South West Bikers | Motorcycle Forum

Varcon wrote:Not really wasted is it, its just where the discussion has gone - bit of a wasted post though !

Personaly i think helets are a must, and i think that the law is right to enforce them. Just think of how many more deaths and very serious injuries we would have without them. I took a bike around a car par once (literally 20 feet), without a helmet, and i felt so naked an exposed ! Definatly wouldnt ever ride without one !

the law should be extended to include gloves as a compulsory peice of safety equipment, helmets need more stringent testing and regular quality control as the stories you hear from inside the trade are quite eye opening on the qualities and way theyre produced

i personally wouldnt ride my sportsbike with my full face flip front that i use for cbt teaching as its useless in my eyes and would not offer the same protection that my arai will offer me,in fact i dont actually like riding the moped/125s with it on but its easier to use for working in than a full face.

people have a wide choice of helmets available to choose from and what you choose is upto you but i genuinely cant beleive someone would really not want to wear a helmet at all

now, part of me agrees with the "nanny state" issue, about free choice, but then there are circumstances where I think it is right for laws to be enforced if people are not reasonable .... helmets and seat-belts being just two (and seat belts have certainly saved me from far worse injuries in the past .... )

So, I dunno, I sort of think the helmet law makes sense, but also think the more we rely on the nanny state to protect us from ourselves, the sooner various activities will be ruled out ..... rugby, football, cycling, ice-skating ...... as all cause serious injuries each year ......

Oddly enough, you won't be allowed on a building site without boots and hard-hat nowadays ...... and thats not laws but employers insurance forcing the issue ....

One point that occurs to me in this debate is this:

People in general often have the attitude of "it won't happen to me".

So, suppose all the people harking on about the right to decide get their way and the compulsory helmet law is lifted. I'm sure they'll all be very happy.

However, loads of people will be riding round without a helmet because they think it won't happen to them, but of course, that will be their choice.

So, when the inevitable happens and those people have accidents they will be far more likely to suffer serious head injuries through either impacts or sliding, whatever.

Death and serious injury rates will go through the roof.

Then the statistic quoting do gooder brigade will have an absolute party and successfully campaign for bikes to be banned altogether (which they are already doing), and you will lose your right to choose to ride a bike, because the government always listens to the do gooders.

So, the freedom of choice you so desperately seem to want could quite realistically f*ck everything up for all of us.

The fact is this law helps to protect biking by reducing serious injuries, sometimes you just have to look at the bigger picture.

Perhaps one day we'll have to wear leathers with airbags built in, like some of the racers, or maybe have to have wipers on our visors. Perhaps one day I won't be allowed to take the roof off my convertible because a brick/branch/plane/leaf might land on my head.

When that happens people on forums will still be "debating" the safety issues and the loss of freedom to choose.

Wearing a lid is the law and we're stuck with that. Perhaps if it wasn't, this thread would be about whether the government should make it compulsory.

Chaoscustoms wrote:Lets go with Darwinism........ natural selection and survival of the fitest, or maybe the smartest !

Cruel ... but an interesting theory

Bladerunner, couldn't have said it better myself, any helmet, no matter the safety rating, will provide you with more protection than your skull alone, and the more we can do to stop the number of deaths and serious injuries rising the better

chris_1127 wrote:
all for pro choice on helmets and any other safety wear on a bike for that matter, but this discussion has been done to death on here so many times and a lot of people still miss the point so its a bit pointless going round in circles and everyone getting all arsey about it really...

what chris says.

Boy did this one go on.
As someone who has attended and still attends RTC's on a regular basis after 26 years as a paramedic, I can confirm that helmets DO SAVE LIVES and SESRIOUS HEAD INJURIES. The only time that I have found they haven't, is when they have been put on but not fastened. ( Yes it does happen). Despite the fact that there has been some tragic fatallities and serious accidents this year, I personally have attended fewer. The amount seems to be dropping on yearly basis in the ereas I cover. I don't know if this is down to better training, riders being more aware of the results of doing daft things on bikes, or being more aware of the stupid things other road users may do, or to the fact that most bikers do wear decent clothing and helmets.
As for freedom of choice, if you're going to be stupid enough to ride a motorcycle without the correct gear, feel free to do so. It certainly isn't recommended and don't expect too much sympathy from any of the emergency services, doctors, nurses, undertakers or anyone else who innocently becomes involved in your accident.
Unfortunately RTC's will continue to occur. Be prepared for them and make yourselves as protected as you can.
Safe riding to you all.

fjrnobby wrote:Boy did this one go on.
As someone who has attended and still attends RTC's on a regular basis after 26 years as a paramedic, I can confirm that helmets DO SAVE LIVES and SESRIOUS HEAD INJURIES. The only time that I have found they haven't, is when they have been put on but not fastened. ( Yes it does happen). Despite the fact that there has been some tragic fatallities and serious accidents this year, I personally have attended fewer. The amount seems to be dropping on yearly basis in the ereas I cover. I don't know if this is down to better training, riders being more aware of the results of doing daft things on bikes, or being more aware of the stupid things other road users may do, or to the fact that most bikers do wear decent clothing and helmets.
As for freedom of choice, if you're going to be stupid enough to ride a motorcycle without the correct gear, feel free to do so. It certainly isn't recommended and don't expect too much sympathy from any of the emergency services, doctors, nurses, undertakers or anyone else who innocently becomes involved in your accident.
Unfortunately RTC's will continue to occur. Be prepared for them and make yourselves as protected as you can.
Safe riding to you all.

have you not heard chap, we are not allowed to comment on this, as according to the stupid riders 2.

we are no longer allowed to voice opinions on this forum as the admin appear to want to censor it.

They say about it being a nanny state, but they may also try nanny forum.....

what a lot of bollocks.

that said i do however agree with your thoughts on it...

timberwolf wrote:have you not heard chap, we are not allowed to comment on this, as according to the stupid riders 2.

we are no longer allowed to voice opinions on this forum as the admin appear to want to censor it.

They say about it being a nanny state, but they may also try nanny forum.....

what a lot of bollocks.

that said i do however agree with your thoughts on it...

You tell me whats been censored on here apart from nothing, duhhhh

The other thread just stated that no one was actually listening to what someone else put.

Its this simple, all Chaos was trying to do was put across that the helmet should be a CHOICE and not mandatory and that the helmet test was pointless.

Oh and by the way, if anyone ever does crash, doing over 22mph, no one can claim off of the helmet manufacturer as the government is happy with a 22mph test - pathetic.

corr its all kikin off here. ..most popular post i've had haha

speedy(delboy) wrote:

timberwolf wrote:have you not heard chap, we are not allowed to comment on this, as according to the stupid riders 2.

we are no longer allowed to voice opinions on this forum as the admin appear to want to censor it.

They say about it being a nanny state, but they may also try nanny forum.....

what a lot of bollocks.

that said i do however agree with your thoughts on it...

You tell me whats been censored on here apart from nothing, duhhhh

The other thread just stated that no one was actually listening to what someone else put.

Its this simple, all Chaos was trying to do was put across that the helmet should be a CHOICE and not mandatory and that the helmet test was pointless.

Oh and by the way, if anyone ever does crash, doing over 22mph, no one can claim off of the helmet manufacturer as the government is happy with a 22mph test - pathetic.

Uh ohhhhh rehashing old arguments...

let it begin haha.

Funky wrote:
[Uh ohhhhh rehashing old arguments...

let it begin haha.

Or Not Maybe matey please

timberwolf wrote:
have you not heard chap, we are not allowed to comment on this, as according to the stupid riders 2.

we are no longer allowed to voice opinions on this forum as the admin appear to want to censor it.

They say about it being a nanny state, but they may also try nanny forum.....

what a lot of bollocks.

that said i do however agree with your thoughts on it...

Would ya care to enlighten us Mods and Admins what bits have been sensored ?

I see your opinion and comments are there for everyone to read.

It's a shame that Chaioscustoms took comments to heart but thats life.

Time for people to move on and lighten up.

Age

Gsxrage wrote:

timberwolf wrote:
have you not heard chap, we are not allowed to comment on this, as according to the stupid riders 2.

we are no longer allowed to voice opinions on this forum as the admin appear to want to censor it.

They say about it being a nanny state, but they may also try nanny forum.....

what a lot of bollocks.

that said i do however agree with your thoughts on it...

Would ya care to enlighten us Mods and Admins what bits have been sensored ?

I see your opinion and comments are there for everyone to read.

It's a shame that Chaioscustoms took comments to heart but thats life.

Time for people to move on and lighten up.

Age

ok chap..

if peeps are gonna get a bollocking from Mr admin, whos mate gets a huff on. then that is sounding kinda like some one is controling us, with regard to what we say.(hence the comment about censorship)

If the forum is to promote the free speech( no reason not to). Then in fairness i dont think that the admin should

have gotten involved. It was only ever goona spark more moans.

But hay ho, have to agree its time to move on.

timberwolf wrote:ok chap..

if peeps are gonna get a bollocking from Mr admin, whos mate gets a huff on. then that is sounding kinda like some one is controling us, with regard to what we say.(hence the comment about censorship)

If the forum is to promote the free speech( no reason not to). Then in fairness i dont think that the admin should

have gotten involved. It was only ever goona spark more moans.

But hay ho, have to agree its time to move on.

Get a bollocking, this aint school, I was airing MY VIEWS.

I can see why he was upset, as this was your first reply in the thread

Re: STOOPID RIDERS
by timberwolf on Wed Nov 05, 2008 12:15 pm

and another wasted topic.

and his reply

Why is it a wasted topic......... because someone has a different opinion to yours, or because someone is honest enough to voice theirs.

Admin has to get involved when ask to by its memebers, and yes I was asked to. Oh and even if he wasnt a mate I STILL WOULD HAVE DONE THE SAME for anyone who asked