The great gear debate - I offer up my 2c

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with pretty much everything you said. Everyone has to make their own decision about what risks they are willing to accept. That being said....

If some buttmunch decides he/she does not want to wear a full-face helmet and becomes a vegetable, I don't want my tax dollars paying their hospital bill and/or disability income.
 
XXX526 said:
I agree with pretty much everything you said. Everyone has to make their own decision about what risks they are willing to accept. That being said....

If some buttmunch decides he/she does not want to wear a full-face helmet and becomes a vegetable, I don't want my tax dollars paying their hospital bill and/or disability income.
Click to expand...

Thats what I always think. Its not a simple as the hurting themselves, and it being there fault. Its us that pay for the ambulance, the doctors, the medical care, the higher insurance prices, the benefits. Wearing no gear aint cool, its selfish.
 
I used to get REALLY angry seeing others not wearing the right gear but I say now "It's their skin, their pain"

Regarding tax pounds/Dollars, do we start going down the "ban smoking/drinking/dangerous sports" routes too and wrap everyone in cotton wool?

I'm pretty sure the government are putting your tax money into other things such as paying for illegal immigrants homes and their kids, weapons and lining their pension pockets etc, someone choosing not to wear gloves is a drop in the ocean compared. (I do agree with compulsory helmet laws as unneccesary deaths have been prevented, including mine when I was younger)
 
RoadcraftNottingham said:
I used to get REALLY angry seeing others not wearing the right gear but I say now "It's their skin, their pain"

Regarding tax pounds/Dollars, do we start going down the "ban smoking/drinking/dangerous sports" routes too and wrap everyone in cotton wool?
Click to expand...

Fair point, but surely if your doing a dangerous sport you protect yourself as much as possible. The less people that are hurt, the less it cost the government, the less likely they are to ban it.

Not that they'd ban motorcycling, but the powers that be might be more favourable to it.
 
Chessecake94 said:
Fair point, but surely if your doing a dangerous sport you protect yourself as much as possible. The less people that are hurt, the less it cost the government, the less likely they are to ban it.

Not that they'd ban motorcycling, but the powers that be might be more favourable to it.
Click to expand...

I think we could wear sumo suits and be strawberry flavoured and the Government would still hate us.

This molly coddling nanny state mentality gets to me sometimes, each to their own. If I decide I want to lick a wire to see if it's live, that's my call! (luckily they've not been live so far) ;)
 
RoadcraftNottingham said:
Chessecake94 said:
Fair point, but surely if your doing a dangerous sport you protect yourself as much as possible. The less people that are hurt, the less it cost the government, the less likely they are to ban it.

Not that they'd ban motorcycling, but the powers that be might be more favourable to it.
Click to expand...

I think we could wear sumo suits and be strawberry flavoured and the Government would still hate us.

This molly coddling nanny state mentality gets to me sometimes, each to their own. If I decide I want to lick a wire to see if it's live, that's my call! (luckily they've not been live so far) ;)
Click to expand...

I don't think it should be law for people to have to wear full gear, but they should chose to. But then I guess that defeats the object of choice.
 
It still really pisses me off seeing people ride without gear. Even now I see so much more squidding in Canada compared to the UK, and people just don't seem to give a shit! Ahhhgg!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top Posters Past 30 days

Winners Video

Website Supported by Ipswich SEO

Latest posts

Back
Top