|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
136.37.101.134
And, especially, if that authority is vested anonymously, all-powerfully in a government. But here's the difference: if a deadly, proven threat is identified through objective means by professionals who specialize in that very subject--- then that is the time to accept reality and to comply with reasonable demands. Those who are extremely critical of government are easy prey to arguments that absolutely run counter to their own best interests--- and illogically and erroneously portray supporters of government protection as extremists.One example.
Motorcycles: is it reasonable to require riders to protect themselves when helmets have been proven to save many lives? Some would say that the government doesn't have the right to do so. That it's a person's right to risk his life if he wishes to. But that's not so. We don't allow drunk driving, do we? We have eyesight tests, right? 1. Motorcyclists can ride helmet-less on private property to their hearts' content. 2. Motorcyclists make the rest of us pay for severe injuries through insurance coverage. 3. Motorcyclists unnecessarily cause many drivers to be responsible for avoidable deaths.
Riding on a public thoroughfare involves responsibilities not only to oneself--- but to OTHERS.
Kind of like... wearing masks.
(Based on a comparison of fatal crashes involving motorcycles with two riders, at least one of whom was killed, the National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has estimated helmets to be about 37 percent effective in preventing fatalities.)
Edits: 10/20/20Follow Ups:
Perhaps, a more apt analogy than the helmet - mask analogy is the condom/aids - mask/Covid-19 analogy.
You might want to read the linked article "Barrier Methods for the Prevention of Infectious Diseases: Decades of Condom Research can Inform the Promotion of Face Mask Use" (link below)
A few excerpts from the article (as always, please read the article for complete context):
"From the start of the AIDS crisis, it would be years - possibly even a decade - before meaningful behavior change could be measured. Rock Hudson died in 1985, but for most of the rest of the decade, people still had sex without condoms.
If the threat of AIDS (and all the cognitive biases that predispose one to believing they don't - or do - have it) was not enough to get people to simply wear a condom, why do you expect better results from telling people to wear masks and socially distance? Though it's been 40 years, our individual ability to change our behavior and see clearly hasn't necessarily improved - or has it?
My personal observation is that many times more people are wearing masks in the first six months of Covid-19 than were using condoms by the fifth year of the AIDS crisis. This is a major improvement over our reaction in the 1980s and, frankly, something we can be proud of, rather than embarrassed about.
Perfection is - as always - the enemy of good."
...
"Let's be clear; face masks are no panacea for ending the COVID-19 pandemic. But in the same way that condoms played a significant role in HIV prevention-especially in the days before the availability of pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV and effective treatments that can effectively interrupt sexual transmission of the virus-consistent and correct face mask use can contribute to interrupting the spread of SARS-CoV-2. But this is unlikely to happen without a national commitment to the development and support of comprehensive, scientifically based prevention strategies that address all relevant avenues for interrupting the spread of SARS-CoV-2."
Very compelling reply, but Covid is an airborne disease, and HIV/AIDS is not.
No one can catch HIV sitting in a hot, stuffy church, or on a subway.
I haven't had enough coffee yet this morning to really think it through, but it seems to me that mask mandates are sensible.
No argument from me.
As a matter of fact, I was for a more thorough or complete shutting down of travel to and from China before the CDC or the Trump Administration and pointed out a flaw in their incomplete quarantine plan at that time.
In 2 separate posts in Inmate Central on January 28, 2020 I made the following comments:
"And they're not prohibiting travel in general from China to the United States.
Also, in regards to travel to China, the CDC travel warning (level three) is only to "Avoid Nonessential Travel" to China.
I guess their attitude is that it's better to be sorry than safe."
and
"Those evacuated "will be quarantined for at least three days and monitored by the CDC, per the official. Those who show signs of the illness and need to be tested could be held for as many as 14 days."
As I understand it, this quarantine only applies only to the US Government chartered evacuation flights from Wuhan and not the general air travel of people from China to the US.
Hmmm."
Better to be safe than sorry.
Perhaps, a more apt analogy than the helmet - mask analogy is the condom/aids - mask/Covid-19 analogy.
You might want to read the linked article "Barrier Methods for the Prevention of Infectious Diseases: Decades of Condom Research can Inform the Promotion of Face Mask Use" (link below)
A few excerpts from the article (as always, please read the article for complete context):
"From the start of the AIDS crisis, it would be years - possibly even a decade - before meaningful behavior change could be measured. Rock Hudson died in 1985, but for most of the rest of the decade, people still had sex without condoms.
If the threat of AIDS (and all the cognitive biases that predispose one to believing they don't - or do - have it) was not enough to get people to simply wear a condom, why do you expect better results from telling people to wear masks and socially distance? Though it's been 40 years, our individual ability to change our behavior and see clearly hasn't necessarily improved - or has it?
My personal observation is that many times more people are wearing masks in the first six months of Covid-19 than were using condoms by the fifth year of the AIDS crisis. This is a major improvement over our reaction in the 1980s and, frankly, something we can be proud of, rather than embarrassed about.
Perfection is - as always - the enemy of good."
...
"Let's be clear; face masks are no panacea for ending the COVID-19 pandemic. But in the same way that condoms played a significant role in HIV prevention-especially in the days before the availability of pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV and effective treatments that can effectively interrupt sexual transmission of the virus-consistent and correct face mask use can contribute to interrupting the spread of SARS-CoV-2. But this is unlikely to happen without a national commitment to the development and support of comprehensive, scientifically based prevention strategies that address all relevant avenues for interrupting the spread of SARS-CoV-2."
Stupid riders die from a few things
I rode for many years here and in Cali. My young brother was a stunt rider before having a shop for bikes. He would laugh in your face with bunches of possible covid spittle.
Nothing is more important when riding a cycle than putting on ALL! the right gear - full face helmet, beefy leather gloves and boots and jacket, and maybe even some Judas Priest style leather pants to save your ass when you slide on asphalt pavement because some idiot behind you has followed to closely and smacked you sending you spinning and possibly into the oncoming lane.
You should speak from much better personal experience or not at all. I've seen all kinds of 'accidents waiting to happen' here in NJ from riders who wear FLIP FLOPS - stupid effing idiots who will soon learn how incredibly wrong they were while they hobble around on broken ankles for the rest of their life - if they survive.
"Leo 2.0!!"
Velocette Thruxton 500cc single-lunger. Always wore a helmet. Boots. Jacket/heavy jeans. I know of where I speak.
I see motorcycle accidents and deaths in the paper seemingly a few times a week. Most of the time, it's caused by a car pulling out in front of them or turning left in front of them.
While I still update my motorcycle license, I wouldn't ride on the street. There are too many bad drivers on the road.
-Rod
...I'm in the same boat, as you. I rode for years, but when my wife got pregnant with our first daughter, I gave up the bikes--for all the obvious reasons. 20 years later--when the younger (of the two) was off to college, I bought a new one. The "landscape" on the roads had changed so dramatically, that I never felt "safe" again. Kept it a few years, but the "fun" was gone, so I sold it. Still keep the endorsement on my license, but doubt I'll ever own one again.
"The phone don't ring, and the sun refused to shine. Never thought I'd have to pay so dearly, for what was already mine, for such a long, long time."--Warren Zevon~"Accidentally Like A Martyr"--1978
left-turn in front of me into his driveway. I avoided him by going more left than he and riding across several lawns. After that, during a Minnesota spring w/lots of sand swept into the median, I was attempting to make a sharp turn on the Commando when I hit the gravel. Down I went, luckily the bars and the foot pegs saved most of me from getting hammered. I still remember the sparks flying into my face shield--- and I sold 'er a couple of weeks later. Moved to Cadillacs and never looked back at bikes.
This spring I was considering a used shaker (a 17 year old Sporty with a 1200) but I came to my senses & held off & later on I bought a new CD player.
. . . are bogeys !
They've got it all figured out:No mask? Freedom!
No seat-belt? Freedom!
No restrictions on cell phones while driving? Freedom!
When I lived in the bay area Rod, I used to love riding over to half moon bay and down the coast. Sometimes up to the GG bridge, and the Japanese tea garden. Back then Cali drivers were pretty good except in the rain.
"Leo 2.0!!"
Insurance- and health insurance companies as well as the state should be well within their rights to refuse to pay any costs accrued because somebody drove drunk, while not wearing a seatbelt or rode a motorcycle without wearing a helmet.
I do wear masks, and wear my seatbelt. I've ridden motorcycles for years with no helmet--because the restriction of vision and hearing made it difficult to see/hear the moron on their cell-phone, or doing their make-up as they run me over. How about sensors for "two hands on the wheel at all times", and a mandatory "cell-phone jammer" as standard equipment--instead of a built-in wifi hot-spot connection in every vehicle?
Get off your "high-horse"...
MOST motorcyclists are better-trained and far more observant than the idiots behind the wheel of a car--your life depends on it.
"The phone don't ring, and the sun refused to shine. Never thought I'd have to pay so dearly, for what was already mine, for such a long, long time."--Warren Zevon~"Accidentally Like A Martyr"--1978
"I do wear masks, and wear my seatbelt." ...and drive intoxicated at a hundred miles per hour.
"It was zero threat, right from the start, it was zero threat" Alfred E. Neuman
Dave, it doesn't matter who's to blame: without a helmet, your brain is in play. Of course, if one doesn't value it much...
Only those that survive riding a few years into maturity.
Gsquared
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: