NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/rec/motorcyc/40027

Text File | 1992-11-22 | 7.2 KB | 162 lines

Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles
Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!emory!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!news.service.uci.edu!ucivax!megatek!randy
From: [e-mail] (Randy Davis)
Subject: Re: HELMETS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Randy Davis)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Megatek Corporation, San Diego, California
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 17:05:33 GMT
Lines: 149

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mike Serafin) writes:
|If p-vision were defined as the total area you can see to both sides by moving
|your eyes in each direction you would have a point.

  Excuse me?  Whether I have a point or not is solely dependant on your
definition of peripheral vision?

  I seriously think you need to reevaluate that arguement.  The fact that
the viewport obscures ANY of my vision means I have a point worth
consideration, and it DOES.  Now, you get to decide whether it obscures any
useful vision, obviously you feel that it doesn't.  I disagree, and I have
the experience with riding helmetless over a period of time and knowing that
the edges of your vision are ARE important.

|  BUT, it is only the vision
|to your sides that you can see with your eyes focus straight ahead.

  Guess again, Mike.  Better yet, pull out a dictionary and prove to yourself
that it doesn't say "straight ahead".  I can't beleive (well, actually I can)
that you are so stupid to hinge your argument on your mistaken definition of
a term.

|  Maybe if
|you would go visit your proctologist he could remove your head from your ass so
|that you would be able to turn it and aid your side vision.

  No, it seems I can see much better than you, even WITH my head up my ass...

|And the DOT requirements are minimums, now, aren't they.

  Sure 'nough...  So, how does this help your case any?

|Maybe you shouldn't be riding at all if you have a physical disability that
|prevents you from moving your head.

  Most times I didn't ride in this condition, back when it bothered me.
You are correct - riding in such a situation is not the best idea.  Sometimes
it is not easily avoidable, and one must weigh the risks versus the benefits.
So far, I have been successful in evaluating risk/benefits/preferences.

|  Don't tell me that you can see around
|parked cars, bushes and trees with your superior vision, without moving your
|head.

  I don't beleive I did...  However, if you think this helps your case any,
feel free to use it...

|  I say it is just another rationalization.

  And again, you prove you don't know...

|  Like I said originally, I
|ain't gonna stop you if you want to change the law, as a matter of fact I'll
|help.  I don't like infringements on individual rights any more than the next
|person.

  Cool.

|  BUT, I am not going to buy your sorry rationalizations.

  Nor do I buy your unsupported and clueless rebuttals.

  I guess we can just go on with our lives disagreeing with the other.  You
can think my "sorry rationalizations" have no merit, and I can go on thinking
you don't know what you are talking about, despite your extra five years of
riding.  I've met even more clueless individuals than you, that had been
riding even more years (such as the "I don't use the back brake" people).

|Oh.  And if we're keeping score, I've been riding for the past 20 years in CA
|and TX.

  So, you have no excuse to be this way, huh?

|I didn't take anything out of context.  Based on personal experience the level
|of noise increases significantly, even at LOW speeds, without a helmet.

  Perhaps on your bike, not on any of mine.  Measured with a dB meter...
If you have drag pipes on your Hog, I bet you ARE better off with something
convering your ears - I'm running the extremely quiet stock exhaust, and I
haven't EVER noticed a 15-25 mph wind being damaging to my hearing.  Wind
noise in MY ears is certainly negligable to nonexistant under 30 mph (perhaps
you have Ross Perot ears?, that might explain the turbulance :-).  So, you
may be correct for your conditions, but they don't seem to apply to mine.

|Yes, I can carry on a conversation with a helmet.

   I guess that one line explains your stance on this argument of yours.

   So, what did this helmet you were conversing with tell you?  Is it a
real *special* helmet to you???  One that would get jealous if you didn't
wear it?

  Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm??????

(Yeah, I know, but I couldn't resist.)

|Let's see, you would like to wear a helmet if you went down, part of the risk
|of motorcycling involves the chance you will go down, you don't seem to be THAT
|stupid, therfore you wear a helmet all the time anyway.

  If this is your idea of logic, again we have an example of why your viewpoint
must make sense to you.  If you would try using *real* reasoning other than
blind acceptance of a popular belief, perhaps you might have a valid
arguement...

|obviously as good as making presuppositions as anyone else.  You seem to have
|missed the whole point behind my post.

  Let me see...  Saying I don't know what I'm talking about, although I've
offered evidence you haven't bothered to refute and being basically an idiot
about defending your beleif without offering any evidence or personal
experience that refutes my basic premise.  *Do* you have any experience
with riding helmetless (at low speed)?  Just curious...

|other passed under the auspices of my protection.  I am just sick of hearing
|all of you jokers try to make justification for why YOU don't want to wear a
|helmet.

  Strange, I wore a helmet most of the time even before the law went into
effect.  I didn't whine about it, either...

|The only point that you have is that you should be allowed to wear a helmet
|when you want to wear one, and with that I agree fully.  As for your reasons,
|well they are just so much bullshit.  For every person that you can find that
|claims a hinderence, I can find one that claims none.

  Thats nice...

|The only really stupid thing I see is YOU.  You insist on basing your reasons
|for not wanting to wear a helmet on questionable-at-best safety issues, when in
|reality it is ONLY a personal desire with know basis in fact.  You seemed to
|have missed that entirely.

  No, actually, I have not.  Yes, at times I do ENJOY riding helmetless.
And do you know WHY? - part of the enjoyment is being more aware of my
surroundings, which you continue to contradict that being a "good thing" (tm).
At highway speed and such, a helmet does not limit my useful perception of
my surroundings, because of the wind protection (primarily my eyes - the
noise level with and without a helmet is not that much different, and both
are high noise levels), the debris protection, and the fact that I have
only once or twice been caught unawares from something that was in the
area of my vision that was obscured by the helmet.  Clearly, I feel that
there are very real advantages of a helmet at higher speed, and SOMETIMES,
there are clear advantages, to me, of going without one at low speed.

Randy Davis                            Email: [e-mail]
ZX-11 #00072 Pilot                            megatek![e-mail]
DoD #0013                                     ucsd!megatek!randy