G
Guest
·who thinks there will be a law towards having motorcycle gear?
mc gear a law?
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
G
Guest
·not including helmet, im talking like you gotta have at least a jacket or osmething close to that. like how now you gotta have a seatbelt.
Joined
·
20,974 Posts
It's easy and cheap to tell whether someone is wearing a seatbelt or a helmet. I'd be cost and time prohibitive to try and determine what is an acceptable jacket or pants. Plus, this is America. We defend our right to be stupid vigorously. It won't happen.
Joined
·
764 Posts
I believe strongly that people who lack intelligence should have every right in the world to clense our gene pool of them.
Put simply, we should have the right to risk our own safety. Perhapse not having a helmet is risking the lives of others on the road but I cant see how at the moment. Given that, I am actually against making helmets mandatory, but I'll choose to wear one myself every single time (also because it's the law here in Cali).
Put simply, we should have the right to risk our own safety. Perhapse not having a helmet is risking the lives of others on the road but I cant see how at the moment. Given that, I am actually against making helmets mandatory, but I'll choose to wear one myself every single time (also because it's the law here in Cali).
Joined
·
132 Posts
the florida thread????
what thread is that
-wafflehouse
what thread is that
-wafflehouse
Joined
·
14,233 Posts
Even over here in Switzerland, where just about everything is regulated by some governmental authority, there are helmet laws - but that's it.
The instructor at my safety training this summer summed it up: All that you MUST wear is a helmet, and something to prevent yourself being a public nuisance (like a sock over your best friend). Other than that, gear is recommended (and good sense), but not required by law. I would be against them trying to tell me what I can and can't wear when I'm on a bike. First, they should spend their time enforcing the laws that are already in place (no passing on the right, no telephone in the hand while moving, etc.)
The instructor at my safety training this summer summed it up: All that you MUST wear is a helmet, and something to prevent yourself being a public nuisance (like a sock over your best friend). Other than that, gear is recommended (and good sense), but not required by law. I would be against them trying to tell me what I can and can't wear when I'm on a bike. First, they should spend their time enforcing the laws that are already in place (no passing on the right, no telephone in the hand while moving, etc.)
Joined
·
11,456 Posts
Should you wear gear? Well, duh!!
Should the gov't MAKE you wear gear? No.
I, for one, am all about personal freedom. I need less gov't, not more. If the neighbor wants to sit in his house and smoke weed, while watching porn and playing with a tommy gun, what do I care? It's his house.
Not only will they pass a new law to harrass the general public, they'll use up valuable funds passing the law . . . generate more funds enforcing the law . . . then, they'll claim they need to raise taxes for the enforcement of the very law that is sapping the general population of its money.
Take $peeding.
They put law$ through the legi$lature, that take$ money.
They pa$$ the law and $tart handing out ticket$, that make$ money.
They come at you every fi$cal year wanting more cop$, which take$ even more money.
How about having the cops NOT harrass the average Joe for going an indiscernable amount over the speed limit, and have them spend more time pursuing REAL crimes?
Back in the day (before $peed trap$ became big money), you could still get a wreckless driving infraction due to your excessive speed. If a cop saw you screwing around, he's stop you and haul your butt before the judge. He could plainly see that you're screwing around. He didn't have to take a laboratory instrument that costs hundreds of dollars and measure your speed down to the nearest 1 1/2 feet per second to do it.
The radar gun is only there so they can split hairs about something that doesn't amount to squat.
People who aren't smart enough to put gear on don't have much to protect, IMHO.
Should the gov't MAKE you wear gear? No.
I, for one, am all about personal freedom. I need less gov't, not more. If the neighbor wants to sit in his house and smoke weed, while watching porn and playing with a tommy gun, what do I care? It's his house.
Not only will they pass a new law to harrass the general public, they'll use up valuable funds passing the law . . . generate more funds enforcing the law . . . then, they'll claim they need to raise taxes for the enforcement of the very law that is sapping the general population of its money.
Take $peeding.
They put law$ through the legi$lature, that take$ money.
They pa$$ the law and $tart handing out ticket$, that make$ money.
They come at you every fi$cal year wanting more cop$, which take$ even more money.
How about having the cops NOT harrass the average Joe for going an indiscernable amount over the speed limit, and have them spend more time pursuing REAL crimes?
Back in the day (before $peed trap$ became big money), you could still get a wreckless driving infraction due to your excessive speed. If a cop saw you screwing around, he's stop you and haul your butt before the judge. He could plainly see that you're screwing around. He didn't have to take a laboratory instrument that costs hundreds of dollars and measure your speed down to the nearest 1 1/2 feet per second to do it.
The radar gun is only there so they can split hairs about something that doesn't amount to squat.
People who aren't smart enough to put gear on don't have much to protect, IMHO.
I cosign that and add something small. I get a kick at the hypocrisy that is the helmet and seatbelt laws. In IL, it is the law to wear your seatbelt. It is a primary offense to be pulled over, yet there is no helmet law. I think you need consistency in your argument, which tends to lack in some states. By the way I think it is my right not to wear my seatbelt and my helmet, but I CHOOSE to do both.themeatmanlandry said:
Joined
·
2,699 Posts
You cosign that? Sorry...that just tickled my funny bone... :lol:DaMaNP750 said:
I think maybe you meant concur with that or agree with that?
Joined
·
11,456 Posts
It's a loan . . . read the fine print. :lol:
I agree DaMaNP750. If a guy/girl wants to wear road rash on their face, it's their business.
Here's one that has always made me realize how stupid gov't is:
You have to wear a seatbelt in your car (primary offense in TN also), but they put your freakin' kids on a school bus that was undoubtedly designed by the Dentist's Guild: Not only are there no seatbelts . . . they've installed a 3" metal bar in the back of the seat in front of your kid . . . right at mouth level. They try to hide it under 1/16" of fabric, like you can't see it. Yeah, that's smart.
Where, you may ask, is the only seatbelt on the whole friggin' bus? That's right . . . the driver gets it. :? The one Darwin would garrote first gets the safety device. Good thinkin', there Einsteins.
I deserve a ticket for not wearing my seatbelt?!? I say, my state representative deserves a ticket for being less than a dumbass.
I agree DaMaNP750. If a guy/girl wants to wear road rash on their face, it's their business.
Here's one that has always made me realize how stupid gov't is:
You have to wear a seatbelt in your car (primary offense in TN also), but they put your freakin' kids on a school bus that was undoubtedly designed by the Dentist's Guild: Not only are there no seatbelts . . . they've installed a 3" metal bar in the back of the seat in front of your kid . . . right at mouth level. They try to hide it under 1/16" of fabric, like you can't see it. Yeah, that's smart.
Where, you may ask, is the only seatbelt on the whole friggin' bus? That's right . . . the driver gets it. :? The one Darwin would garrote first gets the safety device. Good thinkin', there Einsteins.
I deserve a ticket for not wearing my seatbelt?!? I say, my state representative deserves a ticket for being less than a dumbass.
http://www.suzuki-bikes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4048wafflehouse said:
G
Guest
·hmmmm..... alot of harsh opinions. first off, about that gene pool cleansing thing...it reminds me of a second year cadet getting mad at a first year cadet for not doing facing ovements right. instead of teaching that cadet, he yelled at him. why dont you guys try to look on brighter sides of things? like inform people of the use of riding gear instead of calling him darwinism and squid. if you see him pass you on the highway, you probably cant get his attention, but if you see him in residental areas, get him at a stoplight or follow him to his house. if you see a STUNTER, not SQUID stunting on the highway or anywhere not enclosed, tell him. its very similar to you being snooty and turning your cheek on your best friend who blew all of his money in stocks and gambling instead of trying to help him out. you should read a book called make lemonade.
and as for the school bus thing, i agree. some buses have seatbelts in the first 3 rows. but they should redo the seats and add seatbuckles.
as for the gear thing, i been thinking, and instead of making you go out and buy gear, just have like a really sheap, but better than nothing jacket that cost about 50 bucks that comes with the bike.
and as for the school bus thing, i agree. some buses have seatbelts in the first 3 rows. but they should redo the seats and add seatbuckles.
as for the gear thing, i been thinking, and instead of making you go out and buy gear, just have like a really sheap, but better than nothing jacket that cost about 50 bucks that comes with the bike.
How much more relaxed can they be in Florida. Your only required to have eye protection and that's it. Helmet, gloves, shirt, shoes, pants, jacket and anything else are not required to ride a bike. I could put on a speedo and sunglasses and rider circles around OPD headquarters and I'm quite legal over the age of 18.Madura said:
And as I've stated before the reason those states that don't have helmet laws are because the majority of riders in that state had the requirement abolished. I remember when that happened in Florida back in the day. People (non riders) were all in an uproar thinking the number of motorcycle organ doners was going to be in triple digits monthly causing massive problems for the insurance rates in Florida. UNOS would have been pleased but no one else.
However that didn't happen but you can read all the fine print here.
==> Florida Helmet Law 101
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
