detached from each other.



If you strongly connect yourself with the certain fate of someone else, mind why you do that in the first place. As we're all interconnected there is a reasoning behind everything happening.



Personally I don't believe in Utopia coming, in a perfect place that we have to create by restrictions and regulations. Education is the way - but then again: Who is setting the standards? This is why we have diversity and why life is supporting diversity. There is no valid, ready-made concept that limits and simultaneously serves all of us.


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Dentrassi
GOLD Member since Apr 2003

Dentrassi

ZORT!
Location: Brisbane

Total posts: 3044
Posted:what i find fascinating is how this has gone down the ancient philosophical question about 'what are the limits of freedom' that apply to any number of other HoP discussion.



the difference in opinion lies in the belief between the importance of personal liberty/freedom vs the belief that controlling regulation/laws can prevent harm.



Interesting to what extent personal liberties are relative to location, sexuality etc etc. ubbrollsmile



right, back to the sidelines....

EDITED_BY: Dentrassi (1213703194)


"Here kitty kitty...." - Schroedinger.

Delete

Doc Lightning
GOLD Member since May 2001

Doc Lightning

HOP Mad Doctor
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA

Total posts: 13920
Posted: Written by :Stone



Lightning, I think you are confusing the issues of road laws and with sexuality.



You enter into an agreement to use public roads.





That may be the case in Australia. In the U.S. freedom of movement is a constitutional guarantee. You do not enter into an agreement to use a public road.



You enter into an agreement to operate a motor vehicle. A bike is not a motor vehicle.



And again, regulations on motor vehicles and bikes should only focus on behaviors that directly harm or endanger people OTHER than the individual in question. That means speeding, drunk driving, etc.



 Written by

I think there is a difference between self-inflicted victimless crimes like smoking and bad eating habits and having to wear a seat belt or helmet. Arguably, wearing a seat belt or helmet is as much about protecting people from other road users, and much as themselves.





But what you've failed to justify is how making ME wear a seatbelt protects YOU from ME. It protects ME from YOU, but that should be my choice.



And again, I categorically reject the "cost to society" argument because that can be applied to too many draconian rules and regulations.



 Written by

Anyhow, how is wearing a seat belt a threat your personal liberties? What are you giving up, nothing much except the right to be selfish?





I dunno. What if I value not wrinkling my outfit above my own life? Fine, that's stupid, but here's the point: who are you to think that you are better than me and can tell me what I should do because I don't want to wear a seatbelt?



For the record, I wear seatbelts 100% of the time in moving cars and I wear helmets 100% of the time while on bikes.


-Mike )'(
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella

"A buckuht 'n a hooze!" -Valura

Delete

Pele
BRONZE Member since Dec 2000

Pele

the henna lady
Location: WNY, USA

Total posts: 6193
Posted:I have a thought/question.

How much of your opinion is based on where you are?

For example.
I know more urban dwellers who wouldn't ride a bike without wearing a helmet. Obviously they are around traffic all the time and really in harms way.

I grew up in the middle of corn fields. We *never* wore helmets on bicycles, and the children of my friends who are out there now still don't.
Was/is there danger? Sure but it isn't as readily perceived as having to ride next to cars and busses and those crazy freakin cab drivers.

Just curious.


Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK

Delete

Lurch
BRONZE Member since Nov 2003

Lurch

old hand
Location: Oregon

Total posts: 929
Posted: Written by

Lurch, Im impressed you always wear you helmet or seat belt. Most of us arent as diligent, and thats one reason why seat belt laws were introduced. A small price to pay for the community.

Anyhow, how is wearing a seat belt a threat your personal liberties? What are you giving up, nothing much except the right to be selfish?



It's been engrained in me since I was a kid. There is a principal behind all of this that you can't seem to grasp Stone. It's not the 'right to be selfish' it's my right to *choose* that you're taking away. I don't have to justify why I want the choice, you need to justify why I shouldn't be allowed it. Even if my answer will always be the same as yours to a given situation, I want the choice, and I deserve the choice, because who are you to determine whats I should do with my life?


#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored frown

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Delete

Stone
GOLD Member since Jun 2001

Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne

Total posts: 2830
Posted:Fire Tom, thanks for the warning about Indian roads. The road accident rate in India is among the highest in the world, and most accidents are caused by human error.

 Written by Fire Tom

We follow road rules as to insure a were smooth steady flow of traffic (In Australia). Funny enough in a mostly unregulated system like that in India, it still works.



It really depends on what you mean by works Fire Tom.

 Written by

According to the experts at the National Transportation Planning and Research Centre (NTPRC) the number of road accidents in India is three times higher than that prevailing in developed countries. The number of accidents for 1000 vehicles in India is as high as 35 while the figure ranges from 4 to 10 in developed countries. Tribune



 Written by Lightning

But what you've failed to justify is how making ME wear a seatbelt protects YOU from ME. It protects ME from YOU, but that should be my choice.

And again, I categorically reject the "cost to society" argument because that can be applied to too many draconian rules and regulations.

..who are you to think that you are better than me and can tell me what I should do because I don't want to wear a seatbelt.



Lightning, wearing a seat belt "should" be a choice, but most countries have decided people are not capable of making a informed decision in this area, and therefore introduced mandatory seat belt laws. If it seems like they were (are) treating adults as children then the obvious reason for that is adults were acting like children. Given the success of mandatory seat belt laws most adults would agree.

I think this whole argument about the threat of further rules eroding peoples perceived personal liberties has a lot to with insecurity and trust. But that really is another can of worms. These laws have been introduce into many countries with outstanding success, and they have not eroded personal liberties.

Im sure it is a requirement to wear a helmet when going down a mine or when entering a construction site. Are those laws also seen as infringements of personal liberties?


Pele good points.

 Written by Pele

How much of your opinion is based on where you are?



As far as country driving verses city driving goes. There was big safety campaign in Victoria called Country Kids Die on Country Roads. The motive behind the campaign was kids were dying at a higher rate in the country. A reason for this was because kids thought driving was less of a risk in the country, and had become complacent with driver safety.

Lurch, how about the cost to society? I really don't want to go into this, but it's like what I said above. I think this whole argument about the threat of further rules eroding peoples perceived personal liberties has a lot to with insecurity and trust; and adults acting like children when presented with change.


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Page: 12345

Similar Topics

Using the keywords [bike helmet*] we found the following similar topics.
1. Learn > Hoop > Mini hoop > Emergancy helmet *help/resource
2. Forums > Bike Helmets [147 replies]
3. Forums > Bike chain and fire breathing [9 replies]
4. Forums > Bike messengers on crack [10 replies]
5. Forums > bike lights [4 replies]

     Show more..