Sad but ironic Karma

[Belco100]

I’m with the chap in the states, despite the obvious increase in risk and despite the fact I’d still wear a helmet for 90%+ of all journeys.

Any situation where the state or any other group forces compliance “for your own protection” should be resisted. The ONLY person who can judge my acceptable level of risk is me and if I choose to undertake an activity without the maximum level of safety equipment then that should be my choice.

The thinking that supports enforced compliance is the thinking that will gradually attempt to remove all risk by the ever increasing imposition of safety rules until the past time itself is banned. Motorcycles are dangerous. Banning them would be a great safety move.

Life is for living and includes risk. 100% of people alive today will die. While no one wants to rush that eventuality, most arriving at the end regret the things they’ve not done rather than the risks they’ve taken.

Rant Mode On.

I have to agree with everything you have said here and in your following threads. My choice what I wear and when!

Just by saying you should wear a helmet you are admitting there is a risk involved with riding a bike (and there is, we all know that). It is all down to how much risk you, personally, are prepared to accept. Do you want to be told which gloves you must where like they do in France now? And what about your textile jacket when you are told that is no longer good enough and you must wear a one piece leather suit with an air bag like they do in MotoGP as they are obviously the best.

In a lot of peoples eyes Motorcycles are too dangerous in all forms and should be banned. Don't let them get there way! 

Rant Mode Off.

 

[Eyore]

There is an argument that if we all went around without helmets and split our heads open like soft boiled eggs leaving a messy mush all over the road it may go down rather badly with the powers that be resulting in the end of motorcycling.We all need to take some responsibility for our actions.

Incidentally I noticed a BBC reporter clad in helmet  as opposed to hard hat and high vis reporting on the potential for snow last nights news at 10. Wonder if it will be too dangerous to let them out when it really starts or will they report from indoors while peering out the window.

[black-k1]

There is an argument that if we all went around without helmets and split our heads open like soft boiled eggs leaving a messy mush all over the road it may go down rather badly with the powers that be resulting in the end of motorcycling.We all need to take some responsibility for our actions.

Such an argument only holds true while it is viewed as acceptable that the state or some other group are able to implement restrictions on the individual "for their own good". (Full circle!)

We should take some responsibility for OUR actions and stop worrying about others taking responsibility for their own actions even if those actions put them at a greater level of risk than we would find acceptable.

[Eyore]

Afraid its called democracy. We vote in a government on the basis that we will accept their decisions made in the common good.

[black-k1]

That doesn't mean every decision is right, or that we have to agree with every decision. We merely have to conform. One of the advantages of a democracy is that we can disagree with such decisions and attempt to get them overturned.

[Phmode]

David. You are not a stupid man. Nor are you a stupid motorcyclist. These things I know.

In both these respects you are not necessarily 'the norm'.

One only has to see the speed demons in shorts and flip-flops as soon as the sun appears. What, did their skin suddenly get leather-like? Eejits in cars with un-belted kids diving around in the back seat is a common sight.

We could take your anti-compulsion stance to include tyres, brakes, lights, horns etc. We could do away with  the compulsory MoT test. Let's face it, I know best.

Where one draws the line is down to the individual. Compulsion is needed to protect the stupid from themselves and to protect me and you from the stupid!

Brian (who, despite this, would rather have a head-on collision with a biker who was not wearing a helmet  )

[black-k1]

David. You are not a stupid man. Nor are you a stupid motorcyclist. These things I know.

In both these respects you are not necessarily 'the norm'.

One only has to see the speed demons in shorts and flip-flops as soon as the sun appears. What, did their skin suddenly get leather-like? Eejits in cars with un-belted kids diving around in the back seat is a common sight.

We could take your anti-compulsion stance to include tyres, brakes, lights, horns etc. We could do away with  the compulsory MoT test. Let's face it, I know best.

Where one draws the line is down to the individual. Compulsion is needed to protect the stupid from themselves and to protect me and you from the stupid!

Brian (who, despite this, would rather have a head-on collision with a biker who was not wearing a helmet  )

Who defines the stupid? The rich? Those in black shirts? Those with university degrees? Best mates of politicians? I don't like the idea of anyone, anywhere, deciding they know what is better for me. I expect most people feel the same but the problem is most people feel they DO know what's better for someone/everyone else! You can't have it both ways.

All the examples you give put others (non-involved 3rd parties) at risk. When there is a 3rd party risk then I agree, we need to all agree what safety measures should be put in place to mitigate that risk. When the only increase in risk is to the risk taker (helmets and other PPE) then it should be up to the risk taker to decide.

[raesewell]

After an accident there is always a third party involved, as already mentioned, the poor sod that has to clear up the mess.

[black-k1]

After an accident there is always a third party involved, as already mentioned, the poor sod that has to clear up the mess.

That argument only applies if the only mess ever to be cleared up is a result of, in this example, someone not wearing a helmet.

[TomL]

The CTC (Cyclist Touring Club) wanted to make wearing helmets compulsory and gave up because there was too much opposition from it's members. Now they even have to show a balance of non helmet and helmet wear in the CTC mag.

Australia made cycle helmet wear compulsory resulting in many riders giving up cycling. The fines in Sydney for non helmet wear, not having a cycle bell and jumping a red light are huge. In the near future they will be making it mandatory for cyclists to carry identification.

[raesewell]

After an accident there is always a third party involved, as already mentioned, the poor sod that has to clear up the mess.

That argument only applies if the only mess ever to be cleared up is a result of, in this example, someone not wearing a helmet.

I'm not talking only about motorcyclists, earlier you mentioned some other pastimes.
Sometimes people, such as fell walkers, rock climbers, pot hollers and many others go off in, for instance bad weather in the case of fell walkers, get themselves into trouble and then the rescue services have to go and bail them out. Pot hollers often get stuck and need help to get out. Sky diving, that normally ends in death if something goes wrong.

[black-k1]

After an accident there is always a third party involved, as already mentioned, the poor sod that has to clear up the mess.

That argument only applies if the only mess ever to be cleared up is a result of, in this example, someone not wearing a helmet.

I'm not talking only about motorcyclists, earlier you mentioned some other pastimes.
Sometimes people, such as fell walkers, rock climbers, pot hollers and many others go off in, for instance bad weather in the case of fell walkers, get themselves into trouble and then the rescue services have to go and bail them out. Pot hollers often get stuck and need help to get out. Sky diving, that normally ends in death if something goes wrong.

Again, it only applies if the only people who require help are those who've not used the correct PPE.

[raesewell]

I think we will have to agree to disagree.

[black-k1]

I think we will have to agree to disagree.

That's a freedom you have, Just as well no one thinks it's a bad idea allowing you to disagree!

[Expo]

All this discussion comes at the time that a young boxer dies shortly after winning a match in the ring in Doncaster. More cries to ban the sport. Discuss?