Bonneville America Forums Forums Rider Safety Forums Legislation CT helmet law in the works.

I just learned today that my states legisalture (we know whats best for you party controlled) is once again talking about requireing us unable to think for ourselves citizens.
To wear helmets. Again I'll say I wear one. I make my wife wear one,(if she dont wear she dont ride).But I will never support a law that requires one. So if there is a Hartford
anti helmet protest, like the last time they tried ramming this down us. I'll be there fighting for your
right to smash your head on the pavment.(with my bucket on of course).

CT has among the highest cost of living issues in the country, with business and populace on the run as a result, & this is what they (de)focus on ...

They are winding up the propaganda machine. Local TV news(Channel 3,CBS station) aired about a 5 minute report tonight on recent crashes in the state. Mentioned that all the surrounding states have mandatory helmet laws,In a "see its not a bad thing way".Interviewed a couple people I believe are from CMRA (they were agaisnt it).

reporter aksed aguy who had been in a bad wreak,

"Dont you think you should wear a helmet?"
His reply: "Life is about risk".

Question was not "do you believe others should be forced to wear helmets?"

Prediction: The next move by the propagandists will be to produce a liar from one of the major insurance companies.
To tell us that required helmets will make everyones rates go down.

No kidding!! I always thought it didn't... In fact, when I first started riding, I went on a RAT ride from Worcester down to Hooters in Warwick. I remember one guy took his helmet off when we crossed the border. Is it a fairly recent chance?

RI lone rider has never needed helmet. But passenger mandatroy has been in effect for years. I guess the rational is the passenger is in reality a potential victum
should the rider do somthing stupid.So needs to be protected.

I thnk maybe you miss understood Benny. The RI law is for passenger only.

Yes I did, I assumed it meant everyone on the bike. I gocha now. I coulda sworn I saw a helmetless riding this weekend on my way thru!!

There should NEVER EVER be mandatory helmet laws!!!

...Because that takes all the fun out of watchin' for all the morons out there ridin' around without their helmets on who I can only suppose think they're invincible and that their head is harder than they think it is, whenever I ride around WITH my helmet on!!!

YEP! Takes the "sport" clean outta that endevour alright!!!

(and ah..if anybody out there sees themselves in my little "sport" and takes offense in being called a "moron"...TOUGH! the truth friggin' HURTS, doesn't it???!!!...but TRUST ME, it doesn't hurt NEAR AS MUCH as after some idiot cager pulls out in front of you and you kiss their friggin' GRILL!!!)

(am I RIGHT, Jackson???!!!...you know by first hand experience, DON'T CHA???!!!)

(and YEAH folks...I never do make a lot o' friends "tellin' it like it is"...YOU'RE RIGHT!!!)

(but like I said...the government has NO RIGHT takin' away my "sport"!!!)

(and OH, BTW...I don't want the government to ban cigarettes EITHER because, I smoke...I'm kind'a weak that way...but AT LEAST I KNOW that I'M A FRIGGIN' MORON and I readily ADMIT IT whenever I LIGHT ONE UP!..SO THERE!!!)

OK Kevin, Your turn.

Dwight really.... I mean really.... Why even go there?

Why Benny?! Because sometimes a word to the wise(OR maybe even sometimes to my fellow morons out there) COULD just save a life!

(that's why, Benny...that's why)

More the "how" than the "why"...

The "how" is called "bombast", Benny.

You see, I've learned(unfortunately) that in today's world, those big ol' blowhards like Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Obermann get a heck of a lot more "play" out there, and tend to spur a discussion(and yes, some of that stuff known as "emotion" too) a little more than those who attempt to "elevate" a discussion by appealing solely to the intellect out there.

(oh...and it's kind'a fun to poke fun at folks too...at least it is from THIS END of the stick anyway...BUT if you've been paying attention at all then you've probably also noticed that I often point that stick MY WAY an awful lot around here TOO!)

Quote:

---

...just save a life!

---

Oh please save me big brother, please save me from myself.

As I see from you frequently Dwight, you turn the argument from what it truly is about into some overly emotional softspot that you feel that the argument is. It is not about whether or not wearing a helmet is the safe thing or not the safe thing to do. It is about whether or not the beloved governmnet should be telling me that I need to wear a helmet or not. You are correct, if some body wants to be a moron and ride without a helmet and the pavement breaks their skull open like an egg, it probably would have been better to be wearing a helmet. But we restrict one little freedom here, one little freedom there and all of a sudden the words liberty and feedom disappear and the soolcialist oligarchy begins. And I know there are some who may even anticipate that day. I sir, do not.

I wear my helmet when I feel like I need to wear my helmet. I know, dangerous admission in this here forum: most of the time I do not ---->>>> MORON. There it's out, and it is my right to be one if I want. When I decide to wear my helmet or not should be my choice not some oligarchical bureaucrat that would fall off a tricycle. So please continue to profess the way big brother is going to save me from myself. By the way I am sure that there will be some type of new tax imposed to police this ever altruistic effort. Maybe a helmet sticker tax.

(By the way, how do conservative talk show hosts make there way into a discussion on the validity of helmet laws? That is a puzzling one.)

Keith, DUDE, did I NOT SAY that "Big Brother" has NO RIGHT to tell us to wear a helmet or NOT?! Why...I think I DID!

But don't forget, along with these FREEDOMS to choose our own way in life, be they rational and well thought through choices or not, ALSO comes the FREEDOM of those who may differ in those choices to POINT OUT the irrationality of those whose decisions, when almost all empirically-derived data received to date, points to it's irrationality.

You see, it's kind of like pointing out to those living in and around The Windy City that even though those Cubs look pretty darn good this year, their chances of a World Series win are still pretty darn slight at best. An observation which probably also wouldn't be met in that town with much popularity at this time either.

(and BTW...I also included that blowhard Obermann in my "bombast explanation", and that blowhard is anything BUT a "conservative" talk show host ya know, Keith)

(and BTW...does the term..."TONGUE IN CHEEK" mean NOTHING in America anymore???)

Quote:

---

(and BTW...does the term..."TONGUE IN CHEEK" mean NOTHING in America anymore???)

---

Hard to see in cyberspace...

Huh! That's funny, Benny. Evidently that must mean my "cyberspace vision" must be in the upper 95 percentile then, 'cuz it sure seems I can usually read that kind o' "tongue in cheek" stuff pretty darn well. Huh! Go figure?!

(well, son of a gun...Ma was right afterall...she always said eatin' all them there carrots when I was a pup was gonna pay off one day!!!)

Now...has anybody else gotten their little feelin's hurt 'round here 'cuz I said they were a moron for not wearin' their little brain buckets out there? Speak up NOW or hold your peace, folks! This is your LAST CHANCE to SAY SO!



(infuriatingly irreverent, ain't I?!)



(tell ya what folks...from now on I'll just go along with the crowd around here and ONLY call those CAGERS out there "morons", okay?!...'cuz evidently, THAT's okay around here!)



(yep...infuriatingly irreverent, alright!)



(BTW...would "Dolt" be an acceptable alternative for "Moron"???)

(<-that's five of them little suckers here, right?...this moron...err...I mean dolt here was tryin' to keep these guys in a progressive number, you see?!...but that's just THIS moron's...err...DOLT'S O.C.D. actin' up again!)

(<-six, right?!)

Dwight,

Yes you do have a the right to point out what you believe to be the more rational behavior. It just seems to be that when you do point out the error of someone's ways, as per your paradigm, you like to denigrate the said offender. No sir, I don't like that. Nope, not at all. Are my feelings hurt? Come on, gimme a freaking break. I think some people around this place that have met me know I got some pretty darn thick scales on this hide o' mine. So though I do respect you opinion, I do not take well to the belittling of folk to get a point across.

As for the CUBBIES, well, if we don't get it this year there is always next brother. (Course we won't need next year but I'm just saying.) But I certainly hope you don't think that one of them there Kalifornia teams has a chance in hades. Do you? I really hope not or I may just have to change my opinion of your ability level of rational thought.

OK, how do any talkshow hosts come in to play during a helmet law debate, conservative, liberal, libertarian, centrist or whatever? Still wondering.

Yes, those Angels are looking pretty good. I have to believe that part of their MLB leading record comes from the fact that the rest of their division is barely playing .500 ball or worse. Whereas I might add the two teams vying for 2nd place in the CUBBIES division have records good enough to hold 1st place in half of all MLB divisions.

That being said, the stupid AL did win the dumbass all star game. Have I mentioned how much I absolutely abhor the DH rule instituted to bring fan confidence in a league with decreasing fan attendance as well as keep old timers around that cannot even bend down to field a baseball anymore. But I digress here. God, I hate that the world series is dependent on a stupid game that was supposed be fun for both the fans and the players and not a deterministic interleague play type of game.

Lightbulb! Now I get the talkshow reference. In all honesty, I did from the start but it was something fun to bust your chops with.

(BTW, I am probably as intolerant as you of stupidity and idiocy all the while being quite capable of doing and saying some of the stupidest things ever done or uttered by homosapiens)

Yeah! But the Angels are beatin' up on everybody right now, not just those teams in their division.

And BTW...your last line pretty much sums up my thoughts too!

(...but the fact that we all "put on our pants one leg at a time" doesn't necessarily make all arguments of equal validity, ya know)

As much as would like to let Dwight and the rest of the communists tell us how we should live our lives and to what extent we should give up what few freedoms we have left.....

I digress......

I have simply come to the conclusion that these types of left wing "control" freaks will never let us be until their "elitist" attitude prevails.

They just dont want those of us who "choose" to live free in states that allow us the freedom to exist as we see fit to continue to do so.

Next thing you know Dwight and every other control freak out there will want to mandate laws for skiing....you will not be able to participate in downhill skiing without a lid.

You wont be able to skateboard without a helmet. You will not be able to do jack squat unless you wear federally mandated safety gear. The concept of risk acceptance and the ideology of a free spirit will be only a distant memory.


I sure wish we could make smoking "against the law" with federally mandated prison sentences for repeat offendors.

Each day as I leave work to get on my Triumph and leave work I walk past the "designated" smoking area where all those "who choose" to smoke because its legal do so without fear. Its legal to smoke there and they are all privy to the relative risks of smoking and the years it can take from their lives. Yet they do so each day. BECAUSE THEY CAN.......

Now...listen up Dwight and all the rest of you wannabe dictators.

Some of you smoke dont you? Nothing more need be said up to and including me or any other pro choice helmet persons calling you "morons"

Tuff aint it then.

Interestingly enough one coworker of mine from the MIS department who spends a lot of time smoking in the designated area once mentioned to me as I left..."You should wear a helmet...your gonna crack your skull some day"

I stopped , walked over to her and said..."Who dont you add three more cigarrettes to the one already dangling from your lips and smoke em all at one time...maybe the cancer will kick in sooner"

She has never mentioned my lack of a helmet again.

Hello fellow Moron, Kevin! I've been wonderin' where you've been keepin' yourself lately!

(now...let me crush out this here cigarette so I can type somethin' here, which EVIDENTLY won't mean a gosh darn thing to you anyway, especially after readin' THIS line o' yours, 'cuz dude, evidently you "don't read so good":

Quote:

---

"Now...listen up Dwight and all the rest of you wannabe dictators."

---

You see, Kevin ol' boy, ONCE AGAIN...Are ya WITH ME NOW???...LISTEN UP NOW!!!...I SAID:

"I don't want the government mandating people to wear helmets, just like I don't want them to ban cigarettes!!!"

GOT IT, fellow moron???!!!

AND, I ALSO SAID...

"YES! I AM A MORON FOR SMOKING!!! I ADMIT IT!!! I HAVE EMBRACED MY "INNER MORON"!!!

And so, tell ya what, DUDE?!!!

Why don't you get back to me once YOU'VE embraced YOUR "inner moron" and ADMIT that NOT WEARIN' a friggin' HELMET is a pretty moronic thing to do ALSO!!!(given what WE KNOW about the helmet issue anyway!...and Yep, it's kind'a like what's printed on each and every pack of CIGARETTES, ya know?!)

See ya later Kevin...my FELLOW MORON!!!

("communist"...my fellow moron here called me a "communist"...WHAT A FRIGGIN' JOKE!!!)

(<-I'm at seven now, right?!)

(and Keith...NOW do ya see why I "belittle" some folks out there???)

the logic is still is unassailable for those of us "free Morons"

Hypocrisy is the byword here. Yours! No wiggle room to debate your Kalifornis liberal nether region out of!

You made your bed and you gotta lie in it.

If that were not the case your first post would not be self evident as you would never have made it.

The Hypocrisy of the left is the joke here.

Let me ask ya somethin' Kevin...WHY is it that you ALMOST ALWAYS resort to politicizing ALMOST EVERY FRIGGIN' POST around here, HUH?!

MAN dude! Have I NOT told ya about "that other" website that's now fully functional???

Tell ya what. Why don't you join us over there, if you'd like to throw a few POLITICAL misnomers around occassionally, huh dude?! I mean, have I EVER ONCE called YOU(or ANYBODY for that matter) "an illogical REACTIONARY goofball" in this thread??? HUH?! I don't THINK so.

(I mean, I might'a called you a "Moron", but THAT'S pretty APOLITICAL, ain't it?!)

(<-we're up to EIGHT now, right folks?!)

Listen Kevin, if you can calm down for a minute, let me tell ya somethin' here...

Seeing as how this thread is in the "Legislation Forum", you may have a point that this thing is "political in nature" to a certain degree, and maybe, JUST maybe, instead of goin' the "I don't want the government taking away 'my sport' of countin' the morons not wearin' their helmets out there" tact, maybe, just maybe, I SHOULD HAVE said somethin' like..."Well, I sure hope those Connecticut Yankees CHOOSE to wear their helmets while they're on their way to Hartford for this Anti-Helmet Law Rally".

BUT, let me tell you WHY I feel so friggin' STRONGLY about people wearing their helmets while out on their bikes.

It's because, THANKS to my wearing a helmet some 13 years ago after some kid cager pulled in front of me while I was goin' down the road about 40MPH on my brand new Triumph Sprint AND my head hitting the asphalt at just a little less than that speed, causing my helmet to crack almost in two, and YET I was almost immediately able to get up and hobble over to my brand new Sprint which was now totaled and exclaim something to the effect of "OH GEEZ! MY BRAND NEW BIKE!!!", and then hear that kid tell me that famous refrain, "I'm sorry, I didn't see you!", and STILL understand what that kid was saying...well...THAT'S WHY I'm probably still around today to BUG YOU!!!

(I know, I know...you NOW probably have another reason to hate helmets, HUH?!)

(and no, don't worry...I'm gonna stop at eight of those "rofl" little gremlin suckers)

AND, if anybody out there asks me why I didn't go that second route as my argument to begin with...well...it's BECAUSE...I ALWAYS have a HECK of a lot more FUN around here yankin' some of my fellow morons around the room by goin' that FIRST route! THAT'S WHY!!!

(<-notice were back to ONE of these dudes now)

are you like this in real life? or just on the computer?

Well Tom, I think anybody who's come to the Southwest Triumph Fest in Prescott Arizona the last couple o' years would probably tell ya...YES! That goofball "Kalifornian" IS pretty much like "this" is person.

(...but maybe slightly "toned down" a bit perhaps)

However, there IS this other "goofball"(BTW, notice how I so effortlessly have segued from "moron" to "goofball"...that'll be my NEW pejorative noun for a while now, BTW) who resides in Tucson(just a few hours ride to and from Prescott mind you) who evidently, because he's such a friggin' anti-social type, probably won't ever find out for himself! HUH Kevin?!



(BTW Kevin, THAT was yet ANOTHER invitation for NEXT YEAR, you friggin' MOR...err...GOOFBALL you!!!)

I don't like rules either. I'm going to start riding on the left side of the road, and turning right on red even tho there's a sign, and running a business out of my home even tho it's in my lease not to, and stealing cable, and putting trucknuts on my car, and riding my bicycle on the interstate and... and...

I belive that insurance companies should be allowed to limit their disbursements in accidents and also should be able to adjust their premiums based on helmet and seatbelt usage by the operator and passengers. This is already done with respect to life insurance policies and tobacco use. If you say you use tobacco, expect a higher premium. If you say you don't wear a helmet, then expect a higher premium and a limit of liability for med expenses should you be in an accident which is covered by the policy. If you say that you wear a helmet, and then get into an accident and you weren't wearing one, then all bets are off on whether the insurance company should pay the entire amount or not.