home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!uvaarpa!murdoch!dayhoff.med.Virginia.EDU!cdw2t
- From: cdw2t@dayhoff.med.Virginia.EDU (Clifford David Weston)
- Subject: Re: HELMETS
- Message-ID: <1992Nov20.000830.20013@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
- Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
- Organization: University of Virginia
- References: <1992Nov19.033924.25567@spdc.ti.com> <1992Nov19.200105.12133@megatek.com> <BxzJwI.AB@news.iastate.edu>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:08:30 GMT
- Lines: 53
-
- In article <BxzJwI.AB@news.iastate.edu> tomes@iastate.edu () writes:
-
- >Then you should tell the Air Force that their pilots need their peripheral
- >vision and must redesign their helmets.
- [nice story about friend's data wiped]
-
- Might it be out of place to suggest that the task of motorcyling, Randy
- Davis excepted, is far removed from that of piloting a fighter jet? I would
- think that nearly *all* information in the latter is obtained from directly
- in front of the operator (very rarely do BrainDeadF16Drivers pull out in front
- of you).
-
- >....if you rely on peripheral vision to warn you of danger
- >then you are not scanning your environment enough.
-
- No one has said that we riders rely on p-vision as the sole or even primary
- method of information acquisition. The fact that some hazards approach quickly
- from the side, combined with the obvious advantage of having the widest field
- of view possible (surely you'll not argue that too much vision is bad), is the
- prop used to support the rationalization.
-
- >You did not even mention one of the major benefits of helmets: protection from
- >flying dust particles...
-
- Why is it immediately assumed that those who ride helmetless will not wear any
- eye protection? How many of us admitted to sometimes riding with our shields
- up (no, that's not a command from Kirk) in the summer? Where was the hallowed
- eye protection then? You'll happily tell us that Oakleys don't count (I hope).
-
- The bottom line is, imho, that some people will *always* wear a helmet. Most
- will usually wear one, some occasionally wear one, some seldom wear one, and a
- very few *never* wear one. Nobody is any "righter" than anyone else. I'm in
- the first group, but I have *no right* to tell anyone other than my passenger
- that he/she MUST wear a helmet when motorcycling. Yes, it's safer to wear one.
- It's also much safer to wear leather pants instead of jeans. In any accident,
- you stand a much higher chance of losing skin from the waist down than of
- incurring a fatal head injury. Why isn't everyone all worked up about getting
- us all into leather pants (keep your filthy comments to yourselves)? If you're
- *really* interested in keeping people healthy, there are plenty of things more
- deserving of your time than bickering about helmet laws.
-
- >DoD-nominal, which appears to be somewhere between 100 and 150 mph...
-
- That'd be 105 mph, sir.
-
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- | Cliff Weston DoD# 0598 '92 Seca II (Tem) |
- | |
- | This bike is in excellent condition. |
- | I've done all the work on it myself. |
- | |
- | -- Glen "CRASH" Stone |
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-