Banning Motorcycles

[Michael G.]

Could this someday be coming Florida or TV?
At our age, I doubt we will see the day.

MSN (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/motorcycle-monday-motorcycle-bans-seem-to-be-increasing/ar-AAV3gUK?ocid=msedgntp)

[brianherlihy]

get ride of bickes and just leave golf carts

[Topspinmo]

Not going to happen over here.

[Packer Fan]

Not if they don't want a revolt. They will pry my Harley from my cold dead hands in about 40 years.

[fishon]

Stupid article.
Consider the source.

[Toymeister]

The top three states by number of licenced motorcycles:

1. California
2. Florida
3. New York

My conclusion is there will never be a ban.

[MrFlorida]

The media strikes again !

[davem4616]

must have been a slow news day when this one was written....

[Michael G.]

The media strikes again !

LOL...... My thoughts also.

[Spalumbos62]

I dont mind motorcycles at all, but for the love of god wear a helmet. Now, that should be a law here.

[jdulej]

The top three states by number of licenced motorcycles:

1. California
2. Florida
3. New York

My conclusion is there will never be a ban.

I agree with the above. I also think that within 10 years, all NEW motorcycles will be electric.

[jdulej]

I dont mind motorcycles at all, but for the love of god wear a helmet. Now, that should be a law here.
10 or 15 years ago, when my wife and I were riders, we were hanging out in the local Harley shop and overheard another couple looking at helmets (this was in CA where helmets are required, but you can get away with some pretty worthless examples) Her "if you think I'm spending the rest of my life changing your diaper 3 times a day because you were to "cool" to wear a good helmet, you've got another "think" coming" Him "these super certified helmets don't look that bad after all"
Smart guy.

[Byte1]

I dont mind motorcycles at all, but for the love of god wear a helmet. Now, that should be a law here.

Why do you need a law for common sense? How does it hurt anyone if a biker does not wish to wear a helmet? Adults should be able to make their own decisions as long as it does not hurt anyone else.
But, this is about banning motorcycles and that won't ever happen. Even a big Harley uses less fuel per mile than the average car (mobile cage).

[blueash]

Stupid article.
Consider the source.

Ok, I'll consider the source. It is a blogger who calls the attempt to reduce greenhouse gases as "the so called European Green Deal"

Who is contemptuous of attempts to reduce the loud noise of motorcycles to not being louder than a lawnmower by writing " I know everyone’s excited to ride a two-wheeled lawnmower."

He also derides a French ban on old machines
"The postponement isn’t about French officials realizing maybe such a thing is draconian, but instead is to allow for the government to validate new speed cameras so it can fine violators and collect a bunch of money because of course."

So how do you feel about the source now that it clearly agrees with your position??

[JP]

Well, they tried helmet laws that have since been repealed so next step is an out right ban. Ridiculous. Get a life and leave other people alone!! Let's ban stupid journalists.

[Mortal1]

Motorcycles=easy death on two wheels
Motorcycles without legal mufflers=loud noise for no reason

[blueash]

Why do you need a law for common sense? How does it hurt anyone if a biker does not wish to wear a helmet? Adults should be able to make their own decisions as long as it does not hurt anyone else.
But, this is about banning motorcycles and that won't ever happen. Even a big Harley uses less fuel per mile than the average car (mobile cage).

There is no such thing as a brain damaged person who does not hurt anyone else. There is no one who has enough health insurance to cover a lifetime of 24 hr/d nursing care. Would you accept that if you wish to ride with no helmet then you must carry a different policy to cover those health care costs so they don't fall on the public welfare?

Riding with no helmet is the quintessential example of Free-dumb

There are many studies comparing death, disability, $$$, if you want evidence.

One study looked at outcome data (https://smarter-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2019-Unhelmeted-Motorcycle-Riders-Have-Increased-injury-Burden-A-Need-to-Revist-Universal-Helmet-laws.pdf) for helmet wearing vs helmet refusing riders involved in hospitalization [not even considering those who did not require hospital care]

"Conclusions
In summary, our study using the National Trauma Data Bank supports the use of helmets in motorcycle riders. In this series, which included data from 10,345 patients involved in MCCs, unhelmeted MCC patients had more severe injuries (increased ISS, decreased GCS), higher rates of ICU admissions, higher rates of mechanical ventilation, and increased in-hospital mortality when compared with helmeted MCC patients. The unhelmeted patients were also more likely to be uninsured or government-insured. Our analysis suggests the need to revisit the issue regarding laws requiring protective headwear while riding motorcycles because of the individual and societal impact. Helmet use is truly a societal issue, as the cost burden is endured by the public, and must be addressed in a nationwide policy reform of helmet law"


Now tell me again how not wearing a helmet doesn't impact anyone but the stupid rider. It is good for the organ harvest business. Donorcycles

[GpaVader]

I don't disagree that in 10 years from now we may only see electric bikes being made but I don't think we can say BAN.

I usually wore that a helmet but on really hot days and short trips, I rolled the dice. It was stupid...

I gave up my GoldWing because of cell phones. People don't watch for riders as it is but phones made them even worse, then on my way to work one day, I was riding my Wing and this kid passed me a crotch rocket while he as texting. That was it....

Still miss my Wing....

[Michael G.]

Wearing a helmet to me is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.

What about your back, knees, arms, legs, feet.

I own 2 Goldwing's and was guilty of riding in the summer heat with just a t-shirt and flip flops, no helmet.

I ask myself one day: "Am I ready to accept the consequences of what could happen riding at te age of 70?"
The answer was a big NO, and sold my pride and joy.

And for you dorks that say "If I refuse to wear a helmet why should that bother anyone."
Wearing that helmet or not doesn't bother anyone, it's the %&**^$#$%^&* noise that bothers people the worst.

True Story:
My dad told me he rode Indian cycles in the early 1920's before warning and caution decals were applied to bikes.
But, one decal was on the gas tank of his Indian cycle that read: "If you abuse me, I will kill you,".

[jdulej]

I don't disagree that in 10 years from now we may only see electric bikes being made but I don't think we can say BAN.

I usually wore that a helmet but on really hot days and short trips, I rolled the dice. It was stupid...

I gave up my GoldWing because of cell phones. People don't watch for riders as it is but phones made them even worse, then on my way to work one day, I was riding my Wing and this kid passed me a crotch rocket while he as texting. That was it....

Still miss my Wing....

I agree, MCs won't be banned. IMO, electric MCs will be way more dangerous, especially to those with more dollars than sense. The power generated off the line can be phenomenal if it isn't governed somehow. But, they will be quieter!

[coralway]

forget about banning motorcycles

Ban all dogs (the four legged kind) and all persons under the age of 55.

[Topspinmo]

I agree with the above. I also think that within 10 years, all NEW motorcycles will be electric.


IMO Harley owners will never buy electric motorcycle. HD has unique sound.

[Topspinmo]

forget about banning motorcycles

Ban all dogs (the four legged kind) and all persons under the age of 55.


Starting with you???:popcorn:

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Stupid article.
Consider the source.

The source is a website called Motorious, which is:

Motorious is an online automotive lifestyle publication for enthusiasts and collectors. 5 million visitors a month and countless syndicates rely on the industry experts at Motorious to deliver important news, automotive features, and handpicked cars you can actually add to your garage. according to their "About." Microsoft picked up the article and reproduced it on their site.

Meanwhile, Byte1 asks an important, significant, profound question:
Why do you need a law for common sense? How does it hurt anyone if a biker does not wish to wear a helmet? Adults should be able to make their own decisions as long as it does not hurt anyone else.

How does it hurt anyone? Let me count the ways:

If the biker was in a crash with another vehicle, the driver of that vehicle will have to live with knowing that the biker might be dead, or suffer paralysis or permanent brain damage, for the rest of his life. I can tell you from experience that being the "one who survives" a crash is no picnic.

If the biker has family or friends, they will have to live with their dead or brain-damaged or paralyzed loved one. If the biker lives, he will burden his family/friends for the rest of his life, however long or short that may be. Medical expenses, hospitalizations, surgeries, 24/7 home health care, mental health care, intubation, someone to switch out the ostomy bag if he's paralyzed and unable to move his own bowels, and so on and so forth. Traumatic brain injuries and upper spine injuries are no joke.

The health insurance company, which bets on people being healthy and never needing medical care, will have lost the bet. When your premiums go up next year, it's because too many people won their bet against the health insurance company. Too many people did too many stupid things that cost the insurance company too much money - and SOMEONE has to foot the bill. That someone is everyone else.

Their kids might now have to grow up without a father or mother (depending on who was riding the bike). If the rider survives and has traumatic brain injury, those kids will likely have to assume the role of caretaker. Imagine your 15-year-old daughter having to help mommy change your feeding tube and rub lotion on your butt to prevent bedsores.

The family will probably be short a wage-earner now too, since people with traumatic brain injuries tend to have trouble finding and keeping a decent-paying job. If he's lucky they'll let him clean the dining area of the local Burger King as part of a program for brain-injured folks in the area. For less than minimum wage.

All because daddy decided his "freedom" was more important than his family's ability to function.

Meanwhile - the actual topic (if you bothered to read the actual article from Motorious) was referring primarily to the idea of communities wanting to eliminate internal combustion engines. And anyone who owns an e-bike knows that an electric motorcycle is not going to be functional as a method of transportation or leisure travel. There's just no way to strap a battery on a motorcycle that will let the biker go more than 10-20 miles total before needing to recharge it.

[KJ1325]

I dont mind motorcycles at all, but for the love of god wear a helmet. Now, that should be a law here.
Yes. And make drivers of cars wear a helmet also. And golf carts while we are at it. Too many head injuries.

[jdulej]

The source is a website called Motorious, which is:

according to their "About." Microsoft picked up the article and reproduced it on their site.

Meanwhile, Byte1 asks an important, significant, profound question:


How does it hurt anyone? Let me count the ways:

If the biker was in a crash with another vehicle, the driver of that vehicle will have to live with knowing that the biker might be dead, or suffer paralysis or permanent brain damage, for the rest of his life. I can tell you from experience that being the "one who survives" a crash is no picnic.

If the biker has family or friends, they will have to live with their dead or brain-damaged or paralyzed loved one. If the biker lives, he will burden his family/friends for the rest of his life, however long or short that may be. Medical expenses, hospitalizations, surgeries, 24/7 home health care, mental health care, intubation, someone to switch out the ostomy bag if he's paralyzed and unable to move his own bowels, and so on and so forth. Traumatic brain injuries and upper spine injuries are no joke.

The health insurance company, which bets on people being healthy and never needing medical care, will have lost the bet. When your premiums go up next year, it's because too many people won their bet against the health insurance company. Too many people did too many stupid things that cost the insurance company too much money - and SOMEONE has to foot the bill. That someone is everyone else.

Their kids might now have to grow up without a father or mother (depending on who was riding the bike). If the rider survives and has traumatic brain injury, those kids will likely have to assume the role of caretaker. Imagine your 15-year-old daughter having to help mommy change your feeding tube and rub lotion on your butt to prevent bedsores.

The family will probably be short a wage-earner now too, since people with traumatic brain injuries tend to have trouble finding and keeping a decent-paying job. If he's lucky they'll let him clean the dining area of the local Burger King as part of a program for brain-injured folks in the area. For less than minimum wage.

All because daddy decided his "freedom" was more important than his family's ability to function.

Meanwhile - the actual topic (if you bothered to read the actual article from Motorious) was referring primarily to the idea of communities wanting to eliminate internal combustion engines. And anyone who owns an e-bike knows that an electric motorcycle is not going to be functional as a method of transportation or leisure travel. There's just no way to strap a battery on a motorcycle that will let the biker go more than 10-20 miles total before needing to recharge it.

They are here now. Still a bit pricey and buggy, but give it 5-10 years

Harley-Davidson livewire - Electrek (https://electrek.co/guides/harley-davidson-livewire/)

[Mrprez]

Anyone interested in electric motorcycles should watch Long Way Up in which Ewan and Boorman ride electric Harley’s north from the southern most point in South America.

[Nucky]

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Michael G.]

Yes. And make drivers of cars wear a helmet also. And golf carts while we are at it. Too many head injuries.

Now this right here is stupid talk.

[Michael G.]

Meanwhile, Byte1 asks an important, significant, profound question:


How does it hurt anyone? Let me count the ways:

If the biker was in a crash with another vehicle, the driver of that vehicle will have to live with knowing that the biker might be dead, or suffer paralysis or permanent brain damage, for the rest of his life. I can tell you from experience that being the "one who survives" a crash is no picnic.

If the biker has family or friends, they will have to live with their dead or brain-damaged or paralyzed loved one. If the biker lives, he will burden his family/friends for the rest of his life, however long or short that may be. Medical expenses, hospitalizations, surgeries, 24/7 home health care, mental health care, intubation, someone to switch out the ostomy bag if he's paralyzed and unable to move his own bowels, and so on and so forth. Traumatic brain injuries and upper spine injuries are no joke.

The health insurance company, which bets on people being healthy and never needing medical care, will have lost the bet. When your premiums go up next year, it's because too many people won their bet against the health insurance company. Too many people did too many stupid things that cost the insurance company too much money - and SOMEONE has to foot the bill. That someone is everyone else.

Their kids might now have to grow up without a father or mother (depending on who was riding the bike). If the rider survives and has traumatic brain injury, those kids will likely have to assume the role of caretaker. Imagine your 15-year-old daughter having to help mommy change your feeding tube and rub lotion on your butt to prevent bedsores.

The family will probably be short a wage-earner now too, since people with traumatic brain injuries tend to have trouble finding and keeping a decent-paying job. If he's lucky they'll let him clean the dining area of the local Burger King as part of a program for brain-injured folks in the area. For less than minimum wage.

All because daddy decided his "freedom" was more important than his family's ability to function.



Awesome response on this subject and a dam good reason for selling your motorcycle or not buying one with or without wearing a helmet.

Thanks

[Dantes]

Maybe horse’s will make a come back

[midiwiz]

Could this someday be coming Florida or TV?
At our age, I doubt we will see the day.

MSN (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/motorcycle-monday-motorcycle-bans-seem-to-be-increasing/ar-AAV3gUK?ocid=msedgntp)

That will never happen. Nor will the green new deal its a fantasy

[davem4616]

I read all this talk about the move to electric vehicles and yet, no one is talking about what the plan is to co-exist or phase out the 'soon to be called legacy vehicles' that run on gas

I can't wait to hear some bonehead tell me that I have to convert my car into an electric, or I can't drive it

can't wait to hear the plan for switching Air Force One over to electric

ha, wait 'til all the electric bills start including road taxes, like the gas pumps do

collectors and many others will continue to hold on to them and expect to be able to use them....I don't see them being outlawed, but some idiot will try to tax the heck out of them

software companies are able to get away with no longer supporting legacy software that are too many revisions back, but I suspect that there will be quite an uproar, if all the folks with gas driven vehicles and engines are told the gas pumps are turned off

just saying

[Ele201]

get ride of bickes and just leave golf carts
You mean get rid of bikes. Spell check!’

[Jeffery M]

There is no such thing as a brain damaged person who does not hurt anyone else. There is no one who has enough health insurance to cover a lifetime of 24 hr/d nursing care. Would you accept that if you wish to ride with no helmet then you must carry a different policy to cover those health care costs so they don't fall on the public welfare?

Riding with no helmet is the quintessential example of Free-dumb

There are many studies comparing death, disability, $$$, if you want evidence.

One study looked at outcome data (https://smarter-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2019-Unhelmeted-Motorcycle-Riders-Have-Increased-injury-Burden-A-Need-to-Revist-Universal-Helmet-laws.pdf) for helmet wearing vs helmet refusing riders involved in hospitalization [not even considering those who did not require hospital care]

"Conclusions
In summary, our study using the National Trauma Data Bank supports the use of helmets in motorcycle riders. In this series, which included data from 10,345 patients involved in MCCs, unhelmeted MCC patients had more severe injuries (increased ISS, decreased GCS), higher rates of ICU admissions, higher rates of mechanical ventilation, and increased in-hospital mortality when compared with helmeted MCC patients. The unhelmeted patients were also more likely to be uninsured or government-insured. Our analysis suggests the need to revisit the issue regarding laws requiring protective headwear while riding motorcycles because of the individual and societal impact. Helmet use is truly a societal issue, as the cost burden is endured by the public, and must be addressed in a nationwide policy reform of helmet law"


Now tell me again how not wearing a helmet doesn't impact anyone but the stupid rider. It is good for the organ harvest business. Donorcycles

Freedom costs. If you eat a poor diet and the suffer diabetes and heart failure is society then going to ban certain foods? Should mountain climbing, skydiving, and swimming be banned? Should cars have governors so they can go no faster than 55 mph, thus reducing high speed crashes? Smoking is allowed and that causes far more health issues than motorcyclists not wearing helmets. People become brain damaged from doing stupid things and yet society has not collapsed from that. The percentage of the cost of healthcare has been impacted very little by motorcyclists not wearing helmets in the past and present. The rising costs are mostly from increased obesity and people living longer and suffering a varity of ailments in their older age, as well as driving like Mad Max and causing vehicle accidents. Also you are paying increased fees due to health insurance now covering pre-existing conditions, which is fine and I'm personally in favor of that, but it does impact costs. Other things have come about that are totally ridiculous that also impact the cost of healthcare, such as hormone treatment for transgender women. Medicare, the program for the elderly and disabled, lifted its ban on covering sex reassignment surgery.
Besides motorcycle helmet laws, I'm even against seat belt laws except for those under the age of 13. I would not drive without wearing a seatbelt every single time because that is the smart thing to do. Should you wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle? I believe you should. At least on the highways. However, I don't want some law telling me I have to wear a seatbelt or wear a helmet. As adults we should have that freedom of choice, and yes I am willing to be part of paying for that. Because freedom matters more than saving a few bucks on an insurance policy.

[thevillages2013]

:BigApplause::BigApplause::BigApplause::boom::boom :Freedom costs. If you eat a poor diet and the suffer diabetes and heart failure is society then going to ban certain foods? Should mountain climbing, skydiving, and swimming be banned? Should cars have governors so they can go no faster than 55 mph, thus reducing high speed crashes? Smoking is allowed and that causes far more health issues than motorcyclists not wearing helmets. People become brain damaged from doing stupid things and yet society has not collapsed from that. The percentage of the cost of healthcare has been impacted very little by motorcyclists not wearing helmets in the past and present. The rising costs are mostly from increased obesity and people living longer and suffering a varity of ailments in their older age, as well as driving like Mad Max and causing vehicle accidents. Also you are paying increased fees due to health insurance now covering pre-existing conditions, which is fine and I'm personally in favor of that, but it does impact costs. Other things have come about that are totally ridiculous that also impact the cost of healthcare, such as hormone treatment for transgender women. Medicare, the program for the elderly and disabled, lifted its ban on covering sex reassignment surgery.
Besides motorcycle helmet laws, I'm even against seat belt laws except for those under the age of 13. I would not drive without wearing a seatbelt every single time because that is the smart thing to do. Should you wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle? I believe you should. At least on the highways. However, I don't want some law telling me I have to wear a seatbelt or wear a helmet. As adults we should have that freedom of choice, and yes I am willing to be part of paying for that. Because freedom matters more than saving a few bucks on an insurance policy.

:boom::mademyday::BigApplause::BigApplause:

[YeOldeCurmudgeon]

Motorcycles are fine. Just wish they would be equipped with mufflers.

[dewilson58]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

[DaleDivine]

Wearing a helmet to me is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.

What about your back, knees, arms, legs, feet.

I own 2 Goldwing's and was guilty of riding in the summer heat with just a t-shirt and flip flops, no helmet.

I ask myself one day: "Am I ready to accept the consequences of what could happen riding at te age of 70?"
The answer was a big NO, and sold my pride and joy.

And for you dorks that say "If I refuse to wear a helmet why should that bother anyone."
Wearing that helmet or not doesn't bother anyone, it's the %&**^$#$%^&* noise that bothers people the worst.

True Story:
My dad told me he rode Indian cycles in the early 1920's before warning and caution decals were applied to bikes.
But, one decal was on the gas tank of his Indian cycle that read: "If you abuse me, I will kill you,".

Now there's a vision you wouldn't want to see going down the highway.
NO PANTS...:ohdear::ohdear::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[DaleDivine]

The source is a website called Motorious, which is:

according to their "About." Microsoft picked up the article and reproduced it on their site.

Meanwhile, Byte1 asks an important, significant, profound question:


How does it hurt anyone? Let me count the ways:

If the biker was in a crash with another vehicle, the driver of that vehicle will have to live with knowing that the biker might be dead, or suffer paralysis or permanent brain damage, for the rest of his life. I can tell you from experience that being the "one who survives" a crash is no picnic.

If the biker has family or friends, they will have to live with their dead or brain-damaged or paralyzed loved one. If the biker lives, he will burden his family/friends for the rest of his life, however long or short that may be. Medical expenses, hospitalizations, surgeries, 24/7 home health care, mental health care, intubation, someone to switch out the ostomy bag if he's paralyzed and unable to move his own bowels, and so on and so forth. Traumatic brain injuries and upper spine injuries are no joke.

The health insurance company, which bets on people being healthy and never needing medical care, will have lost the bet. When your premiums go up next year, it's because too many people won their bet against the health insurance company. Too many people did too many stupid things that cost the insurance company too much money - and SOMEONE has to foot the bill. That someone is everyone else.

Their kids might now have to grow up without a father or mother (depending on who was riding the bike). If the rider survives and has traumatic brain injury, those kids will likely have to assume the role of caretaker. Imagine your 15-year-old daughter having to help mommy change your feeding tube and rub lotion on your butt to prevent bedsores.

The family will probably be short a wage-earner now too, since people with traumatic brain injuries tend to have trouble finding and keeping a decent-paying job. If he's lucky they'll let him clean the dining area of the local Burger King as part of a program for brain-injured folks in the area. For less than minimum wage.

All because daddy decided his "freedom" was more important than his family's ability to function.

Meanwhile - the actual topic (if you bothered to read the actual article from Motorious) was referring primarily to the idea of communities wanting to eliminate internal combustion engines. And anyone who owns an e-bike knows that an electric motorcycle is not going to be functional as a method of transportation or leisure travel. There's just no way to strap a battery on a motorcycle that will let the biker go more than 10-20 miles total before needing to recharge it.

From your post, you are under the assumption that ALL BIKERS ARE MALES...
There are lots and lots of female bikers now.

[Surf Daddy]

Thank you for the data. I have always believed this. As an ex motocross/supercross rider from the 70s, my favorite sayind was always "dress for the crash, not the ride". I never had a road bike, because I believed the risk is too great.

[Byte1]

Freedom costs. If you eat a poor diet and the suffer diabetes and heart failure is society then going to ban certain foods? Should mountain climbing, skydiving, and swimming be banned? Should cars have governors so they can go no faster than 55 mph, thus reducing high speed crashes? Smoking is allowed and that causes far more health issues than motorcyclists not wearing helmets. People become brain damaged from doing stupid things and yet society has not collapsed from that. The percentage of the cost of healthcare has been impacted very little by motorcyclists not wearing helmets in the past and present. The rising costs are mostly from increased obesity and people living longer and suffering a varity of ailments in their older age, as well as driving like Mad Max and causing vehicle accidents. Also you are paying increased fees due to health insurance now covering pre-existing conditions, which is fine and I'm personally in favor of that, but it does impact costs. Other things have come about that are totally ridiculous that also impact the cost of healthcare, such as hormone treatment for transgender women. Medicare, the program for the elderly and disabled, lifted its ban on covering sex reassignment surgery.
Besides motorcycle helmet laws, I'm even against seat belt laws except for those under the age of 13. I would not drive without wearing a seatbelt every single time because that is the smart thing to do. Should you wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle? I believe you should. At least on the highways. However, I don't want some law telling me I have to wear a seatbelt or wear a helmet. As adults we should have that freedom of choice, and yes I am willing to be part of paying for that. Because freedom matters more than saving a few bucks on an insurance policy.

If I could give you more thumbs up, I would. Thank you for stating EXACTLY what I was thinking. Some folks would not get out of bed without permission by law. And some folks' thinking is so dangerous that they should consider wearing a helmet 24/7.
:thumbup: ..:thumbup:...:thumbup:..:thumbup:

[Byte1]

Motorcycles are fine. Just wish they would be equipped with mufflers.

Yes, and I bet some wish they would put mufflers on thunder. Personally, birds chirping in the morning is soooo bothersome and annoying...:)

[Byte1]

I read all this talk about the move to electric vehicles and yet, no one is talking about what the plan is to co-exist or phase out the 'soon to be called legacy vehicles' that run on gas

I can't wait to hear some bonehead tell me that I have to convert my car into an electric, or I can't drive it

can't wait to hear the plan for switching Air Force One over to electric

ha, wait 'til all the electric bills start including road taxes, like the gas pumps do

collectors and many others will continue to hold on to them and expect to be able to use them....I don't see them being outlawed, but some idiot will try to tax the heck out of them

software companies are able to get away with no longer supporting legacy software that are too many revisions back, but I suspect that there will be quite an uproar, if all the folks with gas driven vehicles and engines are told the gas pumps are turned off

just saying

Just to add to that, banning gas fueled vehicles will destroy our economy and add millions to the poverty level. UNLESS of course, someone is willing to PAY for all those workers by providing electric cars for them. You can purchase a gas fueled car for as low as a few hundred bucks that will get you to work, but even in the future, a battery powered vehicle would cost more than many workers can afford. Even getting one with dead batteries would cost at least a couple thousand to replace the batteries. Heck, it costs over a thousand to replace the batteries in a golf cart.
I can also imagine folks lined up along the road at charging stations, just to get a hundred more miles on their thousand mile journey.
I am sure that battery powered vehicles will have a place in the future, but until they focus on a more viable substitute for fossil fuel power, there will not be a ban of oil in my future. I am sure that man will destroy itself way before we run out of fossil fuel.

[Byte1]

Maybe horse’s will make a come back

I doubt it. The tree huggers will complain about horse flatulence destroying our air quality.

:crap2::0000000000luvmyhors

[KJ1325]

Now this right here is stupid talk.

Exactly......

[OETTING]

Why do you need a law for common sense? How does it hurt anyone if a biker does not wish to wear a helmet? Adults should be able to make their own decisions as long as it does not hurt anyone else.
But, this is about banning motorcycles and that won't ever happen. Even a big Harley uses less fuel per mile than the average car (mobile cage).
The hurt is to all of us who pay for your care after a potential head injury! Sign a waiver, then ride as you wish.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Freedom costs. If you eat a poor diet and the suffer diabetes and heart failure is society then going to ban certain foods? Should mountain climbing, skydiving, and swimming be banned? Should cars have governors so they can go no faster than 55 mph, thus reducing high speed crashes? Smoking is allowed and that causes far more health issues than motorcyclists not wearing helmets. People become brain damaged from doing stupid things and yet society has not collapsed from that. The percentage of the cost of healthcare has been impacted very little by motorcyclists not wearing helmets in the past and present. The rising costs are mostly from increased obesity and people living longer and suffering a varity of ailments in their older age, as well as driving like Mad Max and causing vehicle accidents. Also you are paying increased fees due to health insurance now covering pre-existing conditions, which is fine and I'm personally in favor of that, but it does impact costs. Other things have come about that are totally ridiculous that also impact the cost of healthcare, such as hormone treatment for transgender women. Medicare, the program for the elderly and disabled, lifted its ban on covering sex reassignment surgery.
Besides motorcycle helmet laws, I'm even against seat belt laws except for those under the age of 13. I would not drive without wearing a seatbelt every single time because that is the smart thing to do. Should you wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle? I believe you should. At least on the highways. However, I don't want some law telling me I have to wear a seatbelt or wear a helmet. As adults we should have that freedom of choice, and yes I am willing to be part of paying for that. Because freedom matters more than saving a few bucks on an insurance policy.

So explain to me why there are traffic lights, speed limits, traffic control police officers? Why are there parking spaces at all? Why can't I just stop my car wherever I feel like stopping it? Why am I not "allowed" to park my car in front of a fire hydrant? My freedom is more important than your burning house. I shouldn't have to stop at a red light. In fact we should just get rid of all traffic signals.

And those one-way signs? Heresy, I say! My house is at THIS end of the street. Why should I have to drive ALLLLLLL the way around the other block just so I can enter on the other side of my street to get to my house? Don't I have the freedom of movement?

And now let's do drugs. Why can't JimmyJohn shoot up heroin in your driveway? Is it because it's your driveway? Well okay put him out on the sidewalk. That's public property, he should have the freedom to do whatever the heck he wants with his body on public property.

Next up: private property trespassing. You don't have the right to restrict my movement. It's against my freedom to move! Therefore, I have the right to hop the fence at your back yard and make myself at home. In fact, if I see a nice steak in the window on the kitchen counter, I have the right to eat. And you have food. So I'll just break in and take it. If you don't like that, then next time leave your back door unlocked.

See how stupid these examples are? We can go down the slippery slope into absurdity any time you want.

But there are checks and balances to things - they're called laws, rules, regulations, consequences.

If you do something that has an effect on society, then society has the FREEDOM to ensure that what you're doing will have minimal negative impact. And you have the FREEDOM to a) not do that thing at all, b) comply with the rules, c) accept the consequences if you get caught not complying, or d) live somewhere else that doesn't have those rules.

[Scorpyo]

Well, they tried helmet laws that have since been repealed so next step is an out right ban. Ridiculous. Get a life and leave other people alone!! Let's ban stupid journalists.
Ban stupid journalists? Are you serious? That would be the end of the "news". We wouldn't even have the unreasonable facsimile we currently experience.

[Byte1]

The hurt is to all of us who pay for your care after a potential head injury! Sign a waiver, then ride as you wish.

Hmm, I think I DID sign when I wrote out a check to the insurance company.
There are a lot of things that folks do that I think are silly or stupid, but that is their business. I suggest that those that have a problem with motorcycles, skateboards, roller blades, golf carts, sky diving, fatty eating, alcohol consumption, etc. mind their own business because it really is NOT hurting anyone else.

[Spalumbos62]

You mean get rid of bikes. Spell check!’

Rude......

[Michael G.]

You mean get rid of bikes. Spell check!’

Don't you just love these Intelligent intellectuals spelling police that never made a typo.

[Michael G.]

loud noise for no reason


Oh, but loud noise saves lives........:1rotfl:

[Spalumbos62]

Freedom costs. If you eat a poor diet and the suffer diabetes and heart failure is society then going to ban certain foods? Should mountain climbing, skydiving, and swimming be banned? Should cars have governors so they can go no faster than 55 mph, thus reducing high speed crashes? Smoking is allowed and that causes far more health issues than motorcyclists not wearing helmets. People become brain damaged from doing stupid things and yet society has not collapsed from that. The percentage of the cost of healthcare has been impacted very little by motorcyclists not wearing helmets in the past and present. The rising costs are mostly from increased obesity and people living longer and suffering a varity of ailments in their older age, as well as driving like Mad Max and causing vehicle accidents. Also you are paying increased fees due to health insurance now covering pre-existing conditions, which is fine and I'm personally in favor of that, but it does impact costs. Other things have come about that are totally ridiculous that also impact the cost of healthcare, such as hormone treatment for transgender women. Medicare, the program for the elderly and disabled, lifted its ban on covering sex reassignment surgery.
Besides motorcycle helmet laws, I'm even against seat belt laws except for those under the age of 13. I would not drive without wearing a seatbelt every single time because that is the smart thing to do. Should you wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle? I believe you should. At least on the highways. However, I don't want some law telling me I have to wear a seatbelt or wear a helmet. As adults we should have that freedom of choice, and yes I am willing to be part of paying for that. Because freedom matters more than saving a few bucks on an insurance policy.


I know years ago the high schools, while teaching driver's Ed. introduced films in great detail of auto accidents that specifically showed the mangled cars and the gory injuries and dead bodies....horrible to watch and yes a scare tactic- but effective.
Something like that should be required by the insurance company when purchasing Mc insurance.
I know allot of us feel we are pros, can handle anything...gonna ride into the wind. I can totally appreciate the rush. But I would wager a large amount that every one of the Mc riders on this post have all had a close call.
Just saying..

[Michael G.]

Freedom costs. If you eat a poor diet and the suffer diabetes and heart failure is society then going to ban certain foods? Should mountain climbing, skydiving, and swimming be banned? Should cars have governors so they can go no faster than 55 mph, thus reducing high speed crashes? Smoking is allowed and that causes far more health issues than motorcyclists not wearing helmets. People become brain damaged from doing stupid things and yet society has not collapsed from that. The percentage of the cost of healthcare has been impacted very little by motorcyclists not wearing helmets in the past and present. The rising costs are mostly from increased obesity and people living longer and suffering a varity of ailments in their older age, as well as driving like Mad Max and causing vehicle accidents. Also you are paying increased fees due to health insurance now covering pre-existing conditions, which is fine and I'm personally in favor of that, but it does impact costs. Other things have come about that are totally ridiculous that also impact the cost of healthcare, such as hormone treatment for transgender women. Medicare, the program for the elderly and disabled, lifted its ban on covering sex reassignment surgery.
Besides motorcycle helmet laws, I'm even against seat belt laws except for those under the age of 13. I would not drive without wearing a seatbelt every single time because that is the smart thing to do. Should you wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle? I believe you should. At least on the highways. However, I don't want some law telling me I have to wear a seatbelt or wear a helmet. As adults we should have that freedom of choice, and yes I am willing to be part of paying for that. Because freedom matters more than saving a few bucks on an insurance policy.

Your example here is false in many ways.

Here's just one:
There are a lot less cycle owners with or without helmets that qualify for your comparison to anything to do with the above.

You mention the term: I don't want the law telling me this and that."
I'll bet you must have a hell of a time when the laws say you need to pay your taxes.:1rotfl:

[jimjamuser]

I agree with the above. I also think that within 10 years, all NEW motorcycles will be electric.
I agree!

[Johnsocat]

It seems to me that insurance including Medicare is supposed to cover accidental injuries...
I see a lot of hypocrisy from a group of physically active senior citizens in these responses.
How many hip and knee replacements and orher joint injuries are funded by Medicare due to pickleball, tennnis, golf and other sports we enjoy and give our lives quality?
How many of us climb ladders to replace light bulbs and smoke alarm batteries? Mow our yards and trim our own bushes with dangerous equipment?
Use power tools like skill saws, drills?
Cars, golf carts and bicycles statistically have more accidents and injuries than motorcycles and most motorcycle accidents are caused by other road users.
How people judge, condemn and justifying limiting the activities others need or enjoy doing to maintain their quality and enjoyment of life should be viewed through a mirrored lens.

[joecian1]

Batteries contain Lithium.
80% of which, along with other related minerals are controlled by China. Pretty soon, most job killing electrically powered vehicles will be made there.
How many more electric generating stations will we need to supply charging stations in our garages and along our highways and how will they be powered by massive bird killing China manfactured polluting turbine blades and thousands of China made solar panels (Solyndra anyone?)?
Pothole Mayor Pete is an expert
and is using rising gasoline prices and a potential EV taxpayer funded
$12,500 rebate to force us to go electric.
Enjoy the ride!

[Byte1]

I know years ago the high schools, while teaching driver's Ed. introduced films in great detail of auto accidents that specifically showed the mangled cars and the gory injuries and dead bodies....horrible to watch and yes a scare tactic- but effective.
Something like that should be required by the insurance company when purchasing Mc insurance.
I know allot of us feel we are pros, can handle anything...gonna ride into the wind. I can totally appreciate the rush. But I would wager a large amount that every one of the Mc riders on this post have all had a close call.
Just saying..

"Just saying" it's all about choice to live (or die) by our own decision and NOT about living according to someone else's mandate on HOW we should live. Some folks climb mountains. I wouldn't, but that is their choice.
Perhaps insurance companies should be required to show a prospective customer films of black lungs of dead smokers, heart damage to the obese, or knee replacement surgery to an athlete. Maybe bicycling should be banned in the Villages, due to all the accidents. And would you "wager" that everyone that rode a bicycle as a child have all had close calls? I've had no injuries on a motorcycle, but my close calls were ALL due to poor drivers of cars. I've had many injuries as a child when riding a bicycle.

[Byte1]

It seems to me that insurance including Medicare is supposed to cover accidental injuries...
I see a lot of hypocrisy from a group of physically active senior citizens in these responses.
How many hip and knee replacements and orher joint injuries are funded by Medicare due to pickleball, tennnis, golf and other sports we enjoy and give our lives quality?
How many of us climb ladders to replace light bulbs and smoke alarm batteries? Mow our yards and trim our own bushes with dangerous equipment?
Use power tools like skill saws, drills?
Cars, golf carts and bicycles statistically have more accidents and injuries than motorcycles and most motorcycle accidents are caused by other road users.
How people judge, condemn and justifying limiting the activities others need or enjoy doing to maintain their quality and enjoyment of life should be viewed through a mirrored lens.

They hypocrites whine because they do not enjoy what others have, so therefore you should leave it up to them to decide what you do and what you shouldn't do.

[Michael G.]

I sold my Goldwing's realizing I wouldn't heal as fast at 70 like I would at 30.

[Byte1]

I sold my Goldwing's realizing I wouldn't heal as fast at 70 like I would at 30.

When I turned 70, I decided not to have any accidents that I would not heal from. It's worked so far.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

From your post, you are under the assumption that ALL BIKERS ARE MALES...
There are lots and lots of female bikers now.

From your post, you're under the assumption that I don't use he/him because it's easier than using he/she/they for every possible pronoun in my post. I use he as the default pronoun. Replace with whichever one makes you happy.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

It seems to me that insurance including Medicare is supposed to cover accidental injuries...
I see a lot of hypocrisy from a group of physically active senior citizens in these responses.
How many hip and knee replacements and orher joint injuries are funded by Medicare due to pickleball, tennnis, golf and other sports we enjoy and give our lives quality?
How many of us climb ladders to replace light bulbs and smoke alarm batteries? Mow our yards and trim our own bushes with dangerous equipment?
Use power tools like skill saws, drills?
Cars, golf carts and bicycles statistically have more accidents and injuries than motorcycles and most motorcycle accidents are caused by other road users.
How people judge, condemn and justifying limiting the activities others need or enjoy doing to maintain their quality and enjoyment of life should be viewed through a mirrored lens.

Common situation with motorcycles:

Amos is driving a car shortly after it rains. Amos is going to fast for a turn he's trying to make skids, and hits Malik, who is on his motorcycle. Malik is not wearing a helmet.

Malik suffers traumatic brain injury, or becomes paralyzed due to a broken neck.

Why should Amos's insurance - or even Amos himself - foot the bill for Malik's injury? It's HIS choice not to wear a helmet. Yes, the accident was caused by Amos. But if Malik had been wearing a helmet, Malik might have walked away from the accident.

Amos should have to pay for damage to the bike. And possibly all the medical bills that are NOT related to the head injury or broken neck.

But that's just not how it works, presently.

As for the pickleball stuff - maybe it's time health insurance companies add a "sports equipment" rule into their policies. If you're participating in a sport that has safety equipment available, and you choose not to use that equipment and suffer an injury, they won't cover the medical bills.

[DAVES]

Why do you need a law for common sense? How does it hurt anyone if a biker does not wish to wear a helmet? Adults should be able to make their own decisions as long as it does not hurt anyone else.
But, this is about banning motorcycles and that won't ever happen. Even a big Harley uses less fuel per mile than the average car (mobile cage).

Why you need a law for common sense? Read posts on any thread asked and answered.

[Byte1]

Common situation with motorcycles:

Amos is driving a car shortly after it rains. Amos is going to fast for a turn he's trying to make skids, and hits Malik, who is on his motorcycle. Malik is not wearing a helmet.

Malik suffers traumatic brain injury, or becomes paralyzed due to a broken neck.

Why should Amos's insurance - or even Amos himself - foot the bill for Malik's injury? It's HIS choice not to wear a helmet. Yes, the accident was caused by Amos. But if Malik had been wearing a helmet, Malik might have walked away from the accident.

Amos should have to pay for damage to the bike. And possibly all the medical bills that are NOT related to the head injury or broken neck.

But that's just not how it works, presently.

As for the pickleball stuff - maybe it's time health insurance companies add a "sports equipment" rule into their policies. If you're participating in a sport that has safety equipment available, and you choose not to use that equipment and suffer an injury, they won't cover the medical bills.

So, if one does not agree with another's lifestyle, it is prudent that they seek the gov to intervene and create a law forbidding that persons actions, even though they are not harming anyone else?

[Topspinmo]

Maybe horse’s will make a come back

As long as they are electric…

[Topspinmo]

Common situation with motorcycles:

Amos is driving a car shortly after it rains. Amos is going to fast for a turn he's trying to make skids, and hits Malik, who is on his motorcycle. Malik is not wearing a helmet.

Malik suffers traumatic brain injury, or becomes paralyzed due to a broken neck.

Why should Amos's insurance - or even Amos himself - foot the bill for Malik's injury? It's HIS choice not to wear a helmet. Yes, the accident was caused by Amos. But if Malik had been wearing a helmet, Malik might have walked away from the accident.

Amos should have to pay for damage to the bike. And possibly all the medical bills that are NOT related to the head injury or broken neck.

But that's just not how it works, presently.

As for the pickleball stuff - maybe it's time health insurance companies add a "sports equipment" rule into their policies. If you're participating in a sport that has safety equipment available, and you choose not to use that equipment and suffer an injury, they won't cover the medical bills.

And “couch potato 🥔 “ rule also.

[Topspinmo]

Common situation with motorcycles:

Amos is driving a car shortly after it rains. Amos is going to fast for a turn he's trying to make skids, and hits Malik, who is on his motorcycle. Malik is not wearing a helmet.

Malik suffers traumatic brain injury, or becomes paralyzed due to a broken neck.

Why should Amos's insurance - or even Amos himself - foot the bill for Malik's injury? It's HIS choice not to wear a helmet. Yes, the accident was caused by Amos. But if Malik had been wearing a helmet, Malik might have walked away from the accident.

Amos should have to pay for damage to the bike. And possibly all the medical bills that are NOT related to the head injury or broken neck.

But that's just not how it works, presently.

As for the pickleball stuff - maybe it's time health insurance companies add a "sports equipment" rule into their policies. If you're participating in a sport that has safety equipment available, and you choose not to use that equipment and suffer an injury, they won't cover the medical bills.


Wow, just wow!

[Topspinmo]

It seems to me that insurance including Medicare is supposed to cover accidental injuries...
I see a lot of hypocrisy from a group of physically active senior citizens in these responses.
How many hip and knee replacements and orher joint injuries are funded by Medicare due to pickleball, tennnis, golf and other sports we enjoy and give our lives quality?
How many of us climb ladders to replace light bulbs and smoke alarm batteries? Mow our yards and trim our own bushes with dangerous equipment?
Use power tools like skill saws, drills?
Cars, golf carts and bicycles statistically have more accidents and injuries than motorcycles and most motorcycle accidents are caused by other road users.
How people judge, condemn and justifying limiting the activities others need or enjoy doing to maintain their quality and enjoyment of life should be viewed through a mirrored lens.


How many set in couch and become to big to walk and need ___________. Fill in blanks? Two side to the coin.

[Spalumbos62]

"Just saying" it's all about choice to live (or die) by our own decision and NOT about living according to someone else's mandate on HOW we should live. Some folks climb mountains. I wouldn't, but that is their choice.
Perhaps insurance companies should be required to show a prospective customer films of black lungs of dead smokers, heart damage to the obese, or knee replacement surgery to an athlete. Maybe bicycling should be banned in the Villages, due to all the accidents. And would you "wager" that everyone that rode a bicycle as a child have all had close calls? I've had no injuries on a motorcycle, but my close calls were ALL due to poor drivers of cars. I've had many injuries as a child when riding a bicycle.

Auh...yeah..that was the point...a close call..I did not say caused by the Mc rider per say....its just dangerous in many ways...people don't see you and turn in frt of you. They stop short, change lanes etc,etc. So the Mc driver has to do double duty by driving defensively and being aware of all the nuisances of a bike. So with that, wouldn't a rider want to do everything they can to avoid injury.this is why you can't get bodily injury insurance protection in ny...the risk is too high.

[flsteve]

There is no such thing as a brain damaged person who does not hurt anyone else. There is no one who has enough health insurance to cover a lifetime of 24 hr/d nursing care. Would you accept that if you wish to ride with no helmet then you must carry a different policy to cover those health care costs so they don't fall on the public welfare?

Riding with no helmet is the quintessential example of Free-dumb

There are many studies comparing death, disability, $$$, if you want evidence.

One study looked at outcome data (https://smarter-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2019-Unhelmeted-Motorcycle-Riders-Have-Increased-injury-Burden-A-Need-to-Revist-Universal-Helmet-laws.pdf) for helmet wearing vs helmet refusing riders involved in hospitalization [not even considering those who did not require hospital care]

"Conclusions
In summary, our study using the National Trauma Data Bank supports the use of helmets in motorcycle riders. In this series, which included data from 10,345 patients involved in MCCs, unhelmeted MCC patients had more severe injuries (increased ISS, decreased GCS), higher rates of ICU admissions, higher rates of mechanical ventilation, and increased in-hospital mortality when compared with helmeted MCC patients. The unhelmeted patients were also more likely to be uninsured or government-insured. Our analysis suggests the need to revisit the issue regarding laws requiring protective headwear while riding motorcycles because of the individual and societal impact. Helmet use is truly a societal issue, as the cost burden is endured by the public, and must be addressed in a nationwide policy reform of helmet law"


Now tell me again how not wearing a helmet doesn't impact anyone but the stupid rider. It is good for the organ harvest business. Donorcycles

and on that same subject of it not affecting others... it could also make an otherwise survivable accident turn into manslaughter instead, because a rider refused to protect themself.

[Happydaz]

It is interesting all the coach potatoes who are talking about banning motorcycling, bicycling, doing yard work, using a golf cart, etc. Many of these posters are obese, overweight, and unexercised, and they put an enormous burden on our healthcare system with all their ailments, diseases, and joint replacements. I ride a bicycle, do my own yard work, ride my golf cart and my motorcycle. I use a helmet bicycling, care when operating machinery, seat belts with my golf cart and ATGATT(all the gear all the time, including helmet.) when I ride my motorcycle. I am 75 and enjoy living life. I am 6 feet tall and weigh 160 pounds. I am in the best shape of my life. I never listen to all the risk averse old biddies. What ever happened to all of you worriers? When did you become so old?

[Jeffery M]

So explain to me why there are traffic lights, speed limits, traffic control police officers? Why are there parking spaces at all? Why can't I just stop my car wherever I feel like stopping it? Why am I not "allowed" to park my car in front of a fire hydrant? My freedom is more important than your burning house. I shouldn't have to stop at a red light. In fact we should just get rid of all traffic signals.

And those one-way signs? Heresy, I say! My house is at THIS end of the street. Why should I have to drive ALLLLLLL the way around the other block just so I can enter on the other side of my street to get to my house? Don't I have the freedom of movement?

And now let's do drugs. Why can't JimmyJohn shoot up heroin in your driveway? Is it because it's your driveway? Well okay put him out on the sidewalk. That's public property, he should have the freedom to do whatever the heck he wants with his body on public property.

Next up: private property trespassing. You don't have the right to restrict my movement. It's against my freedom to move! Therefore, I have the right to hop the fence at your back yard and make myself at home. In fact, if I see a nice steak in the window on the kitchen counter, I have the right to eat. And you have food. So I'll just break in and take it. If you don't like that, then next time leave your back door unlocked.

See how stupid these examples are? We can go down the slippery slope into absurdity any time you want.

But there are checks and balances to things - they're called laws, rules, regulations, consequences.

If you do something that has an effect on society, then society has the FREEDOM to ensure that what you're doing will have minimal negative impact. And you have the FREEDOM to a) not do that thing at all, b) comply with the rules, c) accept the consequences if you get caught not complying, or d) live somewhere else that doesn't have those rules.

I agree with your own words that those examples you used are stupid. All of them are a non sequitur. I never stated that you have an absolute right to do whatever you wish in society. I clearly said that I was talking about what only directly impacts a single person and not others. You asked why there are traffic lights, speed limits, traffic control police officers. Naturally because those things protect society in general. A motorcycle rider injured in an accident obviously only physically suffers his own injuries. Driving drunk endangers others. Speeding is hazardous to the driver and others. If I ride safely on a motorcycle and a drunk driver hits me he may be injured or killed and so may I, but my own injuries only impact me in that accident. I may suffer a broken leg, but that injury is only unique to me and not to the other driver. Let's talk about the "slippery slope" term that you mentioned. If someone is overweight and decides to eat sugary desserts or unhealthy fatty fried foods and ends up having heart problems should the government step in and mandate that people be restricted from eating junk food because health insurance costs are impacted? Should all drinking of alcohol be banned due to accidents both on and off the road? Of course not. Like I said before, freedom costs. I do not advocate chaos and anarchy. We must have laws to protect society so that the population in general is guarded against others that may cause harm. But if me not wearing a helmet only jeopardizes myself then I should have the choice of being dumb enough to not wear it. If I decide to engage in acrobatics and land on my head, should the government say I can't do that anymore? If I decided to not be vaccinated from Covid and others I come into contact with are vaccinated then what is the problem? Yet there is a current controversy about that. I have been vaccinated and believe that I should have been. Others have a different opinion. If they don't want to be forced to take the vaccine I am fine with that and support their choice. We all have an obligation to adhere to certain requirements for the general safety of society. However, we are not obligated at every level to forego our individual liberties because somebody else feels uneasy or inconvenienced by your individual choices, that do no harm to others. If one feels that is wrong then outlaw drinking, marijuana, fast cars, abortions, high risk activities, and anything else that could be construed as potentially hazardous. Many freedom minded citizens don't want big nanny goverment deciding every aspect of our lives. Helmets save lives, wear them. Maybe even in golf carts.

[davem4616]

Maybe horse’s will make a come back

Well Ocala is the horse capital during the winter months for a lot of prime horse flesh...so maybe

[Jeffery M]

Your example here is false in many ways.

Here's just one:
There are a lot less cycle owners with or without helmets that qualify for your comparison to anything to do with the above.

You mention the term: I don't want the law telling me this and that."
I'll bet you must have a hell of a time when the laws say you need to pay your taxes.:1rotfl:

You are correct. I absolutely do have a very difficult time with paying some of the nonsensical taxes we have to pay. A certain group of people also had a problem with taxation in the 1770's. I understand paying taxes for defense and police , etc. I have no issue with that. And exactly what is wrong with someone saying that they don't want the nanny government telling them what to do all the time when it doesn't harm anyone but themselves? I am not part of the flock of sheeple that is willing to bend to the governments intrusive, and many times constitutionally illegal regulations. Do you not have a limit to how much the government tells you what to do, or do you just blindly follow anything they tell you to do no matter how imposing it is on your personal freedom and rights? I comply with seat belt laws and would do the same with helmet laws if I were in a state that requires you wear them. I would wear one on my own anyway. I advocate wearing motorcycle helmets. Since there is no requirement in Florida to wear motorcycle helmets there is no law being broken and I'm in agreement with that. So you see I personally have no problem with the regulation in Florida as it is. The problem I have is when these agitators against current legal laws say that there should be a decree demanding that helmets should be mandated because they feel having the freedom of personal choice of not wearing a helmet raises healthcare insurance costs. And again so does obesity, lung cancer from smoking, driving fast cars. Freedom costs! I keep repeating that and somehow my comments are misinterpreted as those of being a contrarian scofflaw, when actually the law says you are not required to wear helmets. That fact seems to be lost to some. So who is being the contrarian here? I rode motorcycles many years and wore a helmet. I wear seatbelts every time I drive or ride in a car. I am in favor of wearing them and would not think of traveling without doing so. I am just not in favor of the government telling me I have to wear them when it only endangers me. Why is that so difficult for some people to understand when it is plainly explained in detail? What would you think if the government said you had to be in bed by 9pm every night because that is better for your health and will keep the costs of healthcare insurance down? What if they mandated wearing helmets in golf carts. I just so happened to have attended a golf cart safety seminar yesterday and a guest sheriff's deputy said many people in golf cart accidents are ejected from the golf carts and are seriously injured or killed. I don't hear anybody advocating wearing helmets while riding in golf carts. If they did come up with a rule saying that you had to wear a motorcycle helmet in a golf cart how would that impact your peripheral vision? It's hard enough to see from inside a golf cart with all the blind spots. Would that be a good idea? How many regulations are enough, especially when it does not impact the safety and the heath of others? There are people advocating censorship of speech now for "the good and safety of society". Does not personal liberty, free choice, or the Constitution mean anything anymore? Apparently not to far too many people nowadays.

[Byte1]

I agree with your own words that those examples you used are stupid. All of them are a non sequitur. I never stated that you have an absolute right to do whatever you wish in society. I clearly said that I was talking about what only directly impacts a single person and not others. You asked why there are traffic lights, speed limits, traffic control police officers. Naturally because those things protect society in general. A motorcycle rider injured in an accident obviously only physically suffers his own injuries. Driving drunk endangers others. Speeding is hazardous to the driver and others. If I ride safely on a motorcycle and a drunk driver hits me he may be injured or killed and so may I, but my own injuries only impact me in that accident. I may suffer a broken leg, but that injury is only unique to me and not to the other driver. Let's talk about the "slippery slope" term that you mentioned. If someone is overweight and decides to eat sugary desserts or unhealthy fatty fried foods and ends up having heart problems should the government step in and mandate that people be restricted from eating junk food because health insurance costs are impacted? Should all drinking of alcohol be banned due to accidents both on and off the road? Of course not. Like I said before, freedom costs. I do not advocate chaos and anarchy. We must have laws to protect society so that the population in general is guarded against others that may cause harm. But if me not wearing a helmet only jeopardizes myself then I should have the choice of being dumb enough to not wear it. If I decide to engage in acrobatics and land on my head, should the government say I can't do that anymore? If I decided to not be vaccinated from Covid and others I come into contact with are vaccinated then what is the problem? Yet there is a current controversy about that. I have been vaccinated and believe that I should have been. Others have a different opinion. If they don't want to be forced to take the vaccine I am fine with that and support their choice. We all have an obligation to adhere to certain requirements for the general safety of society. However, we are not obligated at every level to forego our individual liberties because somebody else feels uneasy or inconvenienced by your individual choices, that do no harm to others. If one feels that is wrong then outlaw drinking, marijuana, fast cars, abortions, high risk activities, and anything else that could be construed as potentially hazardous. Many freedom minded citizens don't want big nanny goverment deciding every aspect of our lives. Helmets save lives, wear them. Maybe even in golf carts.

EXCELLENT POST!!! :mademyday:

[Byte1]

You are correct. I absolutely do have a very difficult time with paying some of the nonsensical taxes we have to pay. I understand paying taxes for defense and police , etc. I have no issue with that. And exactly what is wrong with someone saying that they don't want the nanny government telling them what to do all the time when it doesn't harm anyone but themselves? I am not part of the flock of sheeple that is willing to bend to the governments intrusive, and many times constitutionally illegal regulations. Do you not have a limit to how much the government tells you what to do, or do you just blindly follow anything they tell you to do no matter how imposing it is on your personal freedom and rights? I comply with seat belt laws and would do the same with helmet laws if I were in a state that requires you wear them. I would wear one on my own anyway. I advocate wearing motorcycle helmets. Since there is no requirement in Florida to wear motorcycle helmets there is no law being broken and I'm in agreement with that. So you see I personally have no problem with the regulation in Florida as it is. The problem I have is when these agitators against current legal laws say that there should be a decree demanding that helmets should be mandated because they feel having the freedom of personal choice of not wearing a helmet raises healthcare insurance costs. And again so does obesity, lung cancer from smoking, driving fast cars. Freedom costs! I keep repeating that and somehow my comments are misinterpreted as those of being a contrarian scofflaw, when actually the law says you are not required to wear helmets. That fact seems to be lost to some. So who is being the contrarian here? I rode motorcycles many years and wore a helmet. I wear seatbelts every time I drive or ride in a car. I am in favor of wearing them and would not think of traveling without doing so. I am just not in favor of the government telling me I have to wear them when it only endangers me. Why is that so difficult for some people to understand when it is plainly explained in detail? What would you think if the government said you had to be in bed by 9pm every night because that is better for your health and will keep the costs of healthcare insurance down? What if they mandated wearing helmets in golf carts. I just so happened to have attended a golf cart safety seminar yesterday and a guest sheriff's deputy said many people in golf cart accidents are ejected from the golf carts and are seriously injured or killed. I don't hear anybody advocating wearing helmets while riding in golf carts. If they did come up with a rule saying that you had to wear a motorcycle helmet in a golf cart how would that impact your peripheral vision? It's hard enough to see from inside a golf cart with all the blind spots. Would that be a good idea? How many regulations are enough, especially when it does not impact the safety and the heath of others? There are people advocating censorship of speech now for "the good and safety of society". Does not personal liberty, free choice, or the Constitution mean anything anymore? Apparently not to far too many people nowadays.

Totally agree with this one too. :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

[dewilson58]

EXCELLENT POST!!! :mademyday:

Toooooooooooo Long.

:duck:

[Byte1]

Funny, how the most complaints and suggestions of banning motorcycles/motorcycling comes from those that have NO experience operating a motorcycle. It's amazing how many busybodies insist on deciding the fate, restrictions, actions of others.
Can you imagine if a group of those busybodies decided that automobiles/cars were too dangerous and should be banned? Think of how empty the roads would be and how much safer it would be for motorcyclists, bicyclists, etc. Think of how much cleaner the air would be if only motorcycles were allowed on the highways. Ridiculous right? Ridiculous is a bunch of NON-motorcyclists deciding the fate of millions of motorcycle enthusiasts. But, but, but we did research and scientists say....blah, blah, and more verbal vomit.

[jdulej]

Toooooooooooo Long.

:duck:

Agree. It turned into "blah, blah, blah" about a third of the way in.

[Mrprez]

Toooooooooooo Long.

:duck:

A few paragraphs would be nice. I read the whole thing.

[Michael G.]

A few paragraphs would be nice. I read the whole thing.

I agree.
If I typed that much, I'd have to take a nap.:shocked:

[JMintzer]

You are correct. I absolutely do have a very difficult time with paying some of the nonsensical taxes we have to pay. A certain group of people also had a problem with taxation in the 1770's. I understand paying taxes for defense and police , etc. I have no issue with that. And exactly what is wrong with someone saying that they don't want the nanny government telling them what to do all the time when it doesn't harm anyone but themselves? I am not part of the flock of sheeple that is willing to bend to the governments intrusive, and many times constitutionally illegal regulations. Do you not have a limit to how much the government tells you what to do, or do you just blindly follow anything they tell you to do no matter how imposing it is on your personal freedom and rights? I comply with seat belt laws and would do the same with helmet laws if I were in a state that requires you wear them. I would wear one on my own anyway. I advocate wearing motorcycle helmets. Since there is no requirement in Florida to wear motorcycle helmets there is no law being broken and I'm in agreement with that. So you see I personally have no problem with the regulation in Florida as it is. The problem I have is when these agitators against current legal laws say that there should be a decree demanding that helmets should be mandated because they feel having the freedom of personal choice of not wearing a helmet raises healthcare insurance costs. And again so does obesity, lung cancer from smoking, driving fast cars. Freedom costs! I keep repeating that and somehow my comments are misinterpreted as those of being a contrarian scofflaw, when actually the law says you are not required to wear helmets. That fact seems to be lost to some. So who is being the contrarian here? I rode motorcycles many years and wore a helmet. I wear seatbelts every time I drive or ride in a car. I am in favor of wearing them and would not think of traveling without doing so. I am just not in favor of the government telling me I have to wear them when it only endangers me. Why is that so difficult for some people to understand when it is plainly explained in detail? What would you think if the government said you had to be in bed by 9pm every night because that is better for your health and will keep the costs of healthcare insurance down? What if they mandated wearing helmets in golf carts. I just so happened to have attended a golf cart safety seminar yesterday and a guest sheriff's deputy said many people in golf cart accidents are ejected from the golf carts and are seriously injured or killed. I don't hear anybody advocating wearing helmets while riding in golf carts. If they did come up with a rule saying that you had to wear a motorcycle helmet in a golf cart how would that impact your peripheral vision? It's hard enough to see from inside a golf cart with all the blind spots. Would that be a good idea? How many regulations are enough, especially when it does not impact the safety and the heath of others? There are people advocating censorship of speech now for "the good and safety of society". Does not personal liberty, free choice, or the Constitution mean anything anymore? Apparently not to far too many people nowadays.

While I agree with your posts, paragraphs are your friend...

It was a VERY difficult read...

[spd2918]

Some states have common sense helmet laws. They require extra insurance for those that ride without helmets. This should cover the extra cost of diapers, etc, without burdening the taxpayer.

[Michael G.]

This post is about to die, so post your thoughts soon.

[Byte1]

Some states have common sense helmet laws. They require extra insurance for those that ride without helmets. This should cover the extra cost of diapers, etc, without burdening the taxpayer.

As a "taxpayer" I would rather be "burdened" with the legitimately injured than with welfare recipients or invaders from across the border. Interesting that someone mentions being burdened by a very small group of motorcycle traffic accident victims in comparison to auto accident victims. But, a lot of folks that are too scared to ride or just never had the inclination to ride a motorcycle, just parrot what others say because it sounds plausible.
Personally, I ride with a helmet but I don't give a thought to those that do not. It's their choice and I don't want to be someone else's keeper and make rules for them to live by. I wouldn't even have seat belt laws, even though I feel it is a good idea to wear them if available. But then again, I am one that believes in each individual being responsible for themselves. Ban motorcycles at the same time you ban automobiles. Although, I believe that the amount of horses required for transportation of a population this large would surely create more air pollution with their flatulence than combustion engines.
Just seems like there are way more important issues to warrant scrutiny than a few motorcycles on the hwy. Just my opinion.

[Spalumbos62]

As a "taxpayer" I would rather be "burdened" with the legitimately injured than with welfare recipients or invaders from across the border. Interesting that someone mentions being burdened by a very small group of motorcycle traffic accident victims in comparison to auto accident victims. But, a lot of folks that are too scared to ride or just never had the inclination to ride a motorcycle, just parrot what others say because it sounds plausible.
Personally, I ride with a helmet but I don't give a thought to those that do not. It's their choice and I don't want to be someone else's keeper and make rules for them to live by. I wouldn't even have seat belt laws, even though I feel it is a good idea to wear them if available. But then again, I am one that believes in each individual being responsible for themselves. Ban motorcycles at the same time you ban automobiles. Although, I believe that the amount of horses required for transportation of a population this large would surely create more air pollution with their flatulence than combustion engines.
Just seems like there are way more important issues to warrant scrutiny than a few motorcycles on the hwy. Just my opinion.

For the love of G__, must this go on and on. Wearing a helmet will not take away from your "ride". I still wish helmets to be a law.....do I care if you won't wear one and you end up with your skull in one place and your body elsewhere on the pavement...not really. I'd just think...idiot.
And too bad for his wife.

[Mrprez]

For the love of G__, must this go on and on. Wearing a helmet will not take away from your "ride". I still wish helmets to be a law.....do I care if you won't wear one and you end up with your skull in one place and your body elsewhere on the pavement...not really. I'd just think...idiot.
And too bad for his wife.

Said someone who has never sat at a red light in 100* heat hoping your brain doesn’t boil over.

[Davonu]

Said someone who has never sat at a red light in 100* heat hoping your brain doesn’t boil over.
Exaggerate much?

[Mrprez]

Exaggerate much?

Have you ever ridden a motorcycle? With full gear on? I’ve been riding since 1967. No, I’m not exaggerating.

[Davonu]

Have you ever ridden a motorcycle? With full gear on? I’ve been riding since 1967. No, I’m not exaggerating.
Yes I have. And the post you replied to was talking about helmets, not full gear. My statement stands.

[Mrprez]

Yes I have. And the post you replied to was talking about helmets, not full gear. My statement stands.

So does mine.

[tophcfa]

Some states have common sense helmet laws. They require extra insurance for those that ride without helmets. This should cover the extra cost of diapers, etc, without burdening the taxpayer.

Riders without helmets are referred to as organ donors.

[Happydaz]

Exaggerate much?
Wearing a full face helmet in 95 degree summer heat becomes immediately unbearable when the airflow ceases as you stop at a red light. If I don’t open up the face shield it can become intolerable. I try never to ride after noon in the summer, and if I do, I avoid traffic and stop lights. That being said, I wear a helmet all the time, but I can understand why some people may opt to go without. This conversation on helmets is about a very small group of people. The impact on the healthcare system is extremely small when compared to the the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on obese and sedentary Americans. The obesity rate in the USA is extremely high. Why focus on this small group of motorcycle riders when there is this unbelievable healthcare crisis in the USA. A better topic would be banning eating out too often in The Villages due to all the high fat, calorie dense foods you get at local restaurants. Focus on the big problems, leave the motorcyclists and bicyclists alone.

[Michael G.]

Riders without helmets are referred to as organ donors.

As some WITH helmets!

[Michael G.]

A better topic would be banning eating out too often in The Villages due to all the high fat, calorie dense foods you get at local restaurants.

You mean actually COOKING in our own house????? :1rotfl:

[Byte1]

For the love of G__, must this go on and on. Wearing a helmet will not take away from your "ride". I still wish helmets to be a law.....do I care if you won't wear one and you end up with your skull in one place and your body elsewhere on the pavement...not really. I'd just think...idiot.
And too bad for his wife.

Some folks do not comprehend comments posted or maybe folks like myself just do not comment plain enough for comprehension.
I don't believe that I have ever said anything remotely suggestive that wearing a helmet will "take away from your ride." This is about banning motorcycles. I am against banning motorcycles and I am against restrictive laws that seem to be made/endorsed by folks that have no inkling or experience with the issue. I wear a helmet. I am against helmet mandates. I am also against seat belt mandates. I do not care whether or not they save lives. That should be up to those that wish for their lives to be saved. I suggest that folks ought to be able to chose for themselves the amount of protection or assistance they wish.
I believe that most folks that wish to make rules or laws regarding the issues related to motorcycle riding, are folks that have no experience with motorcycle operation or those that have had a bad incident while riding. I believe there are a lot of folks that just insist they know what is better for someone else than you. I find that presumptuous and arrogant.
If one wishes to ban motorcycles because of accidents, then they should also ban automobiles due to much more accident injuries. Maybe everyone should be required to use buses and trains for transportation, as they are safer.

[jdulej]

Some states have common sense helmet laws. They require extra insurance for those that ride without helmets. This should cover the extra cost of diapers, etc, without burdening the taxpayer.

That seems somewhat reasonable to support those who insist on being stupid in defense of some ‘right’ they think they have
If a 20 something biker is paralyzed for life vs not because of no helmet, how many millions will it cost to keep his diapers fresh for 50 years

[Byte1]

That seems somewhat reasonable to support those who insist on being stupid in defense of some ‘right’ they think they have
If a 20 something biker is paralyzed for life vs not because of no helmet, how many millions will it cost to keep his diapers fresh for 50 years

Redundant and moot point. Might as well be arguing about cutting trees down and the fantasy result or consequences. Might as well be speaking of the cost of welfare to all of us. Might as well be talking about allowing seniors live past 60 and the cost to the taxpayers. All redundant and moot.

[Byte1]

According to the CDC:
"In the 20 states with a universal helmet law, 739 (12%) fatally injured motorcyclists were not wearing a helmet,.."
That means that 88% of those that died in a motorcycle accident that were wearing helmets would have died regardless of wearing or not wearing a helmet.
On the other hand, other than racing fatalities, almost 100% of all automobile fatalities were were not wearing helmets.

I do not endorse the idea of NOT wearing a helmet. I am against mandating the wearing of a helmet.
Don't give me that garbage about how much it costs the taxpayer when someone is injured needlessly. Complain about how many billions every year we waste of the taxpayer money by giving it to other countries, including our enemies.

[spd2918]

According to the CDC:
"In the 20 states with a universal helmet law, 739 (12%) fatally injured motorcyclists were not wearing a helmet,.."
That means that 88% of those that died in a motorcycle accident that were wearing helmets would have died regardless of wearing or not wearing a helmet.

You have a bit of a problem with that logic since you don't know what percentage of those states' riders rider without helmets.

I will exaggerate things for clarity. Let's say of those states with mandatory helmets laws 739 riders did not wear helmets. Since 739 died that means 100% of helmet-less riders died.

I would bet helmets use is very high is states with those laws, so your numbers will be skewed.

[spd2918]

Don't give me that garbage about how much it costs the taxpayer when someone is injured needlessly. Complain about how many billions every year we waste of the taxpayer money by giving it to other countries, including our enemies.

So you are saying since there are other stupid expenditures then we should ignore this stupid expenditure?

[Byte1]

So you are saying since there are other stupid expenditures then we should ignore this stupid expenditure?

Thank you for pointing that out. It really IS stupid to consider motorcycle injuries and the cost to the taxpayer and not compare the cost with automobile (car) injury costs which are much higher over all. If we outlawed all accidents, we would have no use for insurance. Yes, sometimes folks are facetious when attempting to make a point of the foolishness of believing that everyone that does not agree with them MUST need a nanny or law to guide them through life.
Perhaps we should start a thread listing stupid unnecessary laws and how much it costs the taxpayer to enforce those stupid laws. Of course, EVERY law has someone that endorses it.

[Byte1]

You have a bit of a problem with that logic since you don't know what percentage of those states' riders rider without helmets.

I will exaggerate things for clarity. Let's say of those states with mandatory helmets laws 739 riders did not wear helmets. Since 739 died that means 100% of helmet-less riders died.

I would bet helmets use is very high is states with those laws, so your numbers will be skewed.

Right! And we don't know what color helmets they were wearing and whether or not that had any contribution to their accident or accident prevention. If I was to go further into the CDC research, I could have also pasted the information on percentage of those were wearing full helmets, half helmets, etc. It was there but I just provided what seemed relevant.

[Keefelane66]

Could this someday be coming Florida or TV?
At our age, I doubt we will see the day.

MSN (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/motorcycle-monday-motorcycle-bans-seem-to-be-increasing/ar-AAV3gUK?ocid=msedgntp)
So many provocative posts and so many computer problems TROLLING!

[Spalumbos62]

Some states have common sense helmet laws. They require extra insurance for those that ride without helmets. This should cover the extra cost of diapers, etc, without burdening the taxpayer.

Not in new york...bodily injury protection is excluded to Mc riders and their paasenger. My guess allot of other states follow suit.

[Spalumbos62]

Some folks do not comprehend comments posted or maybe folks like myself just do not comment plain enough for comprehension.
I don't believe that I have ever said anything remotely suggestive that wearing a helmet will "take away from your ride." This is about banning motorcycles. I am against banning motorcycles and I am against restrictive laws that seem to be made/endorsed by folks that have no inkling or experience with the issue. I wear a helmet. I am against helmet mandates. I am also against seat belt mandates. I do not care whether or not they save lives. That should be up to those that wish for their lives to be saved. I suggest that folks ought to be able to chose for themselves the amount of protection or assistance they wish.
I believe that most folks that wish to make rules or laws regarding the issues related to motorcycle riding, are folks that have no experience with motorcycle operation or those that have had a bad incident while riding. I believe there are a lot of folks that just insist they know what is better for someone else than you. I find that presumptuous and arrogant.
If one wishes to ban motorcycles because of accidents, then they should also ban automobiles due to much more accident injuries. Maybe everyone should be required to use buses and trains for transportation, as they are safer.

I believe most responding posters write with answers that are very comprehensive, they get right to the point and are very succinct. But yet again the same person, who btw complains don't shove rules down my throat," tries endlessly to say how wrong all of our responses are, nonstop shoving his opinion down our throat. This is done repeatedly on all his post.

Things that make you go hummm????

[jdulej]

Not in new york...bodily injury protection is excluded to Mc riders and their paasenger. My guess allot of other states follow suit.

Can someone name one of these states? It seems like a really lousy risk for the ins company since only people who don't plan on wearing a helmet would buy the extra coverage

[spd2918]

Thank you for pointing that out.

Stupid as in you believe it would be stupid.

I'm a rugged individualist and understand what government overreach is. But I also understand that rights come with RESPONSIBILITIES. I'm all for a person to be free to not wear a helmet, but that I also that person should be responsible for his injuries.

Seems like you want the rights, then demand I pay for someone else's irresponsibility.

As I posted earlier, let em go without helmets as long as they have insurance to cover that choice.

[spd2918]

Can someone name one of these states? It seems like a really lousy risk for the ins company since only people who don't plan on wearing a helmet would buy the extra coverage


If you are at least 21 years of age and have an insurance policy with at least $10,000 in medical coverage for injuries you may suffer in a motorcycle crash, Florida law does not require that you wear a helmet. A violation of the law is only a noncriminal traffic infraction not punishable as a moving violation for which you can be ordered to pay a fine plus court costs and administration fees.

From here: Motorcycle Helmet Laws By State (https://www.motorcyclelegalfoundation.com/motorcycle-helmet-laws-by-state/)

[spd2918]

I own 2 motorcycles. My motorcycle insurance is absolutely higher due to non-helmet crashing riders. Florida vehicle insurance is also much higher due to so many non-licensed and uninsured illegal aliens.

[Byte1]

I own 2 motorcycles. My motorcycle insurance is absolutely higher due to non-helmet crashing riders. Florida vehicle insurance is also much higher due to so many non-licensed and uninsured illegal aliens.

I don't consider my $75 as being very high for motorcycle insurance. I believe it was higher in my last state, but I could be wrong.

[Byte1]

Stupid as in you believe it would be stupid.

I'm a rugged individualist and understand what government overreach is. But I also understand that rights come with RESPONSIBILITIES. I'm all for a person to be free to not wear a helmet, but that I also that person should be responsible for his injuries.

Seems like you want the rights, then demand I pay for someone else's irresponsibility.

As I posted earlier, let em go without helmets as long as they have insurance to cover that choice.

I don't believe I said anything about being irresponsible. I believe that we were talking about banning motorcycles and someone got off onto the diversion of speaking about wearing helmets. I didn't say anything about insurance. I said I do not believe in laws mandating the wearing of helmets, seat belts, etc. Someone ELSE said that everyone must suffer the consequences for someone being irresponsible. And I also said that (in not so many words) that being irresponsible is in the eye of the beholder. I also made the facetious comment that to make sure there were no accidents we should ban automobiles since there are way more car accidents than motorcycle accidents. Ban bicycles because there are bicycle fatalities every year. Skateboarding is a dangerous sport and should be banned. I don't see a mandate for skateboarders to have insurance and there are between 60,000 to 100,000 skateboarding accidents reported by hospitals every year. I have insurance on my riding a motorcycle. If that does not suffice for the NON-bikers than I have to say tough ****.

[Byte1]

I believe most responding posters write with answers that are very comprehensive, they get right to the point and are very succinct. But yet again the same person, who btw complains don't shove rules down my throat," tries endlessly to say how wrong all of our responses are, nonstop shoving his opinion down our throat. This is done repeatedly on all his post.

Things that make you go hummm????

So, if I disagree with those "very comprehensive" answers, I should not enter the conversation with my reasoning? Sounds a bit on the side of censorship.
My answer that some that have NO or little experience on the subject, wish to have the authority install mandates, seemed to be "very comprehensive."
I apologize if it seemed that I am "shoving" my "opinion down" your "throat." It was meant as discussion, not brainwashing. I don't believe in mandates so I will not force anyone to agree with me....:bigbow:
I try to speak in general, not aimed at a particular poster. Using the reply button is just a means of trying to segregate the point so as to address the point, not the person.

[spd2918]

I don't believe I said anything about being irresponsible.

Sure you did. You want people to have the right to ride helmetless without having the responsibility to pay for their injuries. How is that not irresponsible?

Hopefully you do not see this issue as 100% one way or the other. Life is not like that. There is nuance to most of life's concerns, and where we draw the line moves from time to time. It is perfectly reasonable to expect riders who stupidly ride without head protection to pay more insurance. The State of Florida seems to agree.

[spd2918]

I don't consider my $75 as being very high for motorcycle insurance. I believe it was higher in my last state, but I could be wrong.

Is that $75 a month or a year? If a year, can you message me your agent's info because I pay a ton more than that.

[MDLNB]

IMO Harley owners will never buy electric motorcycle. HD has unique sound.


Harley has produced and is selling an Electric Motorcycle. What's the world coming to?

[MDLNB]

Riders without helmets are referred to as organ donors.


Unless they are Villagers. Then they are just valued as compost no matter what is the cause of death.

[MDLNB]

Sure you did. You want people to have the right to ride helmetless without having the responsibility to pay for their injuries. How is that not irresponsible?

Hopefully you do not see this issue as 100% one way or the other. Life is not like that. There is nuance to most of life's concerns, and where we draw the line moves from time to time. It is perfectly reasonable to expect riders who stupidly ride without head protection to pay more insurance. The State of Florida seems to agree.


How would they not have the responsibility of paying for their own injuries? Aren't they required to have the same insurance as cars and trucks have? I guess it is not unreasonable to expect to pay more if smokers and drinkers pay more.

I thought this was about banning motorcycles not helmet laws.

[spd2918]

How would they not have the responsibility of paying for their own injuries? Aren't they required to have the same insurance as cars and trucks have? I guess it is not unreasonable to expect to pay more if smokers and drinkers pay more.

I thought this was about banning motorcycles not helmet laws.

It's extra coverage. Unfortunately we as taxpayers will still be picking up the tab.

It does not solve the issue, but its a step in the right direction.

We do pay for smokers and drinkers, too, but usually not due to specific incidents like crashes.

[butlerperkins@gmail.com]

Several years ago I was on the road linking Gatlinburg, TN to Cherokee, NC. I was parked in the Chimney Tops parking area and hiking the trail up. I was well up the trail.

I did not get the quiet that I sought. I could not find the peace that I sought. I could definitely hear the gunning of engines....

What other species "destroys" the natural environment quite like humans?

Use the word "humane" as an adjective and I will think poorly of the subject of discussion.

While I have your attention, when using the phrase "biking", leave that to those who are doing the pedaling.

One more thing: if electric, vehicles are the successor to the cacophonous machines that "pollute" our environment, bring them on.

[Byte1]

Is that $75 a month or a year? If a year, can you message me your agent's info because I pay a ton more than that.

I apologize, I just checked and my motorcycle insurance is $70 per year. They must have given me a discount, because I would have sworn it was $75. This also includes roadside assistance. It's through Progressive.

By the way, they never asked me if I wear a helmet (I do) and they do not charge me either way, I don't think.

[Michael G.]

Harley has produced and is selling an Electric Motorcycle. What's the world coming to?

Harley Davidson are junk cycles anyway, overpriced, leak oil, and obnoxiously loud.
You are not buying a motorcycle, your buying into a guilt that many are stupid enough to follow.
Dirty jeans, smelly leathers, beer belly's, and tats all over your body.

So adding electric bike will just add the their junk pile.

[Byte1]

Harley Davidson are junk cycles anyway, overpriced, leak oil, and obnoxiously loud.
You are not buying a motorcycle, your buying into a guilt that many are stupid enough to follow.
Dirty jeans, smelly leathers, beer belly's, and tats all over your body.

So adding electric bike will just add the their junk pile.

Obviously someone has not kept up with the times. HD does not leak oil and hasn't for over two decades. They are only loud if one modifies the exhaust pipes, which is also true of any other gas fueled motorcycle. Junk? You see more HD's on the road around here than any other brand, and I do not believe that Villagers or most other Americans think that HD is junk. Buying American is not a bad thing. Over priced? Apparently not, since they seem to sell very well. If they were over priced, would they be able to stay in business?
As for "Dirty jeans, smelly leathers, beer belly's, and tats all over your body." Most of those "bikers" you see on TV are just actors getting paid to put makeup on and act rowdy. A very small group of bike riders are as you described. The great majority are either hard working or retired.

[DaleDivine]

Obviously someone has not kept up with the times. HD does not leak oil and hasn't for over two decades. They are only loud if one modifies the exhaust pipes, which is also true of any other gas fueled motorcycle. Junk? You see more HD's on the road around here than any other brand, and I do not believe that Villagers or most other Americans think that HD is junk. Buying American is not a bad thing. Over priced? Apparently not, since they seem to sell very well. If they were over priced, would they be able to stay in business?
As for "Dirty jeans, smelly leathers, beer belly's, and tats all over your body." Most of those "bikers" you see on TV are just actors getting paid to put makeup on and act rowdy. A very small group of bike riders are as you described. The great majority are either hard working or retired.
Well said.
:bigbow::bigbow:

[fishon]

Wow.
Nine pages of crybabies.

[Byte1]

Wow.
Nine pages of crybabies.

Crybabies?

[Happydaz]

On post number five, I stated that the article in question was stupid.
I’ll add to that saying it was written by a namby-pamby MSN leftist to excite other small minded leftists. It sure wound up the TOTV Karens.
I won’t argue with Karens. They aren’t smart enough to learn.

I called them risk averse old biddies, but I like your description better! They are always saying all the bicyclists and motorcyclists will get run over and killed. Oh, I am so afraid. Then I read the paper and it is golf carters and automobile drivers getting hurt or killed. Pay attention people to your own failings and risks. Leave other people alone. When did you all get so old?

[Mrprez]

I called them risk averse old biddies, but I like your description better! They are always saying all the bicyclists and motorcyclists will get run over and killed. Oh, I am so afraid. Then I read the paper and it is golf carters and automobile drivers getting hurt or killed. Pay attention people to your own failings and risks. Leave other people alone. When did you all get so old?

Good point. It’s weird being the same age as old people.

[Byte1]

Good point. It’s weird being the same age as old people.

Yes, good point. I used to wonder about all the old folks living here, until someone suggested that I take a good look in the mirror. It's no longer fun going to a carnival and entering the crazy mirror display or having someone guess my weight. Candy apples, cotton candy, hotdogs and fried Twinkies no longer have the same appeal.