Michigan Helmet Laws - A Detailed Look Into a Newly Helmetless State

+1

:d

the state constitutionality of helmets laws passed by legislatures and signed by governors has been challenged in 25 states ?

Fact�The highest courts in more than 25 states have held motorcycle helmet laws to be constitutional. The Massachusetts motorcycle helmet law was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court.


Straight from the NHTSA.

Apology accepted.

and you believe that cause you read it on the internet, must be true eh

sources of specific 25 cases you refer too please

+1 29 States allow choice. Just how many states are there?

Perhaps it is only in BobbySandy's "state of mind"

You really should put your energies behind rider education Mr Sands. It would do more good. But don't mandate it or I will fight against you on that too.

No, I think he actually read it on a website
a .gov website at that, so it must be true eh

http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/motorcycle/safebike/myths.html

The peoples republic of the Not-so United states.

His leader thinks there are 57 states. One for every flavor of Heinz.

So, if it's so great over there, why would you want to return to the USA, a nation and its people that you have been denigrating for most of this thread?

Hey ttpete, that isn't even really an argument, is it now!?!?

I see Atomicalex rationally discussing differences between two countries, not denigrating either at all.

Atomicalex responded to your comment by cogently pointing out that the TÜV is essentially analogous to the DOT.

If you believen that the regulation of manufacturing of automobiles for safety's sake is evidence

of "nanny-state" SOCIALISM, then it follows that you live in a SOCIALIST "nanny-state".




(Before everyone flames me, let me point out that I DO NOT believe either

the US or Deutschland to be SOCIALIST "nanny-states".)
.
.
.

Actually, Germany belongs to this group:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_of_European_Socialists#Member_parties

The USA is a Constitutional Republic. The Socialist and Communist parties here have never had any real support.

Get off your dead arse and start looking. Otherwise, shhhh.

Telling.

No, the Federal Republic of Germany actually does not belong to that group, ttpete.

From your link:

"The PES comprises national-level political parties primarily from member states of the

European Union (EU), and other nations of the European continent"

Furthermore, the chart that your link contained specified that the Socail Democratic Party (SPD),

a German political party that does belong to the PES, has only 146 Members of the Bundestag,

out of a possible 620, or 23.5%.

The Christian Democratic Union (CDU/CSU), the right of centre party, has 31.2%, and 100% of them would

take extreme umbrage at being called SOCIALISTS.

The Free Democratic Party (FDP) holds 93 seats, or 15% of the MdB.

The FDP and the CDU/CSU have formed a coalition to rule as a centre-right government.

Simple.




As to the US being a federal constitutional republic, you are correct, but, as Germany is a

federal parliamentary republic, (w/ a constitution) I wonder what your point is in mentioning that.

Hers a link for ya:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundestag#Distribution_of_seats_in_the_Bundestag

It shows that German political parties such as the Marxist Leninist Party, or the German Communist Party,

or The Republicans, or even the Pirate Party all get so few votes it registers as <0% of the vote.

The SDP is SOCIALIST in name only, kinda like the NAZIS.




More to the point, the DOT is analogous to the TÜV, and Atomicalex's posts read like a patriot's.




.
.
.

Go on and explain to us why the ten seconds to put on a helmet are overly burdensome to the pedestrian. Why should I pay even a cent of the medical costs of such stupid, extremely selfish people, who are walking around between heavy, fast moving vehicles, operated by bad drivers, without any safety gear?

Lucky you if you experienced it that way. Or just very idealistic and limited.
I know very well what it is like to express the "wrong" opinion or to wear the "wrong" clothes. It goes as far as your teachers(!) stealing parts of your clothing.

I don't know much about a "Marlboro mindset" but I can see the differences when topics like this one are discussed by Americans or the ones who are against helmet laws are flamed down by a crowd of Germans.
Telling up front what you think, you will likely have a hard time in Germany, if it's the "wrong" thought. Purple hair might be ok, being a waitress with a tongue piercing on the other hand may lead to an elderly lady agitating against you behind your back.

This post is worthless without pictures.

What I want is for a lot more of people minding their own business and not thinking they have the right to tell everyone else what to do. That's a problem that is a LOT bigger than helmet laws, but helmet laws are a symptom of that problem. I work to fight against that problem in a wide variety of ways, whenever I encounter it.

Maybe it's true that "a helmet law is the least intrusive option in the sea of potential limitations on the riding of motorcycles", but why accept ANY of those limitations? When you accept a limitation, you accept the whole idea that it's OK for others to put limitations on you and your choices, and you have then ceded the entire principle. You are no longer standing for individual rights and liberty; you have allowed the those who wish to restrict your rights to define the playing field and the rules, and you will lose your rights as a result.

We each will have some things we care about, and others we don't, but we ALL need to support each other in ALL the fights for ALL of our rights; otherwise we all lose them one by one. I don't ride dirt, but I contribute and write letters and support the rights of dirtbikers, because it's the right thing to do, and because I want their support in return for the rights of sportbikers if/when those come under attack. This same principle applies to the rights of gays and Christians and atheists and gun owners and Muslims and immigrants and women and everyone else.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>

Otherwise, you wind up like BobbySands up there, with no concept of freedom, and thinking that everything you do is subject to some government "cost/benefit analysis" to decide for you whether or not you are qualified to make that decision for yourself. No thanks.

PhilB

YUP! Nailed it.

Pictures.