Helmetless Motorcyclist Killed While Riding To Overturn Helmet Law

[BruceH]

This headline was from The Onion, right?

No, this one really did happen, i saw the story in a couple of legit(tabloid though) newspapers but it sure sounds like an Onion headline.

Well, that's what I meant, really.

[JSngry]

I would say that if Nanny-State laws were put to a referendum and approved by the voters, then its democracy in action and not busy-body politicians trying to enforce their vision of "proper behavior". But I don't know of any case where nanny-state laws got that kind of treatment.

As it pertains to helmet laws, Oregon, 1988, for one (and only?): http://nwhog.wordpress.com/2010/04/07/helmet-laws-in-oregon/

(and yes, I had to look that up!)

[BruceH]

As far as that goes, if the bill of rights was put to a vote, much of it probably wouldn't pass.

[Clunky]

Another factor to consider would be effect a helmetless rider would have on other road users. If I saw a rider sans helmet I might stare in amazement at his/her stupidity and through distraction crash my car or bicycle. Alternatively I might give such a rider such a wide berth that I'd have a head on with the Number 23 coming the other direction.

[Shawn]

people driving while texting and/or yapping on their fucking cell phones are still more dangerous than just about anyone else. They will be more likely to crash into a motorcyclist whether they are wearing a helmet or not.

[BERIGAN]

Its tragic yet deliciously ironic.

Personally I find helmet laws a great symbol of the nanny state, as the risk is entirely the rider's, no one else is at risk but himself, and its no business of any state whether a motorcyclist wants to risk smashing his head on the concrete.

You're stupid if you don't wear a helmet but you're also free to be stupid.

That's a bedrock principle of the USA and this is a fine reminder on its 235th birthday.

Utter bullshit. Taxpayer winds up paying for ambulances and medical care for the helmetless crashers. Typical neocon garbage.

Sounds much more like a Libertarian viewpoint...don't agree with it, but it's hardly Neocon.