Skip to comments.Bareheaded motorcyclist dies in helmet protest
Posted on 07/05/2011 7:06:05 AM PDT by Red BadgerEdited on 07/05/2011 7:07:30 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
A bareheaded motorcyclist participating in a ride to protest mandatory helmet laws was killed when he was thrown over the handlebars in Onondaga, New York.
Philip A. Contos, 55, of Parish, New York, was on a ride organized by the Onondaga chapter of American Bikers Aimed Towards Education (ABATE), state police said Sunday.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Motorcycle hooligans ping.............
That SOUNDS like irony but it really doesn’t. The issue is personal freedom, not whether helmets save lives.
>>The issue is personal freedom, not whether helmets save lives.<<
“Contos hit his brakes, began fishtailing and lost control of his 1983 Harley Davidson. He shot over the handlebars, hit his head on the pavement and was taken to Upstate University Hospital in Syracuse, New York, where he was pronounced dead.”
Obviously he was going much faster than 14 miles per hour, which is the maximum speed helmets are rated for.
Exactly. The man made his decisions and had to deal with the consequences.
A full-face helmet saved my life once. I’ll tell anyone who will listen that they should wear a helmet. But I am loathe to have the government force mandatory usage.
The “it’s a good idea so there should be a law” argument is a long and rocky road to no good things.
The nanny’s argument is a very dangerous non sequitur.
There is indisputable evidence that motorcycle helmets saves lives.
Therefore we will pass laws mandating helmet use on public roads.
If that leap of logic is allowed to stand then you are saying it is governments job to force citizens to always act in the safest possible manner.
No. I protest. I refuse. It is not for a bureaucrat to decide.
At age 18, in 1973, I put a 2-3 inch gash in a helmet when I hit a berm and went over the handlebars. I was doing maybe 30 mph. I have ALWAYS worn a helmet since. This was in CA and I could ride without a helmet at that time...........
Ouch! I gotta disagree. Not about the personal freedom issue, but about the irony.
That's one of the clearest examples of irony I've seen in a while...
When I ride on long trips, I usually wear a helmet. Depends on what state I’m traveling through. But for in and around travel, I would rather not. I’ve been riding for 40+ years.
I’m not a bike rider or a mathematician although I’m pretty sure a helmet does not allow a persons body to defy the laws of physics. Besides he went over the handlebars...so what’s next? Seatbelts for bikes?
I always hear people say ... It isn’t a matter of *if* you have a motorcycle accident, it’s a matter of *when.*
I just find that hard to believe. With all the bikes that are on the road, *everyone* is going to have an accident? Everyone that drives hasn’t had a car accident. We always hear about the accident where the helmet saved the life, but there are also accidents where it didn’t. And accidents where the helmetless rider lived.
I’m sure helmet use is a good idea, but not mandated by the government.
Same with my seat belt, if traffic is heavy or weather deteriorates, I put it on.
I'm an adult, I have the ability to assess the situation for risk.
I despise the nanny state....I really do.
Give the government an inch....guess what?
Recently in Texas, they passed a no refusal law for holiday weekends. In other words, if your suspected of drinking and driving, the government WILL take your blood...on the spot, without a lawyer present.
This now has morphed into every weekend, now all the time, to license and insurance checkpoints.
It will continue on until the government can stop citizens any time, with or without probable cause.
Our liberty to travel from point A to point B are slowly fading.
if he was wearing a helmet his neck would have snapped which would mean he would still be dead. FMVSS 218 has no neck standards.
“Im sure helmet use is a good idea, but not mandated by the government.”
If helmet use is so good, we should all wear one 7/24.
“A full-face helmet saved my life once. Ill tell anyone who will listen that they should wear a helmet.”
Ditto - I creased the back of a Bell helmet on the curb after hitting water on a blind curve (they were watering the golf course). Didn’t help my knee (first of four surgeries), but it did save my life.
I thought I explained it but let me try again.
If he was arguing that he could drive a motorcycle without a helmet and still be safe, then it would be irony.
What he was saying was despite the fact that I am putting myself in increased danger, I protest helmet laws because personal freedom is more valuable than personal safety.
Absolutely. Especially old folks:
Falls are the leading cause of fatal (Kung, 2008) and nonfatal (Alexander, 1992; Cleveland Clinic Health System, 2004) injuries to older people in the United States. More than one-third of adults ages 65 years and older (about 12 million people) fall each year (Hausdorff JM, 2001; Chang JT, 2004).
I’ve had more than my share................
Yup. Just think of all the lives we could save by wearing helmets 7/24.
The story about this poor unfortunate non-helmet wearing protester has been in here for the last three days. Could we give it a rest?
It didn’t come up.....................
Yes, but he only hurt himself, no one else. It isn’t up to the government to tell people they must protect themselves via seat belts, air bags or helmets. He died for something he believed in and hurt only himself. Not wearing that helmet impacted no one else.
I appreciate the personal freedom argument against helmet laws and it is probably correct.
That said, there are some things that should require no laws. Anyone stupid enough to ride a motorcycle without a helmet deserves whatever consequences he suffers. I would also add that not one dime of taxpayer or charity money should go to assist such irresponsible fools.
I like Jerry Seinfeld’s take on helmet laws. “...the idea behind the helmet law being to preserve a brain whose judgment is so poor, it does not even try to avoid the cracking of the head it is in.”
If you want to protest helmet laws, I say get a sticker saying “I don’t need Big Government to tell me to wear this!” and put it on your helmet.
I think the best argument in favor of helmet laws might be that in the nanny state enviroment that is becoming more pervasive, many people assume anything legal is safe, and therefore laws are needed to to educate people.
I wonder if a “helmet law” with absolutely no penalties for disobeying it might make sense. It would put people on notice, without really compelling them to wear helmets, and also might help others escape liability for injuries suffered by helmetless fools.
Here, in FL, we have a choice.
No Helmet: MUST HAVE INSURANCE.
Helmet: NO INSURANCE REQUIRED.
Yep, assuming of course that he leaves no children or parents or spouse or friends behind and, assuming of course that there were no eye-witnesses who now have the lovely image of a splattered melon to occupy their dreams.
If you look at motorcycle fatality statistics, there are only two states that account for over half of all motorcycle fatalities in the US. And the two states are: (drumroll please......)
California and Florida. Maybe we should make those residents wear helmets and leave the rest of the 48 states alone. Don’t forget... If you want to wear a helmet you are always entitled to do so... nobody is preventing you from wearing a helmet.
That is sort of weird, given that the lack of a helmet will mainly only endager the rider and not others on the road.
Of course there is the argument, (which is also used for seatbelts), that a motorcylist with no helmet or a driver with no seatbelt will not make take sudden actions (like slamming on the brakes) to avoid collisions with others. There is some validity to that rationale, but more for seatbelts, than helmets, IMO.
Maybe the reasoning is that anyone who refuses to wear a helmet is an idiot, and therefore much more likely to have an accident? :-)
I would agree, on one condition (along the lines of "Above My PayGrade's post)...that NONE of MY $$$$ goes to pay for your Freedom of a stupid choice.
So...let me clarify: If a rider wants to ride without a helmet...that's fine. However...they better be able to pay for every bit of medical care ON THEIR OWN if they get head trauma. I should not have to pay be anyone's poor choice.
And even if the person has insurence...I would still pay for it. A $50K medical bill that would have been $5K with a helmet is going to get passed on in the form of higher premiums.
Guess that’s called making the anti-point. He showed the mean ol’ helmentniks. ‘How dare you try to help and protect me! Ya’ think I’m STUPID, or somethin’? Take THAT!’
So he dies free.
I always wear seatbelts because it is the smart thing to do, once came out of an accident without a scratch thanks to my seatbelt. But the laws mandating them make me want to not wear seatbelts just on principle.
Therein lies the trap of socialized medicine. Under that logic I am accountable to you for everything I do.
But if you buy into that process I suggest you lobby fiercely for laws against unsafe sex since that costs “US” about 1000X more than unhelmeted bike injuries.
A helment saved my life as well,still have the thing in
a closet now.The grinding that thing took would have been
Rear ended by a drunk on Nashville Pike
Still take it off tho when I`m in a state where its legal
I agree with the personal freedom to decide aspect, but I prefer to wear my brains on the inside. For me it is helmet on, always.
If you are the government telling you to wear a helmet, it's none of your damn business.
Now, let me clarify a bit. The 'foolish' part is because of the disregard some drivers have for motorcyclists in general. Any city driving is dangerous. On open road, I'd rather feel the wind and see the sky, than have to sweat inside a brain-bucket on an all-day ride.
total and complete irony.
that said, I disagree with all these laws.
next up: requiring cars to go no faster than 25 mph, and a law requiring the wearing of helmets while driving a car. after all, that just might save a few lives. and we can’t have people dying, can we?
NASCAR safety harnesses for everybody!................
Everybody has a right to hit their head on pavement.
Already posted at least three times in the past 3 days...
Come on people...search is your friend.
I DID SEARCH. IT DID NOT COME UP!.............
Whether or not someone wears a helmet or wears a seat belt is no one's business except the individual involved, certainly not the governments business or place to pass such laws. If you think seat belt laws and helmet laws are good things then you need to switch to being a Democrat because there is nothing constitutional about such laws. They are an attack on individual freedom.
You give up many personal freedoms when you choose to drive on the road, motorcycle or not.
If you're advocating government control over individuals, your argument is a non-sequitur.
IIRC, we've had that here in MN for years. (and not just on holidays) Here they call it "implied consent" . Nice Orwellian ring to it.
The correct answer is more freedom and less regulation. :)
no different than the nanny statists who argue for banning trans fats,guns,tobacco.... (Mayor Bloomturd ,Moochelle, et al.)
they argue we need more food regulations/fat bans/ menu edicts,etc -— in our ‘best interest’ for health and it will save ‘the government’ money !
who could be against that!?
This is different from what servantboy777 was referring to. Implied consent has been around for a while but does not force you to give your blood - it just imposes mandatory penalties if you refuse to submit to the officer's demands.
This new no refusal tactic is where there are judges present at the checkpoints to issue a warrant to collect your blood. No refusal allowed. Tampa does this.
You give up many personal freedoms when you choose to live in a cave too. We have given up most of our personal freedoms in the past 50 years.