Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Motorcycle Riders May be Allowed to Ride Without a Helmet
WTOP News ^ | February 4, 2005 | unk.

Posted on 02/04/2005 8:21:40 PM PST by FoxInSocks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400401-406 last
To: mugs99

Oh, I agree. While I think wearing a helmet is the smart thing to do and cheap insurance against a number of possible injuries, I think people should be free to make their own decisions. I just hate seeing silly arguments made against their efficacy just to justify the desire to ride without one, which requires no jutification if that is what you want to to, in my opinion.

Otherwise, why allow motorcycling at all? Or downhill skiing or mountainbiking or rockclimbing or horse riding or smoking or drinking or any number of things that people do that are relatively dangerous? I've got a mother, I'm old enough to ignore her concerns if I want, and I don't need another in the form of the government.


401 posted on 02/08/2005 11:29:39 AM PST by -YYZ-
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: -YYZ-

LOL!
So true...Government should not be allowed Mom status!
...


402 posted on 02/08/2005 11:46:38 AM PST by mugs99 (Restore the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies]

To: FoxInSocks

Please note that the Virginia legislature has moved on from abolishing traffic laws and throwing away helmets to taking up the issue of "butt crack" and should that be subject to a $50 fine should it be displayed on the public streets.


403 posted on 02/08/2005 6:14:36 PM PST by muawiyah (tag line removed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I heard about that "butt crack" legislation today. That guy is obviously demented. Democratic Delegate Howell has proposed that

(1) Any person who, while in a public place, intentionally wears and displays his below-waist undergarments, intended to cover a person's intimate parts, in a lewd or indecent manner, shall be subject to a civil penalty of no more than $50;

(2) No person shall operate any motor vehicle if the driver's seat of such vehicle is reclined at such an angle as to prevent the driver from seeing the brake lights of vehicles ahead; and

(3) No operator of any vehicle shall operate or permit the operation within or from the vehicle of any sound amplification system that can be heard outside the vehicle at a distance of 50 feet or more.


404 posted on 02/08/2005 6:28:35 PM PST by FoxInSocks ("It's fun to shoot some people." -- James Mattis, Lt. Gen., USMC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: FoxInSocks
You'll notice, though, the very same legislature that can take up legislation like this has yet to move on cutting taxes.

I think we need an entirely new legislature. Maybe "W" can ship this bunch of Ayatollahs out to Iran or something.

405 posted on 02/08/2005 6:31:00 PM PST by muawiyah (tag line removed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: FoxInSocks

Doesn't that make the majority of his constituents in violation of the proposed law(s)?


406 posted on 02/08/2005 7:24:11 PM PST by brianl703 (Border crossing is a misdemeanor. So is drunk driving. Which do we have more checkpoints for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400401-406 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson