Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
31,013 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Resident Curmudgeon
Joined
·
86,940 Posts
Our infamous city council who are so fond of social engineering passed a helmet bylaw last year. I took up bike riding, without a helmet just to try to get them to charge me. So far, the police ignore me.

Wearing a helmet is and should be a personal choice driven by common sense, not socially engineered by city councils who should be concentrating on cost reductions and better infrastructure. (I've worn seat belts in vehicles ever since the first car I had with them as standard equipment.)

For the record, ours also social engineered a no smoking bylaw which resulted in two bingo hall closures, and four bars and two restaurants also went under. Their latest accomplishment is trying to pass a "no idling" your vehicle bylaw. They're idiots, much like all governments who social engineer us to death.
 

·
Honourable Citizen?
Joined
·
4,853 Posts
Wearing a helmet is and should be a personal choice driven by common sense, ...
I agree.

That said, I think if you don't wear a helmet when riding a bike, it probably proves that you have little worth protecting inside your skull. ;)

Stats prove that the majority of critical injuries and deaths in cycling are head injuries. My brother has his own cracked helmet from the time some homicidal car driver knocked him down and then sped away leaving him on the road. He also had a dislocated thumb, but that wouldn't have potentially killed him as smashing his head on the road without a helmet would have.

My only exception to non-mandatory helmet wearing would be for children. They should be forced to wear a helmet until such time they can legally decide if they want to be an idiot and go without one. If their parents are too stupid to want to buy helmets for them, the kids shouldn't have to suffer for that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,354 Posts
Our infamous city council who are so fond of social engineering passed a helmet bylaw last year. I took up bike riding, without a helmet just to try to get them to charge me. So far, the police ignore me.

Wearing a helmet is and should be a personal choice driven by common sense, not socially engineered by city councils who should be concentrating on cost reductions and better infrastructure. (I've worn seat belts in vehicles ever since the first car I had with them as standard equipment.)

For the record, ours also social engineered a no smoking bylaw which resulted in two bingo hall closures, and four bars and two restaurants also went under. Their latest accomplishment is trying to pass a "no idling" your vehicle bylaw. They're idiots, much like all governments who social engineer us to death.
Your post is full of logical inconsistencies.

First off, why did you decide to wear a seat belt? Was it because you felt that you needed a body decoration? Or was it because you recognized that it was a valid safety device? If so, don't you think that that protection should be extended to everyone? Don't you believe that the state should make some attempt to protect its citizenry or do you believe that "freedom's messy?

Second, you may think that people are being "social engineered to death" but I wonder how many lives were saved from second-hand smoke when those businesses went under?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
31,013 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
They're idiots, much like all governments who social engineer us to death.
Unfortunately the laws are needed to to protect the majority of sensible people from having to pay for the health costs incurred by "idiots" like you.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,473 Posts
Sorry Sinc

I have to disagree.

Given Canada has a socialized heatlth care system where everyone contributes to the cost of care, it then goes that society has a general interest in promoting the health and safety of its populace.

Having had my life saved already as a teen during a bike-car accident, I can attest to not only the importance of wearing a helmet, but also helmet laws, without which I probably wouldn't have worn a helmet nor would I now be typing this message.

I normally subscribe to the liberterian view of individual responsblity, but I think particularly in the case of children and teens, helmet laws have some merit.
 

·
Canadian By Choice
Joined
·
117,692 Posts
Go to any children's hospital and speak to the ER doctors and nurses about the number of serious injuries that come from not wearing a helmet and how many of these serious injuries could have easily been prevented with the use of a good helmet. It is the law here in St.John's, and there are organizations that donate quality helmets to children who cannot afford them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
42,905 Posts
Any time the government pays for anything, another part of your life seems to become their business. If I could sign a waiver freeing me of the benefits and responsibilities associated with any kind of government health care plan I'd do it in a second--but that would be giving me too much freedom I suppose.

20 years from now, there'll be a topic on the forum helping people to understand that they really don't need to eat eggs, cream or candy because eating these items leads to an overall increase in the cost of government health care.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,251 Posts
If I could sign a waiver freeing me of the benefits and responsibilities associated with any kind of government health care plan
You could always try refusing treatment from any government subsidized health care offered. Or... you could always just cut the government a check for the FULL amount of your treatment.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,388 Posts
Our infamous city council who are so fond of social engineering passed a helmet bylaw last year. I took up bike riding, without a helmet just to try to get them to charge me. So far, the police ignore me.

Wearing a helmet is and should be a personal choice driven by common sense, not socially engineered by city councils who should be concentrating on cost reductions and better infrastructure. (I've worn seat belts in vehicles ever since the first car I had with them as standard equipment.)

For the record, ours also social engineered a no smoking bylaw which resulted in two bingo hall closures, and four bars and two restaurants also went under. Their latest accomplishment is trying to pass a "no idling" your vehicle bylaw. They're idiots, much like all governments who social engineer us to death.
I am personally glad to see a senior citizen who is ten foot tall and bullet proof. Usually this trait is only exhibited by the youth of our society.

I wish to personally congratulate Ehmacland's oldest living teenager. Cheers SINC. :clap:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,251 Posts
On this topic my 9 year old last night took a header from her bike into a hydro utility box. She broke her two front chicklets in half. I'd hate to think what would have happened if she didn't have her helmet on.

Helmets should be mandatory.

I'm more interested in hearing as to why they shouldn't be mandatory.

P.S. After two hours in the Dentist's office last night you would hardly even notice that she had broke her two front teeth in half. I am utterly amazed at how quick and how seamlessly they were able to fix her teeth.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,115 Posts
Our infamous city council who are so fond of social engineering passed a helmet bylaw last year. I took up bike riding, without a helmet just to try to get them to charge me. So far, the police ignore me.

Wearing a helmet is and should be a personal choice driven by common sense, not socially engineered by city councils who should be concentrating on cost reductions and better infrastructure. (I've worn seat belts in vehicles ever since the first car I had with them as standard equipment.)

For the record, ours also social engineered a no smoking bylaw which resulted in two bingo hall closures, and four bars and two restaurants also went under. Their latest accomplishment is trying to pass a "no idling" your vehicle bylaw. They're idiots, much like all governments who social engineer us to death.
I prefer to take the "just in case" stance with respects to helmet safety. I know perfectly well that I won't pull a stupid maneuver on my bike and put myself in jeopardy... but I wear one just in case someone else does something stupid and puts me at risk of getting seriously hurt. But even then... you're never in control at all times. Stuff happens.

The no smoking bylaw: best thing that ever happened. It was one of the biggest issues with my wife was being able to go to a bar, pub or restaurant without worrying about her having a asthma attack. "Smoke free" zones were a joke and there were no real alternatives other than sitting at home. Every business that closed down was replaced with another one--and from what I've seen here, they're offer better service. They're still doing well.

The idling thing... I guess it depends one where you live and how much time vehicles spend at a stand-still. I'm not sure it'll help, but whatever. My car never spends more than a minute idling. It'll be hard to enforce it come winter.
 

·
Indigent Academic
Joined
·
8,115 Posts
The 'people' are paying the health care tab - ipso facto, the 'people' are entitled to insist on standards for personal protection.

If one knew anything at all about the structure and anatomy of the head, and the short and longterm potential consequences of damage, one would be demanding better helmets. It does not take a very dramatic incident end all one's life dreams.

My son rode without a helmet - he said literally that helmets weren't cool. Just how cool was the convulsion he had thrashing about unconscious in his own blood and drool in the middle of the road when he went down? (He survived.)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
42,905 Posts
The 'people' are paying the health care tab - ipso facto, the 'people' are entitled to insist on standards for personal protection.
OK, so when "the people" tell you what you can or can't eat and how much you should exercise each day, or which sports are too dangerous for you to participate in, because this affects "the people's" health care tab, I expect to hear nothing from you.
 

·
Indigent Academic
Joined
·
8,115 Posts
OK, so when "the people" tell you what you can or can't eat and how much you should exercise each day, or which sports are too dangerous for you to participate in, because this affects "the people's" health care tab, I expect to hear nothing from you.
Usually the 'people' try to manage this by persuasion - participaction, obesity awarenesss info, safety messages and so on. Indeed the 'people' will pay - 'milk of human kindness' and all that crap - but it is a component of this issue of self protection. Do you object to the law requiring, say, brakes on your car?
 

·
CIO of CYA
Joined
·
3,857 Posts
On this topic my 9 year old last night took a header from her bike into a hydro utility box. She broke her two front chicklets in half. I'd hate to think what would have happened if she didn't have her helmet on.

Helmets should be mandatory.

I'm more interested in hearing as to why they shouldn't be mandatory.

P.S. After two hours in the Dentist's office last night you would hardly even notice that she had broke her two front teeth in half. I am utterly amazed at how quick and how seamlessly they were able to fix her teeth.

Sorry to hear the bad news.
I hope she feels better.
Poor kid.
 

·
Resident Curmudgeon
Joined
·
86,940 Posts
When our no smoking bylaw was passed, the option to have a smoking outlet was ignored. That is the restaurant and bar association would have liked the option to be totally smoke free, or totally smoking which made nothing but sense. Consumers could then base their decision where to go and enjoy smoke free or not. Council overrode that request in what it "claimed" was concern for the employees who would have to work in a smoking type establishment.

Now that the bylaw has been in place for nearly a year, here is the result:

1. It's tough to get service at times because employees are outside for a smoke break about every half hour.

2. The front door area and sidewalks are littered with cigarette butts from patrons stepping outside for a smoke about every half hour.

3. Walking past a bar is like walking through a haze when going down city streets at nearly any time of day without ever going into a bar or restaurant.

4. Bars are having trouble finding employees due to the fact they don't allow smoking.

5. One Bingo hall set up a smoking area outside, the other did not. A 3,000 plus person per week business collapsed and moved to the county where smoking is allowed. Guess which one survived?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,798 Posts
Generally, laws that prevent you from killing yourself are a little too Big Brother.

Here in Ontario, kids under 18 are required by law to wear a helmet. As it should be. Over 18, helmet not required on bikes.

People should have the option of not wearing a seatbelt or motorcycle helmet. If it kills them, it was their choice. We just have to make sure we protect kids from stupid parents.

As for the "smoking" issue, it's so nice now here in Toronto. My wife and I can walk into any pub or restaurant, and not have to worry abut choking to death. There was some initial resistance, but it's the norm now.
 

·
Indigent Academic
Joined
·
8,115 Posts
..............People should have the option of not wearing a seatbelt or motorcycle helmet. If it kills them, it was their choice. ............
Agreed.

The problem occurs when they aren't killed but just maimed, broken, disabled, crippled, dis-embowelled, brain damaged or other words to that effect. Then "their" problem becomes the problem of others and there-in lies the moral issue: Thou shalt not make thyself a burden unto others. Your 'personal' freedom does not include the freedom to dump a huge burden on others.

You have a death-wish? Fine, no problem, go for it. Be all you can be. But don't leave anyone else with a crumpled wreck to take care of ad nauseum
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
42,905 Posts
The problem occurs when they aren't killed but just maimed, broken, disabled, crippled, dis-embowelled, brain damaged or other words to that effect. Then "their" problem becomes the problem of others and there-in lies the moral issue: Thou shalt not make thyself a burden unto others. Your 'personal' freedom does not include the freedom to dump a huge burden on others.

You have a death-wish? Fine, no problem, go for it. Be all you can be. But don't leave anyone else with a crumpled wreck to take care of ad nauseum
And you're simply not capable of allowing them the freedom to opt out of public medical care. Understood.
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top