big surprise, motorcycle helmet laws save lives

Onceler said:
You said it was a BS claim that no one is losing a right by mandating helmets. And you said this in the context of talking about the right to drive.

Ergo, using your logic, if people have to wear a helmet, they are losing the right to drive.

What am I missing here?
Click to expand...

reading comprehension, most likely. not surprising, since you said you didn't want to read the whole thing anyway, but let me point out DERPs first post in this thread.

DERP said:
You have not lost a right by being required to wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle on a public road since riding a motorcycle on a public road is not a right to begin with.
Click to expand...
 
Derp Derp said:
Who cares. It's an irrelevent point to anyone but a political ideologue. The facts are is that it's extremely risky behavior to ride a motorcycle with out a helmet and those who do so are at best using questionable judgement and at worst are just plain stupid.

His basic argument is also bogus. You don't have a right to travel in any way you want on a publicly funded road. I can't ride my bicycle on the insterstate nor can I drive a tractor down a limited access highway. Now if I owned those roads I could but I don't. The public does and since the public pays for those roads they have a right to manage how they are used by the public. Regulating how public roads are used is not the same as denying one a right to travel. That's just a plain silly notion.

My advice to STY is that if he does not like the way in which our public roads are managed he's quite free to build his own and travel on them.
Click to expand...

interesting that liberal idiots like to ignore court cases that don't go their way. my advice to you is to practice what you like to preach, at least in regards to court cases you DO like.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
reading comprehension, most likely. not surprising, since you said you didn't want to read the whole thing anyway, but let me point out DERPs first post in this thread.
Click to expand...

Okay - so you're taking issue w/ his contention that driving isn't a right. But that doesn't support your claim that it's BS that you're losing a right by being forced to wear a helmet.

So, you misspoke apparently. Understood.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
interesting that liberal idiots like to ignore court cases that don't go their way. my advice to you is to practice what you like to preach, at least in regards to court cases you DO like.
Click to expand...
I do practice what I preach. I wear a helmet. Only an idiot wouldn't and it's a sad statement that there are so many morons out there on motorcycles not wearing one that it has to be regulated.
 
Onceler said:
Okay - so you're taking issue w/ his contention that driving isn't a right. But that doesn't support your claim that it's BS that you're losing a right by being forced to wear a helmet.

So, you misspoke apparently. Understood.
Click to expand...
Let me clarify that. Driving anyway you want on a publicly funded road is not a right. Driving whatever you want in whatever way you want on your own property is. That's the point that STY is missing.
 
Onceler said:
Okay - so you're taking issue w/ his contention that driving isn't a right. But that doesn't support your claim that it's BS that you're losing a right by being forced to wear a helmet.

So, you misspoke apparently. Understood.
Click to expand...

isn't mandating something losing a right to choose?
 
Derp Derp said:
Let me clarify that. Driving anyway you want on a publicly funded road is not a right. Driving whatever you want in whatever way you want on your own property is. That's the point that STY is missing.
Click to expand...
your clarification is ridiculous and only self serving. I NEVER said one has a right to drive however they want. What i've said is that people have a RIGHT to drive on the public highways, of course following the constitutionally authorized regulations such as speed limits, obeying traffic signals, and even which side of the yellow stripe to drive on.
 
Derp Derp said:
I do practice what I preach. I wear a helmet. Only an idiot wouldn't and it's a sad statement that there are so many morons out there on motorcycles not wearing one that it has to be regulated.
Click to expand...
and only an idiot would wear a helmet. see how nonsensical your BS judgement statement is? what you SHOULD be saying is that 'you THINK' that not wearing a helmet makes one an idiot.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
your clarification is ridiculous and only self serving. I NEVER said one has a right to drive however they want. What i've said is that people have a RIGHT to drive on the public highways, of course following the constitutionally authorized regulations such as speed limits, obeying traffic signals, and even which side of the yellow stripe to drive on.
Click to expand...
And having a valid license, which is a privilege.
 
Althea said:
Of course it is. But traveling, isn't driving. Can you name a state that doesn't require a driver's license?
Click to expand...

irrelevant. the right to keep and bear arms is also a clearly stated right, but doesn't prevent states from writing unconstitutional laws requiring a permit to buy or carry one.
 
Althea said:
And having a valid license, which is a privilege.
Click to expand...

in one respect, this is correct. If you wish to comply with the unlawful demands of a state to get a license to exercise a fundamental right, then it does become a privilege. That makes it your own stupidity though, not anyone elses.
 
Althea said:
Of course it is. But traveling, isn't driving. Can you name a state that doesn't require a driver's license?
Click to expand...
That'd be an impediment on a fundamental right, which can only be deemed constitutional by dire public need and executed in a fashion that is the least prohibitive to peoples.
 
Onceler said:
You lose the right to not wear a helmet. You don't lose the choice to DRIVE.

That's like saying a speed limit takes away you're right to drive. It's really strange to argue that.
Click to expand...
it IS strange to argue that, which is why I haven't. but don't let that get in the way of you believing I did.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
it IS strange to argue that, which is why I haven't. but don't let that get in the way of you believing I did.
Click to expand...

Same logic, STY. You're arguing that mandating a helmet is taking away the right to drive.

Read back through your responses to me. You seem to have issues w/ saying what you mean, and meaning what you say. Once again, you're entangled in the goalposts you're trying to switch around.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
in one respect, this is correct. If you wish to comply with the unlawful demands of a state to get a license to exercise a fundamental right, then it does become a privilege. That makes it your own stupidity though, not anyone elses.
Click to expand...
You don't have a driver's license?
 
Onceler said:
Same logic, STY. You're arguing that mandating a helmet is taking away the right to drive.
Click to expand...
no, i'm not. I'm rebutting DERPS argument that one doesn't have a right to choose whether to wear a helmet or not because there is no right to drive.

Onceler said:
Read back through your responses to me. You seem to have issues w/ saying what you mean, and meaning what you say. Once again, you're entangled in the goalposts you're trying to switch around.
Click to expand...
are you sure you've had enough coffee today? because you're seriously wrapping two arguments in to one when they were never argued that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top