View Full Version : Steeler's Roethlisberger hurt in accident
RaceGrrl
06-12-06, 01:53 PM
Link to story (http://www.cbc.ca/story/sports/national/2006/06/12/roethlisberger-motorcycle-crash.html)
Riding his motorcycle without a helmet- not smart. A witness told Pittsburgh's WTAE Channel 4 Action News that Roethlisberger went over his handlebars, hit the windshield of another vehicle and then hit the ground.
He has "undisclosed injuries" but apparently was conscious after the accident.
Link to story (http://www.cbc.ca/story/sports/national/2006/06/12/roethlisberger-motorcycle-crash.html)
Riding his motorcycle without a helmet- not smart. A witness told Pittsburgh's WTAE Channel 4 Action News that Roethlisberger went over his handlebars, hit the windshield of another vehicle and then hit the ground.
He has "undisclosed injuries" but apparently was conscious after the accident.
Makes you wonder if he would choose not to wear a helmet in football. :shakehead
hanging around Kellen Winslow Jr a bit too much recently?
RaceGrrl
06-12-06, 02:00 PM
Makes you wonder if he would choose not to wear a helmet in football. :shakehead
I wondered the same thing when I read the story. :saywhat:
ESPN.com's John Clayton reported that early indications were the injuries were not life-threatening.
:thumbup:
Wheel-Nut
06-12-06, 02:06 PM
Stupid kids!! Those things are dangerous . . .
His surgery to have Cowher's foot removed from his backside is scheduled for next week!!
Spicoli
06-12-06, 02:06 PM
dumba$$.
:shakehead
extramundane
06-12-06, 02:08 PM
http://images.ibsys.com/2006/0612/9356658_400X300.jpg
The windshield off of which Ben's face bounced.
FCYTravis
06-12-06, 02:10 PM
Ow.
Yeah, because winding up in the hospital with severe head injuries means he's a REAL MAN. :gomer:
TKGAngel
06-12-06, 02:41 PM
After he's recovered from his injuries, I hope Cowher slaps some sense into the boy, and at the very least makes him do PSAs about how motorcycles should always, always be ridden while wearing a helmet. Most people won't let their kids out on their 10-speed without a helmet, and yet these same chuckleheads go riding motorcycles without helmets. :mad:
pfc_m_drake
06-12-06, 02:52 PM
Pennsylvania used to have a motorcycle helmet law, but it was repealed about 2 (?) years ago. I always thought that wasn't a very smart move :thumdown:
Al Czervik
06-12-06, 03:05 PM
Pennsylvania used to have a motorcycle helmet law, but it was repealed about 2 (?) years ago. I always thought that wasn't a very smart move :thumdown:
Just because something is illegal doesn't stop people from doing it.
Insomniac
06-12-06, 03:08 PM
Makes you wonder if he would choose not to wear a helmet in football. :shakehead
Well, they do play in a group, so it's probably safer.
Tifosi24
06-12-06, 03:09 PM
Pennsylvania used to have a motorcycle helmet law, but it was repealed about 2 (?) years ago. I always thought that wasn't a very smart move :thumdown:
You can thank the ABATE movement for that. I am sure there are other organizations like it for other parts of society, but it is the only one I can think of that publicly endorses and campaigns for a proven safety measure to be repealed. Oh, I know how to drive so my cars doesn't need a collapsable steering column. I am surprised that the insurance industry hasn't stopped paying medical bills for those how choose to not wear a helmet.
Insomniac
06-12-06, 03:09 PM
After he's recovered from his injuries, I hope Cowher slaps some sense into the boy, and at the very least makes him do PSAs about how motorcycles should always, always be ridden while wearing a helmet. Most people won't let their kids out on their 10-speed without a helmet, and yet these same chuckleheads go riding motorcycles without helmets. :mad:
Heh, Cowher and the Steelers knew he rode without a helmet last summer. He had a chat with him, Ben said thanks for the advice, I ride safely and won't wear a helmet.
Insomniac
06-12-06, 03:11 PM
Well, they're saying the car had Maine plates. Probably had a New England Patriots bumper sticker too. ;)
ESPN Radio is reporting that he lost most of his teefs, has a broken jaw, and damage to both knees.
On the lighter side, the local ESPN affiliate was interviewing Tim Benz, a local Pittsburgh radio guy that did time here in Cbus, and he said that while he was @ the hospital, some guy walked into the ER wearing a Winslow Browns jersey. :gomer:
Fellow biker and all, I hope Big Ben recovers OK, and learns to wear a lid in the future.
-Kevin
oddlycalm
06-12-06, 04:17 PM
You can thank the ABATE movement for that. I am sure there are other organizations like it for other parts of society, but it is the only one I can think of that publicly endorses and campaigns for a proven safety measure to be repealed. I'm the last person to argue against wearing a helmet when riding, but if we follow your argument should also ban smoking as well, ban all gun ownership, ban alcoholic drinks, etc., etc., right? See the problem? Where do you stop?
The difference between something being an overwhelmingly good practice and having the government mandate it as law is a big one. By not wearing a helmet a rider doesn't put anyone else at risk, and a lot of people think that it's the responsibility of the individual to make that choice.
Here's the other fly in the ointment. After around a year of constant use perspiration begins to degrade the integrity of the foam compression liner. Further, if a helmet is dropped on a hard surface, even once, it should be considered compromised and be replaced. Same question here; where do you stop? Do you make it mandatory that every rider replace their helmet every year? Do you mandate only helmets that conform to the latest SNELL standard? If you don't, then you may as well not have a law at all because there is no way to ensure that the helmets worn would be effective.
I happen to place a high value on my head but others may feel differently. :gomer:
oc
The difference between something being an overwhelmingly good practice and having the government mandate it as law is a big one. By not wearing a helmet a rider doesn't put anyone else at risk, and a lot of people think that it's the responsibility of the individual to make that choice.
That really isn't true....
If you wreck your bike and become a vegetable, my tax dollars are going to pay for someone to stand around and wipe your drool. (Among other expenses.)
That really isn't true....
If you wreck your bike and become a vegetable, my tax dollars are going to pay for someone to stand around and wipe your drool. (Among other expenses.)
that's not necessarily true in the case of the injured party carrying health insurance.
although my health expenses could count against your group health insurances total claims in turn driving up your group plan's coverage/premiums :gomer:
i'm with OC on the lack of law business though. it's stupid not to wear one, doesn't need to be law though.
That really isn't true....
If you wreck your bike and become a vegetable, my tax dollars are going to pay for someone to stand around and wipe your drool. (Among other expenses.)same can be said for smokers, drunks and guys accidentally shooting themselves in the head.
If I rode, I would wear a lid. My choice.
Tifosi24
06-12-06, 05:05 PM
Oh no, it is the slippery slope argument. You sound like my friend arguing about not wearing a seat belt, which I am cool with but what, as JoeBob says, he becomes a vegetable, or what happens if he has a family and succombs to injuries that could be prevented by wearing a safety device. You guessed it, the government sends his family checks on a monthly basis. If you are going to engage in a risky behavior, why don't you have some kind of user fee on the practice in much the same way that tobacco and alcohol has. I am all for people being able to ride around with reckless abandon lidless, just as long as they assume some sort of extra risk for being a d-rocket.
[Off-Color Joke Mode] I wonder if ol' Ben is gonna start referring to himself as a soldier after this incident. [Off-Color Joke Mode]
Dr. Corkski
06-12-06, 05:10 PM
But do we get the choice to not support any Darwin Award candidates that gets themselves hurt by choosing to ride without a lid?
redmist
06-12-06, 05:25 PM
That really isn't true....
If you wreck your bike and become a vegetable, my tax dollars are going to pay for someone to stand around and wipe your drool. (Among other expenses.)
then why not require helmet use in all vehicles, by sheer volume alone there are many more head related injuries and deaths in car accidents than motorcycle accidents. while i agree it's agood idea to wear one, i seldom do when riding around town.
cameraman
06-12-06, 06:15 PM
i seldom do when riding around town.
Yet "around town" is where 99% of the bike riders get killed...
Mr. Toad
06-12-06, 07:36 PM
At least he didn't fall out of one of these.
http://www.simonday.net/free-desktop-wallpapers/spain/palm-tree-01.jpg
KaBoom21
06-13-06, 08:40 AM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=27276&item=8772661721
Insomniac
06-13-06, 09:10 AM
I'm the last person to argue against wearing a helmet when riding, but if we follow your argument should also ban smoking as well, ban all gun ownership, ban alcoholic drinks, etc., etc., right? See the problem? Where do you stop?
Come on, don't slippery slope this. You can go the other way. They should legalize drugs, assault weapons, etc.
Where do you stop? Wearing a helmet is the law. It's quite simple really. I don't really care. If people don't want to wear helmets, they either know the risks and are fine with it or are too stupid to realize the risk.
Insomniac
06-13-06, 09:12 AM
That really isn't true....
If you wreck your bike and become a vegetable, my tax dollars are going to pay for someone to stand around and wipe your drool. (Among other expenses.)
Our tax dollars are always being wasted. Smokers, drinkers, just plain idiots, the lazy, fraud...nothing new. We as a society choose to try and help the less fortunate. That includes the stupid.
Insomniac
06-13-06, 09:14 AM
then why not require helmet use in all vehicles, by sheer volume alone there are many more head related injuries and deaths in car accidents than motorcycle accidents. while i agree it's agood idea to wear one, i seldom do when riding around town.
Isn't that because they weren't wearing a seat belt?
Spicoli
06-13-06, 11:53 AM
If he is/was stoopid enough to not wear a helmet, the phoooey on him.
Live by the sword, die by the sword. :cry:
Andrew Longman
06-13-06, 12:34 PM
I'm generally a "Don't Tread on Me" type, but I also have too much motorcycle related tragedy too close to me to still be utterly cold on the issue of helmet laws.
If I hit you and you become a turnip, whether it is my fault or not, you and your family will likely sue me. And even if I avoid paying you, insurance carriers and the government will pick it up the cost of changing your adult diaper for the next 50 years. If you choose to ride without a helmet (or seat belt) do I and the rest of society get to decide how much less to care for you because you took on unnecessary and what we feel is un reasonable risk?
We don't require people to wear a helmet in a street car because we see that unreasonable, especially people with really good hair. But we do now require airbags, side impact protection and a bunch of other stuff because it lowers the risk society has to take at a reasonable cost to the individual.
We require that LP tanks be replaced (or rather not refilled) after they reach a certain age for the same reasons.
And we have building and construction codes, sanitation rules, and a bunch of other rules because as much as a few people may want to build a house out of milk crates and bedsheets and sit in their own poop, it eventually causes a health and safety issue for the resident and the whole neighborhood.
Insomniac
06-13-06, 01:31 PM
I'm generally a "Don't Tread on Me" type, but I also have too much motorcycle related tragedy too close to me to still be utterly cold on the issue of helmet laws.
If I hit you and you become a turnip, whether it is my fault or not, you and your family will likely sue me. And even if I avoid paying you, insurance carriers and the government will pick it up the cost of changing your adult diaper for the next 50 years. If you choose to ride without a helmet (or seat belt) do I and the rest of society get to decide how much less to care for you because you took on unnecessary and what we feel is un reasonable risk?
We don't require people to wear a helmet in a street car because we see that unreasonable, especially people with really good hair. But we do now require airbags, side impact protection and a bunch of other stuff because it lowers the risk society has to take at a reasonable cost to the individual.
We require that LP tanks be replaced (or rather not refilled) after they reach a certain age for the same reasons.
And we have building and construction codes, sanitation rules, and a bunch of other rules because as much as a few people may want to build a house out of milk crates and bedsheets and sit in their own poop, it eventually causes a health and safety issue for the resident and the whole neighborhood.
Don't you think most of society thinks health problems due to smoking and drinking are unreasonable risks that they should not have to pay for? Also, airbags are not mandatory, but are included in most (all?) new cars.
Gangrel
06-13-06, 01:49 PM
(snip)Where do you stop? Wearing a helmet is the law.(snip)
FACT ALERT! FACT ALERT! Many states, including PA, do not require helmets. Helmet law was repealed in PA a few years ago. Same in IL. Reason it was repealed here - bikers complaining that decreased field of view from wearing helmet actually increased chance of getting into an accident. In other words, not wearing a helmet = less likely to be in accident, but if accident happens, will probably be more severe.
Anyhow...
Opposite Lock
06-13-06, 02:01 PM
...phoooey on him.
"Phoooey"? Damn, dude, that's pretty rough language, considering the guy isn't even out of the hospital yet.
Speaking of airbags, anyone seen this gem of safety engineering?
http://www.yamaha-motor.co.jp/global/news/2006/05/23/asv-3.html
oddlycalm
06-13-06, 02:35 PM
Speaking of airbags, anyone seen this gem of safety engineering? Sweet. You don't know how many times I wished I had a combination gut buster/testicle remover when riding... :gomer:
cameraman
06-13-06, 03:06 PM
Hmmm,
http://www.yamaha-motor.co.jp/global/news/2006/05/23/img/asv-3_002.jpg
I suppose if it actually works and doesn't lauch you into space...
Don't you think most of society thinks health problems due to smoking and drinking are unreasonable risks that they should not have to pay for? Also, airbags are not mandatory, but are included in most (all?) new cars.
There are many, many taxes and fees added to the price of tobacco and alcohol. That money helps pay for the costs of smoking and drinking.
Also, airbags are mandatory on all new cars - and have been since 1996. http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/safety/articles/45863/article.html
Riding without a helmet in PA: legal
Riding without a license in PA: not so much
http://kdka.com/sports/local_story_164115654.html
(KDKA) PITTSBURGH One day after the motorcycle accident that seriously injured Ben Roethlisberger, there are new questions about whether the Steelers quarterback even had a license to drive a motorcycle.
As accident investigators continue to search for answers, KDKA Investigator Andy Sheehan has learned that police are looking into that issue this afternoon
Sources say that while Roethlisberger had a license to operate a car, he apparently did not possess a Pennsylvania motorcycle license.
City accident investigators are not commenting, but a confidential source tells KDKA that a review of motor vehicle records in Harrisburg shows that Roethlisberger has never had a Pennsylvania motorcycle license.
According to our source, Roethlisberger did have a learner's permit that allowed him to ride a motorcycle; but that permit expired on March 29th.
The source goes on to explain that Roethlisberger never took the written and driving test required to get a motorcycle license – and would have been driving illegally at the time of the accident.Oops.
Gangrel
06-13-06, 03:46 PM
There are many, many taxes and fees added to the price of tobacco and alcohol. That money helps pay for the costs of smoking and drinking.
Also, airbags are mandatory on all new cars - and have been since 1996. http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/safety/articles/45863/article.html
Front, not side impact.
All of the ER doc's and nurses that I know call them "donor-cycles".
Enough said.
Spicoli
06-13-06, 03:59 PM
"Phoooey"? Damn, dude, that's pretty rough language, considering the guy isn't even out of the hospital yet.
Speaking of airbags, anyone seen this gem of safety engineering?
http://www.yamaha-motor.co.jp/global/news/2006/05/23/asv-3.html
Nothing personal on the dood, its just that if you play with fire, you're likely, at some time, gonna get burned. I've seen too much carnage on those (a friend got ate up bad several years ago). In the end, I'm a Libertarian on my views on Bikes. They are, without a doubt, cool to ride, fun as hell to watch racing, and have some of the nicest design lines around, but if you do it - don't come cryin to mama when you get busted up.
Now axe me about the mufflers/lack of on Harleys, and then I get opinionated ;)
Opposite Lock
06-13-06, 04:58 PM
Nothing personal on the dood, its just that if you play with fire, you're likely, at some time, gonna get burned. I've seen too much carnage on those (a friend got ate up bad several years ago). In the end, I'm a Libertarian on my views on Bikes. They are, without a doubt, cool to ride, fun as hell to watch racing, and have some of the nicest design lines around, but if you do it - don't come cryin to mama when you get busted up.
Now axe me about the mufflers/lack of on Harleys, and then I get opinionated ;)
I shoulda used a :gomer:. I wasn't really calling you out - just having fun with the mildness of the word "phoooey". :)
I doubt Ben will be cryin' to anyone, even if it turns out the accident wasn't his fault. He was ill-prepared regardless of fault, and he's gonna hafta admit it. Speaking from personal experience, there's nothing like a trip to the trauma center to cause a reconsideration of helmets and invincibility.
And yes, as my BMW-riding friends say when a noisy Harley goes by, "That's so sad - such a pathetic cry for attention."
Tony George
06-13-06, 05:00 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8827899546&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1
:rofl: :eek: :rofl:
Spicoli
06-13-06, 05:10 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8827899546&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1
:cry: :rofl: :cry:
priceless.
Insomniac
06-13-06, 06:54 PM
FACT ALERT! FACT ALERT! Many states, including PA, do not require helmets. Helmet law was repealed in PA a few years ago. Same in IL. Reason it was repealed here - bikers complaining that decreased field of view from wearing helmet actually increased chance of getting into an accident. In other words, not wearing a helmet = less likely to be in accident, but if accident happens, will probably be more severe.
Anyhow...
I know that. If you didn't cut up what I wrote, you'd see I was referring to where you would draw the line and that it wasn't a slippery slope.
Insomniac
06-13-06, 06:57 PM
There are many, many taxes and fees added to the price of tobacco and alcohol. That money helps pay for the costs of smoking and drinking.
Also, airbags are mandatory on all new cars - and have been since 1996. http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/safety/articles/45863/article.html
Those taxes don't help those of us with insurance and rising insurance premiums. They may offset state provided health care, but I can bet not all of the costs, therefore, we all still have to pay for their decisions.
Also, it is not illegal to drive a car without an airbag.
All of the ER doc's and nurses that I know call them "donor-cycles".
Enough said.
I'll bet some of those docs and nurses are overweight, or smoke, or drink alcohol. The number one killer is heart disease, and these people won't even make good donors....
All of the ER doc's and nurses that I know call them "donor-cycles".
Enough said.
Doctors here call bike riders M.O.Ds : Mobile Organ Donors. :cry:
Well, they're saying the car had Maine plates. Probably had a New England Patriots bumper sticker too. ;)
I was thinking Bengals fan, myself.
For some reason I find it hard to muster any sympathy for such sheer boneheaded idiocy.
Andrew Longman
06-13-06, 10:58 PM
Those taxes don't help those of us with insurance and rising insurance premiums. They may offset state provided health care, but I can bet not all of the costs, therefore, we all still have to pay for their decisions.
Also, it is not illegal to drive a car without an airbag.
No. but it is illegal to sell one. That is what is deemed as a reasonable imposition on the individual for the benefit of the whole. Ans I'll admit to a not knowing the exact standard, but I believe there is some federal standard for side impact protection. That's why the manufacturers have been working on improving that.
And no, just because our government sets a booze and tobacco tax that doen't cover the full social cost of their use doesn't mean it is fine. Other countries tax tobacco and booze much higher than the US. That's a political question, not an ethical question.
Insomniac
06-14-06, 09:36 AM
I was thinking Bengals fan, myself.
For some reason I find it hard to muster any sympathy for such sheer boneheaded idiocy.
Me either. My initial reaction when I saw it go across the screen during the US-Czech game was what a dumb***. It was covered in depth last off-season and he said he'd just keep riding without a helmet=. It was almost inevitable, or a self-fulfilling prophecy. The other thing I found interesting was he went on and on about how safe he is, riding Harleys/Choppers and always riding in groups on country roads. Then he wrecks a sport bike on anything but a country road by himself. At least he stuck to not wearing a helmet...
Insomniac
06-14-06, 09:42 AM
No. but it is illegal to sell one. That is what is deemed as a reasonable imposition on the individual for the benefit of the whole. Ans I'll admit to a not knowing the exact standard, but I believe there is some federal standard for side impact protection. That's why the manufacturers have been working on improving that.
And no, just because our government sets a booze and tobacco tax that doen't cover the full social cost of their use doesn't mean it is fine. Other countries tax tobacco and booze much higher than the US. That's a political question, not an ethical question.
Illegal to sell a new car without an airbag, not a used one. And again, it is not illegal to drive a car with no airbag, or even a car with a disabled/deployed/missing airbag for that matter.
You could debate whether almost any law was a political/ethical/moral question.
Dirty Sanchez
06-14-06, 09:55 AM
helmet n a z i s=:gomer:
it should be a choice. the best way to survive an accident is to not have one. wearing a full face helmet limits your vision and ability to hear, imo.
it seems odd that one law should apply to both riders... the guy on his cruiser riding with caution. jeans and leathers... big wallet with a leash. and the younger dude showing off his invincibility on a sport bike doing wheelies on the highway while weaving thru traffic.
and btw, the bungles need a plane crash to happen before they can get their playoff hopes up :laugh:
Those taxes don't help those of us with insurance and rising insurance premiums. They may offset state provided health care, but I can bet not all of the costs, therefore, we all still have to pay for their decisions.
Also, it is not illegal to drive a car without an airbag.
what about bungee jumpers, whitewater kayakers/rafters, anyone who participates in any sporting activity that's risky.
they're upping your premiums by partaking in such activities. you're paying for their decisions.
all it takes to eliminate the cost burden on the private end is for the insurance company to not pay out the claim by having the policy state "riding sans lid? no love."
Tifosi24
06-14-06, 10:16 AM
what about bungee jumpers, whitewater kayakers/rafters, anyone who participates in any sporting activity that's risky.
they're upping your premiums by partaking in such activities. you're paying for their decisions.
all it takes to eliminate the cost burdern on the private end is for the insurance company to not pay out the claim by having the policy state "riding sans lid? no love."
Spot on brother, but try getting that past all of the motorcycling lobby groups. If this policy gets pushed through I will be all for people riding around with people riding around without a lid. Slight tangent, but I am curious how per capita motorcycle deaths compare between European countries and the United States.
what are lobbying groups going to do? not buy the private company's policy?
ok then, go ahead :gomer:
As the bikers say: Let those who ride decide.
-Kevin
rosawendel
06-14-06, 10:34 AM
the issue of helmet laws versus personal liberties comes down to one simple statement: driving is a privilege, not a right. period.
the issue of helmet laws versus personal liberties comes down to one simple statement: driving is a privilege, not a right. period.
and riders have to go get a license to this effect :gomer:
and riders have to go get a license to this effect :gomer:
Or not.... :gomer: ;)
-Kevin
Tifosi24
06-14-06, 11:05 AM
what are lobbying groups going to do? not buy the private company's policy?
ok then, go ahead :gomer:
C'mon Ank, would you expect the motorcycle lobby to stand idlely (sp?) by and let the the insurance industry create different policy. There would be lawsuits brought up and bills brought up before Congress and state legislatures in about 1.7 seconds.
laws that do what? tell an ins company they can just refuse to offer coverage?
guess the lobbying groups in Texas must suck balls considering how the ins companies freely withdrew mold & storm coverage policies after major storms during the past 20 some odd years
it seems odd that one law should apply to both riders... the guy on his cruiser riding with caution. jeans and leathers... big wallet with a leash. and the younger dude showing off his invincibility on a sport bike doing wheelies on the highway while weaving thru traffic.
Every day, on my way to work I drive past the spot where a motorcycle rider was killed. He was riding through a city park. He particularly enjoyed the parkway because there is beautiful scenery, lots of shade, and a speed limit of 25 MPH. In other words, a great place to cruise.
A state trooper dringin in the opposite direction on the parkway was making a left, off the parkway and onto a larger road that intersects the parkway. There was no emergency, he just didn't see the biker coming and turned into him. The biker (who wasn't wearing a helmet) died of head injuries.
If you think the only bikers who get killed or seriously injured are the ones on the sportbikes, you're seriously mistaken. It seems to me, the most common accident is a driver turning into a motorcycle. That can (and does) happen anywhere - whether you're cruising or riding like an idiot.
Dirty Sanchez
06-14-06, 12:03 PM
meh. accidents happen to all kinds of bikers. you can come up with all kinds of examples. but look around... that generalization is still quite valid.
I knew a guy that died BECAUSE of his helmet. Seriously.
They couldn't cut it off of his head soon enough to cut his skull to relieve the swelling.
Of course, if he didn't have a helmet, the efforts to save his life would have been unnecessary. Dude hit his head HARD! :(
Spicoli
06-14-06, 01:11 PM
Couple years ago dooder was riding whellie on sportbike at 2am thru the main drag in broad Ripple (Indy). Car no see healight. Car plow over biker. biker dead.
helmet? no idea. :gomer:
problem - bikes have very little protection.
Andrew Longman
06-14-06, 02:10 PM
You could debate whether almost any law was a political/ethical/moral question.
Absolutely. And it is the messy but beautiful political process that sorts it out.
In this case people of PA, through their representatives, thought they did not want to pay the social cost of helmetless bikers. The the bike lobby made the noise necessary to gain statehouse support for personal liberty.
Of course with this and a lot of things, the vast majority in the middle have no lobby or special cause as they are more concerned with their own little world of job, family, bills, racing, etc. :)
Insomniac
06-14-06, 02:16 PM
what about bungee jumpers, whitewater kayakers/rafters, anyone who participates in any sporting activity that's risky.
they're upping your premiums by partaking in such activities. you're paying for their decisions.
all it takes to eliminate the cost burden on the private end is for the insurance company to not pay out the claim by having the policy state "riding sans lid? no love."
I'm not sure how I became the guy complaining about people's decisions costing my tax dollars. I'm the one who started the argument we already pay for so many decisions other people make. We as a society have chosen to do that. And that incluides huge burdons that arise as a result of smoking and drinking, which no one even consider banning or making illegal.
Insomniac
06-14-06, 02:23 PM
Every day, on my way to work I drive past the spot where a motorcycle rider was killed. He was riding through a city park. He particularly enjoyed the parkway because there is beautiful scenery, lots of shade, and a speed limit of 25 MPH. In other words, a great place to cruise.
A state trooper dringin in the opposite direction on the parkway was making a left, off the parkway and onto a larger road that intersects the parkway. There was no emergency, he just didn't see the biker coming and turned into him. The biker (who wasn't wearing a helmet) died of head injuries.
If you think the only bikers who get killed or seriously injured are the ones on the sportbikes, you're seriously mistaken. It seems to me, the most common accident is a driver turning into a motorcycle. That can (and does) happen anywhere - whether you're cruising or riding like an idiot.
Definitely. I had a friend from high school die the exact same way. A car turned to cross a 2 lane highway to get on the interstate and he hit the driver's side door and was launched. He was wearing a helmet. I think cars don't realize how fast a motorcycle is really going. But that is part of the risk of driving anything. You can be as safe as you can be, but you can't control other drivers and you have to think about that when you get on a motorcycle because you're the most vulnerable out there.
BTW--They finally installed a traffic light there after countless accidents and requests for a light (his being the last). :(
Insomniac
06-14-06, 02:25 PM
I knew a guy that died BECAUSE of his helmet. Seriously.
They couldn't cut it off of his head soon enough to cut his skull to relieve the swelling.
Of course, if he didn't have a helmet, the efforts to save his life would have been unnecessary. Dude hit his head HARD! :(
That's kind of like those people you hear saying "I only survived because I wasn't wearing a seat belt." I'm sure it happens, but the significant majority of cases, you're a lot better off wearing one.
That's kind of like those people you hear saying "I only survived because I wasn't wearing a seat belt." I'm sure it happens, but the significant majority of cases, you're a lot better off wearing one.100% in agreement.
Definitely. I had a friend from high school die the exact same way. A car turned to cross a 2 lane highway to get on the interstate and he hit the driver's side door and was launched. He was wearing a helmet. I think cars don't realize how fast a motorcycle is really going. But that is part of the risk of driving anything. You can be as safe as you can be, but you can't control other drivers and you have to think about that when you get on a motorcycle because you're the most vulnerable out there.
BTW--They finally installed a traffic light there after countless accidents and requests for a light (his being the last). :(
The number one cause of motorcycle accidents is the dreaded "left turn in front of..." collision. Also, 3/4 of motorcycle accidents are not the fault of the rider, so the cruiser/sportbike argument is wrong. In fact, the latest statistics show a sharp rise in middle-aged males dying on cruisers.
Gangrel
06-14-06, 03:13 PM
All I can really say is that I have had more than a few encounters with very eligible and deserving two-wheeled Darwin contestants, doing 90 on busy surface roads, popping wheelies, weaving through traffic, tailgating ( :saywhat: !!!), etc. The urge can be overwhelming to make a sudden move to the edge of the lane or feel the sudden need to make sure the breaks are working, though I resist. I have no issue with cruisers on Harleys, and have plenty of empathy for two wheeled bystanders who have someone turn left in front of them. OTOH, I really believe this world would be a better place if sportsbikes were remanded to the race track. I know of several cases last year here in Chicago of sportsbike riders finding spectacular ways to knock on Darwin's door, usually getting an answer. One I recall, the guy was moving about 130 when some lady moved into his lane. He laid the bike down trying to avoid hitting her. The came to a stop about a half a mile down the road. They were picking up parts of the rider for most of that distance. I have no sympathy for this guy whatsoever. The only thing lacking in his suicide was a note.
As for helmets, I understand their value in protecting the scull and brain, but I have to wonder if they contribute to busted necks. I think the only real solution is to acknowledge that the risks are high, and learn to be as safe as you can. I face those same questions when making the decision to go SCUBA diving. The probability of an emergency in the case of diving is pretty minute, but if one does happen, the probability is that it is going to be pretty bad. A great degree of training is not optional.
The urge can be overwhelming to make a sudden move to the edge of the lane or feel the sudden need to make sure the breaks are working, though I resist.
My wife and daughter thank you and your higher brain functions for controlling an obviously psychotic urge.
OTOH, I really believe this world would be a better place if sportsbikes were remanded to the race track.
Sure. Add sportscars next to your list. Wait, then add sports sedans. An M5 doesn't really need 500hp....
oddlycalm
06-14-06, 03:40 PM
The bigger issue has always been that our minimum standards for vehicle operation are so low that almost anyone that can breath air can get a drivers license. Raise those standards significantly to the point where you are assuring actual competency and you will really make a difference in safety on the road.
My questioning of madatory motorcycle helmet laws isn't about a slippery slope, it's about applying a requirement to one group that isn't equally applied to other groups. If you look at the activities with the highest number of head injuries nationally motorcycles are but one of many. Yet when do you suppose we will see mandatory helmets for all bicycle riders, equestrians and basketball players, etc....?
oc
Gangrel
06-14-06, 03:42 PM
My wife and daughter thank you and your higher brain functions for controlling an obviously psychotic urge.
If you're not tailgating people while you're riding, your wife and daughter don't really have much to worry about. If you are, it's not me they should be worried about.
Sure. Add sportscars next to your list. Wait, then add sports sedans. An M5 doesn't really need 500hp....
Name one place in this country where it is within the bounds of the law, or even decency, to use all 500 of those hp on a public road. So yeah, I guess you're right. It'll never happen, and never should, but it would be an improvement.
Important note: I never said (nor did you in your reply) that sportsbikes should be made illegal, only that the world would be a better place without them. The world would be a better place without fuel emissions and urban sprawl, too. Not much we can do about that.
Dirty Sanchez
06-14-06, 04:18 PM
The bigger issue has always been that our minimum standards for vehicle operation are so low that almost anyone that can breath air can get a drivers license. Raise those standards significantly to the point where you are assuring actual competency and you will really make a difference in safety on the road.
My questioning of madatory motorcycle helmet laws isn't about a slippery slope, it's about applying a requirement to one group that isn't equally applied to other groups. If you look at the activities with the highest number of head injuries nationally motorcycles are but one of many. Yet when do you suppose we will see mandatory helmets for all bicycle riders, equestrians and basketball players, etc....?
oc100% agreed. driver safety is the problem. helmet laws are not the answer.
The bigger issue has always been that our minimum standards for vehicle operation are so low that almost anyone that can breath air can get a drivers license. Raise those standards significantly to the point where you are assuring actual competency and you will really make a difference in safety on the road.
ocThis too, is a slippery slope.
I am NOT, I repeat, NOT driving my wife around all day long. :flame: Quit bringing this *&%$ up oc, and I'll promise to not let her drive over in your State. Deal?
;)
B3RACER1a
06-14-06, 09:05 PM
Really, IMO< anyone that rides a motorcyle, pedal bike....anything like that without something on their head is just asking for problems. Seat belts are mandantory and saves thousands everyday, but there are the few that swear by not wearing one because they hear about those 2 out of a 10,000 accidents were not wearing a belt was a plus...like they get freakishly thrown from the car and survived. Without a helmet I really cant think of any way were you could be in a wreck and be better off without a helmet on. Its just stupid.
But then agian, if you prefer not to wear one, I say go for it. But I bet insurance companies would develope a clause about no helmets and it would cost more for a rider without a helmet. Same thing for seat belts. I guess then you'd have to be honest to the insurance company about wearing your helemt or belt....and well, thats a whole different story.
Really, IMO, everyone really should be wearing them for their own good, but you just cant force them. If they want to be idiots....like ol' Ben here, then let em.
I mean, there is no law that says you have to wear a helemt in some states...thats beyond the point though. There is also no law that says you have to wear a parachute when you jump out of an airplane.
slow bear
06-14-06, 09:53 PM
Joe Bob hit the nail on the head.
Back when I rode, I was a hell of a lot more worried about someone making a left turn across my bow than if my lid was going to save me when they did.
A brain bucket isn't much help if you get centerpunched, or the moron who hits you runs clean over you.
Yes, driving is a privilige and states have the right to pass whatever laws they want but I have a philosophical disagreement with laws protecting me from myself.
IlliniRacer
06-14-06, 10:50 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=27276&item=8772661721
And another one:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ROETHLISBERGER-BEN-AUTO-MOTORCYCLE-16x20-PHOTO_W0QQitemZ8813643453
Insomniac
06-15-06, 09:27 AM
Yet when do you suppose we will see mandatory helmets for all bicycle riders, equestrians and basketball players, etc....?
Many states have bicycle helmet laws to at least protect children.
http://www.helmets.org/mandator.htm
kids have always had different rules though
I always wear a helmet when riding, especially trail riding. But if I"m just taking the dogs for a run around the neighborhood I don't bother, I even wear flips instead of shoes. Sure it's a risk but if I get into an accident it's going to be because some soccermom plowed her 75K land yacht into my backside not b/c of anything that happened in front of or beside me. And well, I'd probably be vaporized when someone's G500 or X5 tumbles over me:gomer:
the helmet's definitely saved what little isupstairs many times when tumbling down a hillside though :saywhat:
Tifosi24
06-15-06, 10:37 AM
Helmets while cycling are a most, and are a reason why I didn't suffer a dibiltating (sp?) head injury while I was in high school. There is nothing like riding a mile to your friends house and having no idea how you got there, and then to this day not being able to remember anything from the first week of school that year to emphasize the importance of head gear. I should have taken a picture of the helmet after the wreck, and before we sent it in for a freebie. The inner shell was caved in at the point of impact about one-quarter to three/eigths of an inch, I thought my mom was going to lose it when she saw that.
Gangrel
06-15-06, 10:49 AM
the helmet's definitely saved what little isupstairs many times when tumbling down a hillside though :saywhat:
That may be a matter of opinion... :laugh:
Hello Extreme Baseball SuperFan #1.
I think one of the ESPN guys yesterday didn't meet his quota of "White Sox are the greatest ever" on the air, you better get back on the job and start up that email campaign again :gomer:
Helmets while cycling are a most, and are a reason why I didn't suffer a dibiltating (sp?) head injury while I was in high school. There is nothing like riding a mile to your friends house and having no idea how you got there, and then to this day not being able to remember anything from the first week of school that year to emphasize the importance of head gear. I should have taken a picture of the helmet after the wreck, and before we sent it in for a freebie. The inner shell was caved in at the point of impact about one-quarter to three/eigths of an inch, I thought my mom was going to lose it when she saw that.
so this is how you explain a weekend full of shrooms & shwag to your mom, huh? :D
Gangrel
06-15-06, 11:00 AM
Hello Extreme Baseball SuperFan #1.
I think one of the ESPN guys yesterday didn't meet his quota of "White Sox are the greatest ever" on the air, you better get back on the job and start up that email campaign again :gomer:
Ank on the mound.....here's the windup...and the pitch...
Juuuuuuusssssst a bit inside! :gomer:
Andrew Longman
06-15-06, 12:24 PM
Helmets while cycling are a most, and are a reason why I didn't suffer a dibiltating (sp?) head injury while I was in high school. There is nothing like riding a mile to your friends house and having no idea how you got there, and then to this day not being able to remember anything from the first week of school that year to emphasize the importance of head gear. I should have taken a picture of the helmet after the wreck, and before we sent it in for a freebie. The inner shell was caved in at the point of impact about one-quarter to three/eigths of an inch, I thought my mom was going to lose it when she saw that.
Same here. While I probably have had as many as 15 untreated concussions from many years playing football, it was an accident on a bike about 20 years ago that convinced me to always wear a helmet on the road.
I was cycling on a lonely country two lane when a thunderstorm came up. Bolts were crashing all around me and there was no cover in sight. So I put my head down and just peddled as fast as I could. Suddenly I was flying through the air and landed head first on the centerline. I didn't see the diagonal RR crossing and when my front wheel hit the wet rail it immediately kicked out.
My helmet shattered, my shoulder scraped up, and the bike twisted. But I was fit enough to jump up and scream a bunch of expletives for quite a few minutes until realized I was jumping up and down in the middle of the road and would likely get run over if I stayed there too long.
Anyway, back to motorcycles. I agree the greatest risk is cars turning in front. A young couple riding a Ducati at the speed limit near my home a few weeks ago were turned into by a young girl who only had her license a few weeks. They died almost instantly and left two young kids at home. The driver's helmet did not help as the impact ripped it off his head.
I don't agree that a full face helmet impairs hearing and vision, at least I have never found that to be true, but then I have never ridden a motorcycle without a full face helmet.
Bottom line for me is I don't think it is too much to ask that people wear a helmet. Do it for the people you might leave behind. Do it for the people who might need to scrape your ooz off the road. Do it for the people who might need to wipe your drool for the next 50 years. If they are willing to do that, then at least do what you can to manage the risks you choose to take.
Does it need to be a law? Different point. As a matter of personal responsibility and choice, I think a helmet is the less selfish choice.
oddlycalm
06-15-06, 02:55 PM
Does it need to be a law? Different point. Exactly. I was a certified MSF (Motorcycle Safety Foundation) instructor for more than 10yrs and I told people the truth about wearing helmets, including the need to replace them periodically and why the Snell Foundation standards are important, as opposed to the much lower government standards.
Mandatory helmet laws force people to wear a helmet, but they don't force them to wear an effective helmet so they fall very far short of compelling safety. The huge number of people that ride in these states with the legal minimum helmet as not any better protected than with no helmet at all. It's like having a seat belt law that only requires ornamental seat belts. :gomer:
Since it's pretty clear to anyone that actually knows anything about helmet safety that these laws were not actually passed to make motorcyclists safer, one is tempted to conclude they were passed out of spite and society's desire to control the activities in some way of a very unpopular minority. Truth is, most non-riders share feelings ranging from mild dislike to hate when it comes to motorcycle riders.
oc
one is tempted to conclude they were passed out of spite and society's desire to control the activities in some way of a very unpopular minority. Truth is, most non-riders share feelings ranging from mild dislike to hate when it comes to motorcycle riders.
oc
That's for sure. We just need to read some of the posts in this thread for proof.
Insomniac
06-15-06, 08:22 PM
"In the past few days, I have gained a new perspective on life. By the grace of God, I am fortunate to be alive, surrounded by loved ones and lifted by the prayers and support of so many. I am sorry for any anxiety and concern my actions have caused others, specifically my family, the Steelers organization, my teammates and our fans.
I recognize that I have a responsibility to safeguard my health in the offseason so I can continue to lead our team effectively. I never meant any harm to others nor to break any laws. I was confident in my ability to ride a motorcycle and simply believed such an accident would not happen to me. If I ever ride again, it certainly will be with a helmet.
Change of heart after being lucky to be alive and still walk. Imagine that...
Gangrel
06-16-06, 10:25 AM
That's for sure. We just need to read some of the posts in this thread for proof.
The only ones I feel dislike or hate towards are ones who use their bikes as weapons. If you fall into the catagories I described above, and you don't like my attitude, then maybe you should leave more than 3 feet between my back bumper and your front wheel when driving on the expressway at speed, and think twice before riding the dashed white line between my vehicle and the one in the next lane. If you don't partake in either of these activities, then you are just another motorist on the road as far as I am concerned. If you do, as I stated above, it is not me that your wife and daughter have to worry about.
Tifosi24
06-16-06, 10:46 AM
Truth is, most non-riders share feelings ranging from mild dislike to hate when it comes to motorcycle riders.
I think this attitude among non-riders doesn't stem from a dislike for the motorcycles, but rather the actions of some in the motorcycle community. I agree with Gangrel in that part of this includes those who ride like maniacs on the freeway, or who dodge through traffic on city streets. The obsession of some Harley riders to have pipes that are outrageously loud is another reason some have a negative dislike towards motorcycles. There is nothing more annoying than not being able to listen to the radio in my car, or having to stop conversation while I am walking, because a loud pack of motorcycles ride past.
Lumping people into rider and non-rider categories is not a very good classifying system. I grew up with many people in my family and family friends who ride and I was taught at a young age to give motorcyclists much more leeway than cars on the road. The only reason I don't have a motorcycle is because my body doesn't lend me to be very comfortable on bikes. Mucho short legs makes it impossible for me to flat foot anything, and knowing the risks that can be involved with riding, I have decided to keep cycling as my means of two-wheeled fun.
That's for sure. We just need to read some of the posts in this thread for proof.
I think this statement is way off base. The only comments I have seen by posters in here have been worthwhile discussions. I only use "reckless abandon" to describe riding without a helmet because I know from personal experience how important a helmet is even at 10 miles per hour. Personally, I think it is somewhat reckless no matter what you are riding on the road not to wear a helmet.
Andrew Longman
06-16-06, 11:27 AM
There has been one biker I has a serious dislike for, but the bike was the symptom, not the cause. He was a neighbor who when he wasn't screaming at his wife or dragging his little girls around by the hair, he was tinkering with his Harley. Of course he didn't know what he was doing and forever was fowling the plugs and struggling, sometimes for hours, to get it started.
When he did get it started, he would gun it unmuffled up and down the street.
One day, during a town-wide yard sale when it was parked on the street, another neighbor put a sign on it labled "FREE". The guy came to blows with some poor schmuck that tried to ride off on it. He would have too, but of course it wouldn't start.
Other than that I don't have any more or less trouble with idiotic bike drivers and car drivers.
The only ones I feel dislike or hate towards are ones who use their bikes as weapons. If you fall into the catagories I described above, and you don't like my attitude, then maybe you should leave more than 3 feet between my back bumper and your front wheel when driving on the expressway at speed, and think twice before riding the dashed white line between my vehicle and the one in the next lane. If you don't partake in either of these activities, then you are just another motorist on the road as far as I am concerned. If you do, as I stated above, it is not me that your wife and daughter have to worry about.
The problem is that some car drivers and truck drivers do the same aggressive maneuvers & use their (much larger) vehicles as weapons, yet motorcyclists are treated differently while being more vulnerable.
Spouting about the urge to take out a motorcyclist is just as bad as spewing about taking out someone driving a Corolla erratically. For whatever reason, being on a motorcycle tends to anger others more.
By the way, in my state, riding between lanes of cars is legal and encouraged. That doesn't stop people with mental problems from opening their car doors/throwing cigarettes/swerving at riders, however.
Gangrel
06-16-06, 01:13 PM
The problem is that some car drivers and truck drivers do the same aggressive maneuvers & use their (much larger) vehicles as weapons, yet motorcyclists are treated differently while being more vulnerable.
Spouting about the urge to take out a motorcyclist is just as bad as spewing about taking out someone driving a Corolla erratically. For whatever reason, being on a motorcycle tends to anger others more.
The point you are missing is that when a moron in a car is tailgating me, I think nothing of actually doing a break check on him. When it is a bike, the urge is there, but I resist because the price for the biker is much higher, and the risk is greater.
By the way, in my state, riding between lanes of cars is legal and encouraged. That doesn't stop people with mental problems from opening their car doors/throwing cigarettes/swerving at riders, however.
That's fine Rich. I don't live in CA. I live in IL, where it is quite illegal to ride between lanes. Furthermore, the ones that do it here are frequently doing it at 40-50 mph faster than the traffic they are riding in. In a car, I would call that a suicide run. On a bike, I don't see how that could even be questioned.
Are wheelies, standing on the seat, and riding at over 150 mph also legal in CA? Just checking on things that might be different here than there.
The point you are missing is that when a moron in a car is tailgating me, I think nothing of actually doing a break check on him.
I'll just stop discussing this with you now. Doing brake checks on anyone in a car OR bike is ****ing stupid and needlessly risks lives.
Gangrel
06-16-06, 01:30 PM
I'll just stop discussing this with you now. Doing brake checks on anyone in a car OR bike is ****ing stupid and needlessly risks lives.
Yep, 'cause no one was ever hurt by a little innocent tailgating.... :rolleyes:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.