I cringe whenever

when ever I'm riding either in my car or scoot I cringe every time I see people in their 50'S and 60"s riding their bike with Sandals,shorts ,t-shirt and no helmet. I would hate to be around when one of these riders has to take a spill. Here in Arizona after 18 years of age are not required to wear a helmet. In my home state of NY helmets are required as well as headlights. What do my fellow scoot riders think about mandatory helmet law?

A necessary evil. I find the helmet a real nuisance sometimes but I can't imagine riding without it. I've only come off my bikes twice and both times my helmet took some punishment (although not a direct impact) but it certainly saved me from even a minor head injury.

I also cringe when I see people riding in shorts, T shirts etc. but helmets are mandatory here. I think these people should look up some gory injuries sustained from flesh lacerations and tearing, the infection alone can kill you.

My main gripe is having to carry my helmet with me when leaving the bike if my top box and underseat storage is full but I'd rather do that than risk brain damage, or worse. Helmet law is good, of course, we don't often have the weather here for anyone to want to ride without a lid anyhow!

There is a hook just under the left edge of your seat where you can secure your helmet. The thief would have to cut the chin strap inorder to make off with your helmet. The hook and strap actually goes into a pocket molded as part of the under seat support. I use it whenever my top box is being used.

I have a Pac-Safe helmet bag which i carry with me on trips where the space to store a helmet is taken up with luggage.
It's a good piece of kit.

AldusFran wrote:

when ever I'm riding either in my car or scoot I cringe every time I see people in their 50'S and 60"s riding their bike with Sandals,shorts ,t-shirt and no helmet. I would hate to be around when one of these riders has to take a spill. Here in Arizona after 18 years of age are not required to wear a helmet. In my home state of NY helmets are required as well as headlights. What do my fellow scoot riders think about mandatory helmet law?

I think people worry WAY to much about what others do. I think it’s a person’s choice, not society or anyone else. Also I think those who look down on another’s choice are wrong headed snobs wanting to push their ideas of a false sense of security on someone else.
I find it amusing its ok to demean someone’s choice about so called safety gear but not to defend someone’s right to do what they want.
What is the point of your even posting this? You cringe at someone else choosing something different for themselves when in no way does it affect you. Do you “cringe” if I vote different? Go to another church? Worship another god? Their weight? If they eat meat?  Where do you and others like you draw the line on deciding what’s best for everyone else?

AS I have said before shorts and flip flops are my CHOICE  in safety gear, you do whatever you want. That’s what America is about. Not a nanny state were “they” know what’s best . Freedom aint free…  Don’t give it away because you decide you know what’s best for others…. Be that helmet laws, seatbelt laws, drink size laws ,etc.

You asked what I think about mandatory helmet laws, now you know...

Dan

All this CHOICE nonsense is irrelevant given that we recently had a teenage motorcyclist killed in a head on collision by a US citizen driving out of one of our military airbases on the wrong side of the road.

The CHOICE of the lady driving the car was not to stay around at the scene as the emergency services and police attended.

Tragic accident it may have been but she didn't stay at the crash scene to be interviewed by the police like a normal person involved in a road traffic accident.

She shamelessly slunk back to the RAF airbase where the US military has a presence and somehow managed to get on a flight back to the States within hours.

She's still over there now, initially playing the 'diplomatic immunity' card which may have now been revoked. But her CHOICE seems to be that she has no intention of going back to the UK to face prosecution.  The young lad she hit and ended the life of with her Volvo 4x4 on that fateful evening had no CHOiCE at all.

Care to comment on that anyone.

I will! What she did was inexcusable and she should pay the same penalty in jail as she would have done here or in the UK. I do believe the fact that she fled the scene could override any diplomatic immunity. It may not. I remember a couple of fatal traffic accidents caused by UN diplomatic personnel in New York who were able to escape any punishment when they fled from the US.

It seems to be that the UK should put some pressure on the US to return this person to the UK to face justice for what she did.

I will comment.
It is quite well known that Meldrew and I do not often see eye-to-eye and have clashed on more than one occasion. That is a choice I/we have made.

In this case, however, I agree with him utterly.
It is a disgrace that that woman has acted in such a way.
According to the reports she it him with such force that there were bones sticking out of his body - he was smashed to pieces.
His father arrived and witnessed his son's destruction and death.
I say no more.

Slow down DLK. I don't wear protective gear because it's law, I wear it because it's safer. I started wearing a seat belt in my first ever car long before seat belts became law.

Wear whatever you want, I would still enjoy having a beer with you and talking about bikes, religion, politics or whatever. I don't hold it against you.

I work in a hospital.....I find it very grounding.

Meldrew wrote:

All this CHOICE nonsense is irrelevant given that we recently had a teenage motorcyclist killed in a head on collision by a US citizen driving out of one of our military airbases on the wrong side of the road.

The CHOICE of the lady driving the car was not to stay around at the scene as the emergency services and police attended.

Tragic accident it may have been but she didn't stay at the crash scene to be interviewed by the police like a normal person involved in a road traffic accident.

She shamelessly slunk back to the RAF airbase where the US military has a presence and somehow managed to get on a flight back to the States within hours.

She's still over there now, initially playing the 'diplomatic immunity' card which may have now been revoked. But her CHOICE seems to be that she has no intention of going back to the UK to face prosecution.  The young lad she hit and ended the life of with her Volvo 4x4 on that fateful evening had no CHOiCE at all.

Care to comment on that anyone.

I will.
Did you even read the posts above?
A hit and run is a crime. No matter where it happened.
How is this tied to the riders choice of safety gear???

Please stay on topic or start a new thread…

Dan

Loosemarbles wrote:

Slow down DLK. I don't wear protective gear because it's law, I wear it because it's safer. I started wearing a seat belt in my first ever car long before seat belts became law.

Wear whatever you want, I would still enjoy having a beer with you and talking about bikes, religion, politics or whatever. I don't hold it against you.

I work in a hospital.....I find it very grounding.

What am I to “slow down”?
The question was thoughts on helmet laws.

Quote from above “What do my fellow scoot riders think about mandatory helmet law?”

That is my point that everyone has their own choice to make at least in free states.
You do what makes you happy, and let me do what makes me happy.

Dan

DLK wrote:

I think people worry WAY to much about what others do. I think it’s a person’s choice, not society or anyone else. Also I think those who look down on another’s choice are wrong headed snobs wanting to push their ideas of a false sense of security on someone else.
I find it amusing its ok to demean someone’s choice about so called safety gear but not to defend someone’s right to do what they want.
What is the point of your even posting this? You cringe at someone else choosing something different for themselves when in no way does it affect you. Do you “cringe” if I vote different? Go to another church? Worship another god? Their weight? If they eat meat?  Where do you and others like you draw the line on deciding what’s best for everyone else?

AS I have said before shorts and flip flops are my CHOICE  in safety gear, you do whatever you want. That’s what America is about. Not a nanny state were “they” know what’s best . Freedom aint free…  Don’t give it away because you decide you know what’s best for others…. Be that helmet laws, seatbelt laws, drink size laws ,etc.

You asked what I think about mandatory helmet laws, now you know...

Dan

Nothing wrong with free choice as long as the only person that suffers from any consequences is you.  Unfortunately, that's not usually the case.  

It my be your choice to ride buck naked down the highway, but fall off that bike and get seriously hurt and then look around and see who is affected.  

Loved ones who have to now care for you and potentially pay for some of your care or cover the cost to plant you in the ground.  

The rest of us who have to help shoulder the cost of the hospital bills since the system is designed to spread the real cost of care as wide as possible to the poor slobs who pay their insurance premiums every month.

And if you are permanently disabled, then loop back to the last two points since they will now be a permanent fixture.

Freedom of choice is a great concept till you need the nanny state to care for you.  But at least it is there if your choice turns south.

EvilTwin wrote:

Nothing wrong with free choice as long as the only person that suffers from any consequences is you.  Unfortunately, that's not usually the case.  

It my be your choice to ride buck naked down the highway, but fall off that bike and get seriously hurt and then look around and see who is affected.  

Loved ones who have to now care for you and potentially pay for some of your care or cover the cost to plant you in the ground.  

The rest of us who have to help shoulder the cost of the hospital bills since the system is designed to spread the real cost of care as wide as possible to the poor slobs who pay their insurance premiums every month.

And if you are permanently disabled, then loop back to the last two points since they will now be a permanent fixture.

Freedom of choice is a great concept till you need the nanny state to care for you.  But at least it is there if your choice turns south.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What you say is partly true. But seatbelts and helmets make very little difference in the cost of “Hospital bills” . Based on the chosen few who pretend to know best for everyone people DIE from not using seatbelts and helmets… Very little cost in being cremated by the state.  I am one of those poor slobs who pay the full cost of my families health insurance. No help from anyone or any government subsidy, so that doesn’t apply, as to family and friends, lets face it your grabbing at straws to make your point.

If cost of healthcare is your argument for helmet laws consider how much more is spent on unwanted unplanned births both to citizens and illegals,  and healthcare for illegals  in the united states.

AS you can see there are much better ways to lower the social burden on the healthcare system than helmet laws.

No choice is made in a vacuum. But we cannot make laws to protect us from everything. Giving up freedom is NEVER a good idea. You will never get it back.

Dan

DLK wrote:

Meldrew wrote:

All this CHOICE nonsense is irrelevant given that we recently had a teenage motorcyclist killed in a head on collision by a US citizen driving out of one of our military airbases on the wrong side of the road.

The CHOICE of the lady driving the car was not to stay around at the scene as the emergency services and police attended.

Tragic accident it may have been but she didn't stay at the crash scene to be interviewed by the police like a normal person involved in a road traffic accident.

She shamelessly slunk back to the RAF airbase where the US military has a presence and somehow managed to get on a flight back to the States within hours.

She's still over there now, initially playing the 'diplomatic immunity' card which may have now been revoked. But her CHOICE seems to be that she has no intention of going back to the UK to face prosecution.  The young lad she hit and ended the life of with her Volvo 4x4 on that fateful evening had no CHOiCE at all.

Care to comment on that anyone.

I will.
Did you even read the posts above?
A hit and run is a crime. No matter where it happened.
How is this tied to the riders choice of safety gear???

Please stay on topic or start a new thread…

Dan

Simple, there's a lot of family photos in the British press of the teenage rider that was killed and in all of them he's wearing a full face helmet, textile riding suit, boots, and gloves.

Unlike the vast majority of riders his age he already had a Full Motorcycle Licence and would have been well aware of the dangers of motorcycling and dressed for it.

If you're wanting a reaction, I couldn't care less about mandatory motorcycle helmets, I've always worn a helmet and always will. I always wear a helmet when cycling too, and my latest Lazer cycle helmet has MIPS in the inner lining.

Want to go further, I have a range of armoured textile suits, open and flip front helmets, back protectors, gloves etc. In fact all manner of riding gear for year round riding. Hot weather, cold weather, wet weather, insulating layers, base layers, dry cooling vest, heated garments, and I protect my hearing too. So I'm probably a lot more savvy about choices of riding gear than you are.

I'm also too jaded now to care what others wear when riding, it's their skin to lose, limbs to break, and brains to spill.

The fact that the topic of who wears what to ride in crops up regularly on here, and it's usually the same old tosh started by the ball cap, shorts, and flip flop riders in the pensioners playground of Florida or some other humid state. It's basically click bait to get a reaction from other members.

It's also interesting that the subject of who wears what to ride in barely gets a mention on forums this side of the Pond, as riding is a year round activity for most. The nearest comparison is the open face v full face debate.

Lady should go to jail. I lived over 40 years outside of US, more than 20 year driving on left----you just have to think!

People should take responsibility for their actions. No gear and you crash it's going to be ugly.
Even the best gear will not save you in a hard impact.

Most people who leave an accident have something to hide.

Meldrew wrote:

Simple, there's a lot of family photos in the British press of the teenage rider that was killed and in all of them he's wearing a full face helmet, textile riding suit, boots, and gloves.

Unlike the vast majority of riders his age he already had a Full Motorcycle Licence and would have been well aware of the dangers of motorcycling and dressed for it.

If you're wanting a reaction, I couldn't care less about mandatory helmets, I've always worn a helmet and always will. I always wear a helmet when cycling and my latest Lazer helmet  has MIPS too.

Want to go further, I have a range of armoured textile suits, open and flip front helmets, back protectors, gloves etc. In fact all manner of riding gear for year round riding. Hot weather, cold weather, wet weather, insulating layers, base layers, dry cooling vest, heated garments, and I protect my hearing too. So I'm probably a lot more savvy about choices of riding gear than you are.

I'm too jaded now to care what others wear when riding, it's their skin to lose, brains to spill, or spent the the rest of their life in a wheelchair. I can also see what other riders are wearing just by looking.

The fact that the topic of who wears what to ride in crops up regularly on here, and it's the same old tosh. Usually started by the ball cap, shorts, and flip flop riders in the pensioners playground of Florida, or some other humid state. It's basically click bait to get a reaction on here.

It's also interesting that the subject of who wears what to ride in barely gets a mention on forums this side of the Pond, as riding is a year round activity for most. The nearest comparison is the open face v full face debate.

Wow, so wrong on so many levels….

1, This started as a question “Quote” “What do my fellow scoot riders think about mandatory helmet law?”
   So your response of “I couldn't care less about mandatory helmets,” leaves me wondering what your even posting on this topic for…

2,you said “quote” “Simple, there's a lot of family photos in the British press of the teenage rider that was killed and in all of them he's wearing a full face helmet, textile riding suit, boots, and gloves. Unlike the vast majority of riders his age he already had a Full Motorcycle Licence and would have been well aware of the dangers of motorcycling and dressed for it.”

So related to the topic what would a mandatory helmet law have changed? And the fact that he is dead with all that gear on even goes to what’s the point of all the gear if you still end up dead?

3,you stated incorrectly from on high “quote” “ I have a range of armoured textile suits, open and flip front helmets, back protectors, gloves etc. In fact all manner of riding gear for year round riding. Hot weather, cold weather, wet weather, insulating layers, base layers, dry cooling vest, heated garments, and I protect my hearing too. So I'm probably a lot more savvy about choices of riding gear than you are.”

I’m old also, been there, bought that applies to me also. In fact I have had every form of helmet, from several makers, and 4 different riding suits. Not to mention individual items. Im not new to this game in any way. Also I probably have much more current knowledge as I am right now researching and outfitting my son, helmet, gloves, boots, for cold weather. He has and always will wear at a minimum a snell dot full face no matter what he rides till he is old enough to choose for himself.

4, you stated “quote” “It's also interesting that the subject of who wears what to ride in barely gets a mention on forums this side of the Pond”

Is it not correct that you have NO CHOICE on helmet use on the roadways? How can you have a discussion on choice of using a helmet if you have no choice?

I am glad that we are able to have a free and open discussion on the merits of a nanny state controlling every aspect of our lives under the guise of keeping us safe from ourselves , or living with the choices we make as free men and woman , at least on this side of the pond.

Dan

You dress for the FALL and not the ride. It's that simple.

As you say......it's your choice.
But also think about who else is involved when clearing up after an accident when no protection is worn. I was in the Fire service for 20 years (now retired) and have seen some horrific sights of riders who have come off not just collisions but slippery/oily roads, faces torn apart whilst using an open face helmet, arms and legs shredded from sliding on the ground when riding in T shirt and shorts and the inevitable hours of agony having the nurse gently remove those umpteen amounts of gravel from your face, arms & legs with tweezers (like shot gun wounds), Loved one's left in limbo !, also clearing up the mess left behind after an incident involving the Fire Service, Ambulance, Police, Council Highway workers with images in their minds that NEVER go away, but as you say
It's YOUR choice !!!!!

DLK wrote:

Wow, so wrong on so many levels….

I am right now researching and outfitting my son, helmet, gloves, boots, for cold weather. He has and always will wear at a minimum a snell dot full face no matter what he rides till he is old enough to choose for himself.

I am glad that we are able to have a free and open discussion on the merits of a nanny state controlling every aspect of our lives under the guise of keeping us safe from ourselves , or living with the choices we make as free men and woman , at least on this side of the pond.

Dan

Really, for all your talk of choices and nanny states controlling our lives, you're dictating what your son wears. While it's nice that The Bank of Mum & Dad is picking up the bill for his riding gear, you seem to be nannying him by choosing his gear for him.

There's more to choosing a helmet that buying one that has a Snell sticker on it. For a start do you know your sons head shape, because all helmet manufacturers make them to fit a specific head shape.

What you choose for him in a store might have the right sticker for you and fit him comfortably there, but if it's not designed for his head  shape it'll become painful to wear after a coupe of hours.

Apart from the primary function of head protection, what about the equally important secondary functions of the helmet. Noise reduction, an effective seal round the face aperture to stop both noise and rain seeping in, ventilation to prevent that visor/face shield misting up and to pull heat out from inside the helmet.

You will have no idea as you're not wearing his helmet, only imposing your own values on what you think he should be wearing.

I don't know about you but I've bought a few helmets that seemed fine trying them on in a store, but after a few rides in them they've been real clunkers that have been a disappointing waste of money.

Shark, Baehr, early Schuberth helmets, BMW System 3, Scorpion EXO 900, and a couple more. Completely wrong choices.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

-- Thomas Jefferson
U.S. Declaration of Independence

So, there's that.

I naturally side with DLK on most of the points above. Freedom is in our DNA (and our law). Don't care if you don't like it. Freedom rocks.

This country was born because the British insisted on telling our early residents how to live. And we insisted on the freedom to do things our way.

Is that still happening?

Yes you certainly do things your way, and sadly that freedom allows your fellow citizens the right to bear arms. That right alone allows a never ending cycle of assault rifle killings in schools, colleges, and shopping malls. That inalienable right alone puts you out of step with the rest of the civilised world, but as only a small percentage of your citizens have a passport and travel abroad you're unaware of this.


All that freedom to bear arms but still no right to basic free health care we have.

Take last week as an example, I picked up the free monthly prescription meds I'd ordered online, asked for and was given the annual winter flu vaccination by the pharmacist, and back home accepted an invitation to go the hospital for a MRI scan the following day. I'm due another free eye test about now too.

In fact on visits to the US I'm often asked about our healthcare system, it's usually from someone that hears my strange to them Northern English accent. “Wow you don't pay, that’s so cool” etc.

Plus if something in our stores is labelled £5, that’s what I pay. Unlike on visits to the US when a $5 item has state sales tax added to so it's always more than the $5. Neither do we have to tip everyone to make up for the poor wages their employers should be paying.

So despite what's perceived on the other side, I like our 'nanny state'. It obviously appeals to others too, as illegal immigrants are queueing up in droves on the French side of the English Channel to get over here by any means.

How's that wall coming along?

I’ll give Meldrew the last word.

Topic locked