Why is it a matter of law that bicyclists must wear helmets? Why must the helmets, in turn, look so stupid? If I want to bike down to the village for a shaved ice, why am I legally obliged to put a space-age poly-plastic-foam-alloy jackass-hat on my head that makes me look like I think I'm supposed to be Monsieur Tour D. France?
Absent some sinister collusion between lawmakers and stupid-looking helmetmakers,* I don't know why this should be a matter of law. Why should a recreational bicyclist be forced to wear a helmet? If a cyclist is a racer, then yeah, they may be getting up to some pretty dangerous speeds. Fine. Those guys and gals are going to be wearing helmets anyway, to take advantage of those little jetway funnel-cuts that shape your head-zone to perform more aerodynamically.
But somebody just biking a regular bike across town, through traffic, around the fountain - your skull is no more in need of a helmet than the skulls of the pedestrians you skirt! Seriously. What is it, "you could be hit by a car?" So what! So can the pedestrian! Far more pedestrians than cyclists are struck by cars. Shall we make helmets mandatory for anyone who wants to go outside?
On the sole basis of these bicycle helmet laws, I am officially coming out against motorcycle helmet laws. Now, I want to make this perfectly clear: I would have been willing to support mandatory motorcycle helmet laws, if it hadn't been for these bicycle helmet laws. When the motorcycle helmet laws first came out, I said: "I suspend judgment - we'll see how far they go with this." And just like I should have known: they got their motorcycle helmet laws in place, and then they kept on coming. Well, I wish they hadn't - because now we're we're going to have to roll back the progress clock on all forms of helmet law. As long as these Mother Government, micro-meddling, other-peoples'-decisionmakers keep pushing their agenda to impinge on our lives in ever more restrictive ways, I have pledged to do my level best to slant the slippery slope back 'til it tilts in the other direction.
Go ahead. Dig up as many brain-damaged people as you want. Trot them out and tell their sob stories. "Poor Claire, poor Johnny...if only they'd worn a helmet!" Yeah, if only I gave a fuck. It's my head, my life, any risks that I take are on me. My skull is harder than most. Furthermore, forcing expensive and ridiculous-looking protective measures upon every one of us, in an attempt to reduce injury to the few who do get plowed into by cars...hey, I don't know how to put it any better than Ben Franklin: "Security minus Liberty equals NEITHER!" Just because something might be a good, sensible protective measure doesn't mean the law has a right to force it on you. A word to the wise is sufficient. Those who want helmets can have them. Far more important than any helmet is that we be allowed to live our lives without being subjected to an ever-increasing yoke of frivolous restriction. If you want to talk about the burden of medical treatment costs on all of society, go kill off the fucking aged first and then we'll talk. Shit. Fucking asshole.
Actually, that remark probably doesn't deter the people who make that argument, insofar as they are most likely already pro-euthanasia anyway.
But I hate that argument. This is the true cost of socialized medicine: that stupid fucking argument. It goes like this: "I have a right to tell you what you have to do for your own health, because my taxes will pay for your medical treatment later." Oh yeah? Well I have a right to tell you to shut your damn mouth, or else my taxes will be paying for your medical treatment immediately!! Everyone should have to be led collared and leashed through their penned-in, meaningless, freedomless lives...so that we can save a buck later on health care. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Go pound sand.
Mind you: mandatory pedestrian helmets would undoubtedly save lives. They would! Indisputably! That's not really the point, though. What kind of a life is that, where you're forced by an intrusive government to purchase and wear a stupid-looking helmet as the badge of your willing obedience.
*which is to imply that both the helmetmakers and their helmets are stupid-looking.
Absent some sinister collusion between lawmakers and stupid-looking helmetmakers,* I don't know why this should be a matter of law. Why should a recreational bicyclist be forced to wear a helmet? If a cyclist is a racer, then yeah, they may be getting up to some pretty dangerous speeds. Fine. Those guys and gals are going to be wearing helmets anyway, to take advantage of those little jetway funnel-cuts that shape your head-zone to perform more aerodynamically.
But somebody just biking a regular bike across town, through traffic, around the fountain - your skull is no more in need of a helmet than the skulls of the pedestrians you skirt! Seriously. What is it, "you could be hit by a car?" So what! So can the pedestrian! Far more pedestrians than cyclists are struck by cars. Shall we make helmets mandatory for anyone who wants to go outside?
On the sole basis of these bicycle helmet laws, I am officially coming out against motorcycle helmet laws. Now, I want to make this perfectly clear: I would have been willing to support mandatory motorcycle helmet laws, if it hadn't been for these bicycle helmet laws. When the motorcycle helmet laws first came out, I said: "I suspend judgment - we'll see how far they go with this." And just like I should have known: they got their motorcycle helmet laws in place, and then they kept on coming. Well, I wish they hadn't - because now we're we're going to have to roll back the progress clock on all forms of helmet law. As long as these Mother Government, micro-meddling, other-peoples'-decisionmakers keep pushing their agenda to impinge on our lives in ever more restrictive ways, I have pledged to do my level best to slant the slippery slope back 'til it tilts in the other direction.
Go ahead. Dig up as many brain-damaged people as you want. Trot them out and tell their sob stories. "Poor Claire, poor Johnny...if only they'd worn a helmet!" Yeah, if only I gave a fuck. It's my head, my life, any risks that I take are on me. My skull is harder than most. Furthermore, forcing expensive and ridiculous-looking protective measures upon every one of us, in an attempt to reduce injury to the few who do get plowed into by cars...hey, I don't know how to put it any better than Ben Franklin: "Security minus Liberty equals NEITHER!" Just because something might be a good, sensible protective measure doesn't mean the law has a right to force it on you. A word to the wise is sufficient. Those who want helmets can have them. Far more important than any helmet is that we be allowed to live our lives without being subjected to an ever-increasing yoke of frivolous restriction. If you want to talk about the burden of medical treatment costs on all of society, go kill off the fucking aged first and then we'll talk. Shit. Fucking asshole.
Actually, that remark probably doesn't deter the people who make that argument, insofar as they are most likely already pro-euthanasia anyway.
But I hate that argument. This is the true cost of socialized medicine: that stupid fucking argument. It goes like this: "I have a right to tell you what you have to do for your own health, because my taxes will pay for your medical treatment later." Oh yeah? Well I have a right to tell you to shut your damn mouth, or else my taxes will be paying for your medical treatment immediately!! Everyone should have to be led collared and leashed through their penned-in, meaningless, freedomless lives...so that we can save a buck later on health care. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Go pound sand.
Mind you: mandatory pedestrian helmets would undoubtedly save lives. They would! Indisputably! That's not really the point, though. What kind of a life is that, where you're forced by an intrusive government to purchase and wear a stupid-looking helmet as the badge of your willing obedience.
*which is to imply that both the helmetmakers and their helmets are stupid-looking.
Comments