[Michael G.]

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

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by Michael G.

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]

Originally Posted by DaleDivine

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Byte1

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]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

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]

Originally Posted by Dantes

Maybe horse’s will make a come back

As long as they are electric…

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

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]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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

[Spalumbos62]

Originally Posted by Byte1

"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]

Originally Posted by blueash

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 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]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

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]

Originally Posted by Dantes

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