Roethlisberger in motorcycle accident
Moderators: Bill_Abner, ScoopBrady
- dbdynsty25
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 21551
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
- Contact:
F'n hilarious.sfz_T-car wrote:http://cgi.ebay.com/Ben-Roethlisberger- ... dZViewItem
- dbdynsty25
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 21551
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
- Contact:
Haha...apparently Ben didn't even have his motorcycle drivers license. What a dumbass.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2482306
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2482306
I agree 100%.matthewk wrote:Not in Wisconsin. I ride a sportbike (always with a helmet, gloves, and armored jacket), and I think they should be mandatory. That said, when I was 23 I didn't always wear a helmet.davet010 wrote:Is wearing a helmet not mandatory in the US ?
I'd also like to add if people want helmets to be mandatory, then they should also make using cell phones while driving illegal. The bozos who are playing with their phones, PDAs, and even laptops while driving are just as big a drain on society as a biker who crashes.
ESPN have an article about this issue with some interesting statistics:
According to a Jan. 2006 publication from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:
• An unhelmeted motorcyclist is 40 percent more likely to suffer a fatal head injury and 15 percent more likely to suffer a nonfatal injury than a helmeted motorcyclist when involved in a crash.
• Motorcycle helmets reduce the likelihood of a crash fatality by an estimated 37 percent.
• From 1984 through 2004, helmets saved an estimated 16,019 lives of motorcyclists.
• Motorcycle helmet use saved an estimated $1.3 billion in 2002 alone. An additional $853 million would have been saved if all motorcyclists involved in fatal crashes had worn helmets. From 1984-2002, the NHTSA estimates that motorcycle helmet use saved $19.5 billion; another $14.8 billion would have been saved if all motorcyclists had worn helmets during the same period.
- TheMightyPuck
- Starting 5
- Posts: 779
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 3:00 am
- Contact:
- TheMightyPuck
- Starting 5
- Posts: 779
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 3:00 am
- Contact:
I always hate these statistics. Reeks of communism. I know it seems a leap but hear me out. In the free market world prices are set by the market. I'm constantly amazed at what people are willing to pay for but hey it's a free country right. What is the value of riding without a helmet. Maybe it is worth 15 billion dollars if you multiply the intangible "value" of helmetless riding by all the helmetless riders. Now if the costs associated with the activity are borne by people not engaged in the activity, I can see a strong argument for restrictive laws, but the stats never seem to break that stuff down.Feanor wrote:
• Motorcycle helmet use saved an estimated $1.3 billion in 2002 alone. An additional $853 million would have been saved if all motorcyclists involved in fatal crashes had worn helmets. From 1984-2002, the NHTSA estimates that motorcycle helmet use saved $19.5 billion; another $14.8 billion would have been saved if all motorcyclists had worn helmets during the same period.
I know what you mean, but I think it's pretty obvious that the costs of traffic accidents spill over to the general public who pay for Police, Ambulance, road repair, higher insurance premiums, etc.
If motorcyclists had to pay the real cost to society of them not wearing a helmet and pay an extra $1,000 in annual taxes or something, then I'd say go for it. It's probably better if people who are reckless/stupid enough to ride without a helmet kill themselves as quickly as possible, before their reckless nature hurts some innocent third party.
If motorcyclists had to pay the real cost to society of them not wearing a helmet and pay an extra $1,000 in annual taxes or something, then I'd say go for it. It's probably better if people who are reckless/stupid enough to ride without a helmet kill themselves as quickly as possible, before their reckless nature hurts some innocent third party.