Squids and so on
- Thread starter CBRHoonigan
- Start date
Trinith
Wannabie Member
I've crashed in a helmet that had fallen off the seat of my bike a few times and it held up fine. I am pretty sure one of the tests requires them to be able to be used after a short fall. Personally I figure if the paint has chunks knocked off (not tiny chips or scratches) or is spider-webbed then the foam underneath is damaged. Reddit is full of varying opinions, I've seen a number of people on there claim that full face helmets make riding more dangerous because of the visibility/hearing limitations.
If I come off the bike and my head hits anything hard enough for me to notice it I'll probably replace the helmet, but that has a lot to do with gear coverage from my insurance company. If it falls off the bike, or a table or something, then I probably won't worry about it too much.
If I come off the bike and my head hits anything hard enough for me to notice it I'll probably replace the helmet, but that has a lot to do with gear coverage from my insurance company. If it falls off the bike, or a table or something, then I probably won't worry about it too much.
Quackbit
Wannabie Member
It's already replaced. I had to use the old one the day after but then I was able to get somewhere and buy a stopgap helmet until I can find a better one. The Drift is a different matter; that is well and truly shafted. At least I have a small backlog of video for my channel.
CBRHoonigan
#1 Hoonigan
Yeah if you can see visible damage id say replace, but not many people have money to repalce helmets they dropped off bike seats ect
ShadowBoxer
Wannabie Member
Regarding Helmets:
I thought that both the US and Euro standards included drop tests. Some, multiple times to simulate a crash where your head might bounce against the ground a few times and/or several hard objects.
Would not a simple seat drop be well within those distances and forces? I'd say a helmet should be able to take a small shock like that if it's up to the official safety standards.
Regarding ATGATT:
I feel it's personal choice. They are adults making decisions for their lives. Just like we, as motorcycle riders, are supposed to be adults making our own decisions regarding our lives. Some would say motorcycling in general is "squid" behavior regardless of what we wear.
I'd not take someone else' personal choice personally.
Give them the same rights we want for ourselves. That means they aren't obligated to do what we think is best, nor are we obligated to agree with their choice.
However defending their freedom of choice is defending our freedom of choice.
People who get mad about that sort of thing probably have some sort of fear/insecurity about motorcycle riding and their perception of public opinion of motorcycle riding.
They buy into and co-sign on labeling and probably see the world in big chucks or groups of people in boxes including themselves. Once you are labeled, for example a biker, that's it. And they care a great deal what others think. They then take it personally because they feel it somehow gives a negative public perception of motorcycle riders which reflects on them personally since they're in that box so they get emotional about it.
Or something like that.
At least that's the dynamic I've experienced and the pattern I see.
What do you think?
I thought that both the US and Euro standards included drop tests. Some, multiple times to simulate a crash where your head might bounce against the ground a few times and/or several hard objects.
Would not a simple seat drop be well within those distances and forces? I'd say a helmet should be able to take a small shock like that if it's up to the official safety standards.
Regarding ATGATT:
I feel it's personal choice. They are adults making decisions for their lives. Just like we, as motorcycle riders, are supposed to be adults making our own decisions regarding our lives. Some would say motorcycling in general is "squid" behavior regardless of what we wear.
I'd not take someone else' personal choice personally.
Give them the same rights we want for ourselves. That means they aren't obligated to do what we think is best, nor are we obligated to agree with their choice.
However defending their freedom of choice is defending our freedom of choice.
People who get mad about that sort of thing probably have some sort of fear/insecurity about motorcycle riding and their perception of public opinion of motorcycle riding.
They buy into and co-sign on labeling and probably see the world in big chucks or groups of people in boxes including themselves. Once you are labeled, for example a biker, that's it. And they care a great deal what others think. They then take it personally because they feel it somehow gives a negative public perception of motorcycle riders which reflects on them personally since they're in that box so they get emotional about it.
Or something like that.
At least that's the dynamic I've experienced and the pattern I see.
What do you think?
CBRHoonigan
#1 Hoonigan
^I agree man, and the us and euro is different i belive, they only have to pass a certain criteria to be legal to sell crazy really you think they would wana match everything instead of just enough
RoninK6
Rogue Samurai
I promised my wife that I'd ride safe, so I bought all of the gear that would help in the case of a potential disaster. Here in Nebraska, helmets are required... check that one off. Gloves are smart and so are jackets. When I see some riders ride bare to their sneakers, though (no socks, ankles exposed complete with a t-shirt, etc.)... it's just a major injury to happen, unfortunately.....
CBRHoonigan
#1 Hoonigan
Helmets should be legal requirment atleast, but in england on a quad or trike you do not have to wear a helmet its madness
RoninK6
Rogue Samurai
It's complete madness with some of the states here that don't require a helmet with anything at all! Instant bashed-in pumpkin, anyone >_> ?.....
:/
CBRHoonigan
#1 Hoonigan
I think the helmets with no chin bar of any structual integrity should be ilegal, but then saying that where would the laws end ect, but i dont see open face helmets or those shark raw helmets as safe.
ShadowBoxer
Wannabie Member
I agree not wearing a helmet is insane.
I don't even like having the visor up most of the time. It's just too windy, drying out my eyes, dirt, etc.
HOWEVER
As I said earlier every adult should be allowed to make their own decision. Even if it's a bad one. These people had too much decided and done for them as children and never learned to make smart choices. Now they run around like idiots expecting everyone else to watch out for them as they experienced as children. Essentially giving them the correct answers to life's lessons does not mean they learned it, or anything at all. I would say quite the opposite.
That's my theory at least.
Also I don't feel the issue is really helmets or gear. It's personal choice. A group (of citizens for example) that can make smarter individual choices for the right reasons is much stronger than a group that simply follows the law.
If we make helmets (for example) mandatory then the next thing is gear, then the next thing is motorcycles are just too dangerous... etc.
Much better to simply have smarter citizens making informed and intelligent decisions.
What do you think?
I don't even like having the visor up most of the time. It's just too windy, drying out my eyes, dirt, etc.
HOWEVER
As I said earlier every adult should be allowed to make their own decision. Even if it's a bad one. These people had too much decided and done for them as children and never learned to make smart choices. Now they run around like idiots expecting everyone else to watch out for them as they experienced as children. Essentially giving them the correct answers to life's lessons does not mean they learned it, or anything at all. I would say quite the opposite.
That's my theory at least.
Also I don't feel the issue is really helmets or gear. It's personal choice. A group (of citizens for example) that can make smarter individual choices for the right reasons is much stronger than a group that simply follows the law.
If we make helmets (for example) mandatory then the next thing is gear, then the next thing is motorcycles are just too dangerous... etc.
Much better to simply have smarter citizens making informed and intelligent decisions.
What do you think?
RoninK6
Rogue Samurai
^
Well, if they want to die in the process, then the more power to them. The only catch is that not all citizens make well-informed and intelligent decisions, especially after the first spill. I read a statistic that three-forths of all automobile deaths would be prevented if people just buckled up. I guess for those who make their decision not to, I'm paying their bill by one way or another, be it higher insurance premiums, etc.....
Well, if they want to die in the process, then the more power to them. The only catch is that not all citizens make well-informed and intelligent decisions, especially after the first spill. I read a statistic that three-forths of all automobile deaths would be prevented if people just buckled up. I guess for those who make their decision not to, I'm paying their bill by one way or another, be it higher insurance premiums, etc.....
ShadowBoxer
Wannabie Member
Yes. And no one said learning the hard way was easy.
It's just a choice.
But remember;
Less of them means less traffic and more parking for us.
It's just a choice.
But remember;
Less of them means less traffic and more parking for us.
RoninK6
Rogue Samurai
~
Marbro_za
Dan's princess
Agree'd on their own decision etc, BUT!
all those stories you get told about how someones cousin's uncles barber lost his leg while riding a motorcycle, Alot of those could have been prevented if the rider just had the right gear
Sooooo they kinda putting a downer on me, because they want to look cool with a tshirt flapping in the wind. Thats not cool
all those stories you get told about how someones cousin's uncles barber lost his leg while riding a motorcycle, Alot of those could have been prevented if the rider just had the right gear
Sooooo they kinda putting a downer on me, because they want to look cool with a tshirt flapping in the wind. Thats not cool
Trinith
Wannabie Member
Not when it costs me as much money as the unpaid medical bills do. When the general public has to pick up the tab because they're too stupid to wear a helmet and cannot afford the medical bills they leave behind, they become too stupid to be allowed to make certain choices for themselves. I don't like government, I generally don't like new laws, but since my tax money goes to paying back hospitals for defaulted bills, I say they should be forced to wear a helmet. Hell, it wouldn't really bother me much if the helmet law simply said "Wear a helmet. If you don't we'll impound your bike and crush it."
ShadowBoxer
Wannabie Member
Hi Trinith,
There is a certain percentage of that happening already. There always will be. You can't eliminate stupid choices (legal or illegal, people still make them) or people, but you can reduce them.
The forces that profit from stupidity and a misinformed public (big government, pharmaceutical companies for example) use what you speak of and your feelings as an excuse to eliminate your choices, your freedoms and sell stupid solutions that really have profits as their core reasoning, not safety or the public good. What I'm saying is that there are other ways to solve the problem with the better outcome of a stronger and smarter public at large than removing the freedom of choice. A better educated public basically. Education is never on the table as a solution however or is given a minor, token role. There is a good reason for that from a business standpoint.
The way things are set up, you (or we), as the general public, are picking up the tab for idiots and simply unlucky people who got injured truly by accident not by carelessness.
If we had more freedoms but combined that with more informed and intelligent decisions, due to better training & education, there would still be a percentage of stupidity but it would probably be smaller.
It's not the way things are headed now. Smarter, better trained and educated citizens are not what big government and corporations want. Why? Because smarter, better trained and educated citizens make better, less expensive choices and have fewer problems overall.
The bottom line; if people are smarter and make more intelligent decisions in general (not just motorcycle related) government and big corporations make less money. These are businesses and businesses have obligations to owners and shareholders, etc.
So education and intelligent decisions are not promoted or encouraged.
Essentially:
Education and training is cheaper in the long run than ignorance and laws, for the public.
Ignorance or misinformation and laws are more profitable than education and training, for big government and corporations.
These are the patterns I see.
What do you think?
There is a certain percentage of that happening already. There always will be. You can't eliminate stupid choices (legal or illegal, people still make them) or people, but you can reduce them.
The forces that profit from stupidity and a misinformed public (big government, pharmaceutical companies for example) use what you speak of and your feelings as an excuse to eliminate your choices, your freedoms and sell stupid solutions that really have profits as their core reasoning, not safety or the public good. What I'm saying is that there are other ways to solve the problem with the better outcome of a stronger and smarter public at large than removing the freedom of choice. A better educated public basically. Education is never on the table as a solution however or is given a minor, token role. There is a good reason for that from a business standpoint.
The way things are set up, you (or we), as the general public, are picking up the tab for idiots and simply unlucky people who got injured truly by accident not by carelessness.
If we had more freedoms but combined that with more informed and intelligent decisions, due to better training & education, there would still be a percentage of stupidity but it would probably be smaller.
It's not the way things are headed now. Smarter, better trained and educated citizens are not what big government and corporations want. Why? Because smarter, better trained and educated citizens make better, less expensive choices and have fewer problems overall.
The bottom line; if people are smarter and make more intelligent decisions in general (not just motorcycle related) government and big corporations make less money. These are businesses and businesses have obligations to owners and shareholders, etc.
So education and intelligent decisions are not promoted or encouraged.
Essentially:
Education and training is cheaper in the long run than ignorance and laws, for the public.
Ignorance or misinformation and laws are more profitable than education and training, for big government and corporations.
These are the patterns I see.
What do you think?
ShadowBoxer
Wannabie Member
If I understand you correctly you are saying you heard some scary stories and decided to wear proper gear?
That sounds fine to me. It's your choice to heed the warning or not.
We both agree that riding around for years in proper gear is cooler than riding around in a T-shirt with one leg.
You have the freedom of choice.
You made your intelligent choice.
Job done.
Good.
Trinith
Wannabie Member
I think it's the governments job to protect the general public from your bad choice, to an extent of course. That's why I have no problem with bans on smoking in public parks. I don't agree with banning it on the street, but public/government owned property? Sure. Private business? No. If the business owner wants to shoot himself in the foot by letting people smoke inside, let him. It's his business, if he wants to lower his income that's up to him. I should be able to go to a public park and not have to worry about contracting cancer so you can get your fix however.
No matter how much education there is there will still be too many people making stupid choices. I can't tell you how many people I've talked to that essentially said "Of course I know what will happen if I crash without a helmet. That's why I don't crash." They think they are the 1% who will never go down. For the most part I agree, the government shouldn't be taking away freedoms of choice like that. However, in this instance, I have no problem with it. The truly sad fact is that in a lot of cases helmet laws don't really do much. Tn, for example, allows people to wear paper thin pieces of PVC that are shaped like the top of your head and call them 'helmets.' Those things aren't going to do a damn thing. In Tx the helmet law is written in a way that makes it nearly impossible to enforce. So while there is one there is no real reason to ever wear a helmet once you're over the age of 18. Both those laws need to go. As far as I am concerned they should be replaced with laws mandating helmets that will actually do something. I would be more against helmet laws if 'they' were to enact laws stating that tax money cannot be used to pay for motorcycle related injuries. Then you allow the hospital to say "You got hurt while not wearing protective gear? Pay us a deposit or go somewhere else." I have no sympathy for someone who suffers cranial trauma because they chose not to protect it, and I have no desire to pay for them either.
The core problem is that while yes, education is good, the human animal is arrogant. We tend to think we won't be on the bad side of the possible outcomes, and as such we make stupid choices regardless of how well informed we are. When those choices negatively impact the general populace there becomes a problem, and it's the governments job to mitigate those problems. That becomes a slippery slope though, because no one will be able to agree on where to draw the line. Lots of people like to tell themselves that the government should just disappear, and let me run my life how I see fit. Anarchy, however, has never (to my knowledge) led to a nice place to live. There's always going to be those people that follow the 'I don't care what happens to you, I'm going to do whatever I want' ideology, and frankly there needs to be an authority that says "No, if you try that shit we'll take you off the street."
