Safety, how much

[Nemrod]

I don't think the govenment should force helmets, fat free food on adults. I prefer to make my own decisions. The extreme safety fascination prevelent in the diving community I believe is a psychological extension of the natural human fear of water, being in the water and under it and of course the primal fear of drowning. So, sleek, sophisticated 21st century hominds think laws and overly protective safety "rules" will somehow keep us from what we really fear--death--they are wrong.

N

 

[RadRob]

I feel a person's decision is their's alone. Don't make stupid laws requiring me to wear a helmet. We don't want laws governing our diving either. If I want to wear a helmet, I will. If I don't, I won't. If I want to go to 250', I will. Stupid decisions to some are normal activity to others. What is dangerous to you, may not be to me. I ride wheelies at 140mph on sport bikes and choose to wear a helmet while doing so. I also ride a harley and choose not to wear one. My riding, my choice. The last thing I want is someone waiting at the surface ready to check my computer max depth and writing me a ticket for passing the magical 60' or 120' or x' mark. Sounds crazy, but I would bet it's not too far off base and could become reality... If we let it.

Captain - if you have to explain what riding with no helmet does for you, save your breath. Some never get it and never will. Keep the rubber side down man.

 

[Rockhound76]

Note: My 12yr. old son is a transplant survivor (stem cells from cord blood, so no one had to die.)

A few months ago, there was a bone marrow drive at the hospital where he was treated. One of the side-events was a Harley-Cruise. 300 Harley's lined up to make a charity run to get donors to sign up. It was great (and VERY loud.)

The doc at the event summed it up in a speech after the ride, thanking all the riders for signing up to be marrow donors. Then, noting few were wearing helmets, he thanked them for also being future organ donors but offered that they were probably going to waste some perfectly good marrow. (he rides, btw.)

 

[Kingpatzer]

I don't think the govenment should force helmets, fat free food on adults. I prefer to make my own decisions.
N

That would be a fine attitude if you could opt out of the helmet law and at the same time opt out of any tax payer supported medical care when you smash your head in because you didn't have a helmet -- starting with no ride in a publically funded emergency vehicle or stay at a publically funded emergency room.

Sadly, that option isn't open to you. When you get in an accident, tax payer support kicks in immediately. Asking you to minimize the impact caused by your choices when those choices have economic impacts on an entire community is not unreasonable.

Moreover, it has nothing to do with keeping you safe. It has everything to do with not wasting community resources.

 

[RadRob]

That would be a fine attitude if you could opt out of the helmet law and at the same time opt out of any tax payer supported medical care when you smash your head in because you didn't have a helmet -- starting with no ride in a publically funded emergency vehicle or stay at a publically funded emergency room.

Sadly, that option isn't open to you. When you get in an accident, tax payer support kicks in immediately. Asking you to minimize the impact caused by your choices when those choices have economic impacts on an entire community is not unreasonable.

Moreover, it has nothing to do with keeping you safe. It has everything to do with not wasting community resources.

I pay taxes just like you. So for the years I have been paying taxes without utilizing
"your tax dollars" (riding for 29 years btw), its like a prepaid phone. I have paid, just not used yet. Or you could look at it as we are doing community service. Providing the interns with schooling material for free. So maybe everyone should be paying us to ride without helmets.

(dang - got lured into this one)

AND - I'm ummm... Amish. Yeah. I'm cheating a little by using the internet, and I have a job in, ummm... the farm lands of Iowa. Yeah. And I don't approve of people using motor vehicles and modern technology and don't want my taxes paying for motor vehicle accidents. So there!

Now I'm going back to the corn fields. Yeah, that's it. Good argument.

 

[Doc Harry]

I have been riding motorcycles for over 30 years. If not required by law I do not generally wear a helmet.

I support your right you do as you please.

But as long as I (a tax payer) am going to end up paying for the hospitalizations and long-term care of people who whack themselves riding motorcycles without a helmet, then your behavior becomes my business.

I think the solution to is require motorcyclists to purchase high-value medical insurance policies and long-term disability policies before they can ride without a helmet. Then go at, ride with you hair flapping in the wind.

The same solutions should apply to all risky behaviors that have proven costly to taxpayers.

Then we can all do what we want with abandon.

 

[captain]

So you are putting the taking ofprofessional risk in order to save another person's life or property on the same footing as taking risk for personal pleasure? Police and firefighters do a necessary job and get compensated for it. Riding without a helmet does nothing for any one except the rider.

As a surgeon, I was more exposed to HIV and hepatitis than a non-surgeon --- does that make the choice to be a surgeon on a par with the choice to do heroin with dirty needles?

Your argument doesn't make sense. There is not a parity between taking risks as a service to others and taking risks for hedonistic self interest.

As I pointed out the choise of those professions may be motivated by the need for risk and thrills, the fact that you preceive that risk to be noble still does not automaticly mean that those chose those professions strickily for noble reasons. For all we know they may take the same risks in their personal lives as the ones they save.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

I no longer ride and have no desire to. Of course that would probably change the second my brother in law offers to let me take his Super Glide for a spin. I do however solo dive and am constantly asked why. Just today a guy at work who does not dive asked me aren't you not supposed to do that? My answer was that depends on who you ask. I have the training, equipment and experience to do it under certain conditions safely. Without IMO going to extreme's. I dive doubles, carry back up cutting tools and lights, liftbag and reel or spool. In areas I'm familiar with I have no problem going to 120 feet or so. I also have no problem telling newbies that they should not do it. Some instructors do not want someone to solo if they have new students in their group. If I'm assisting with the class then I respect that. I will not however alter my dive plans for an instructor with whom I'm not working. I don't drink, smoke, do drugs. I don't jump out of planes and no longer ski. Diving is my main source of stress relief. Solo just adds to that.

 

[captain]

Some people are thrill seekers, but I really am not. I climbed, rode mountain bikes, and dive because I love the beautiful surroundings in which I can do these things, and because they were challenging activities which tested ones skill.

The motorcycle however, I rode that for the thrill of the speed, acceleration and carving canyons. Theres nothing like it, but I always, always wore a helmet. I don't think that I would have enjoyed it without one.

I don't know if "thrill seeker" is the correct description but I would say it comes pretty close to you even in your occupation. Maybe adrenalin junky is a better description.

 

[vladimir]

I've got bad news for you. Skinny people have strokes too.

Terry

Roughly half as often. But you are correct; I was imprecise. What I meant to convey is that lack of fitness trumps many of the other risk factors Scubaboarders obsess over, and it doesn't seem, based on the discussions I read, that it is appropriately weighted in their risk analysis.