^
Better yet increase education, and leave the choice? Sadly we have an office in Washington DC with over 500 people on the payroll who get to make that choice for us. The biggest problem is the continued growth of Government and needless offices like the CPSC who are not elected yet create national policy on items they know nothing about.
Its not worth getting pumped over. There is bigger fish to fry in my opinion. I really dont see a way to change this law. Would I prefer to just wear my headsets of course, do I plan to always wear a helmet of course not. Tickets are meant to be written and it wouldn't be fun if we didn't test the law.......2 more folks that wanna take it in the A$$
I was actually considering making them catch me to write me a ticket...Uhhh sorry sir...I didnt know you were back there
What a joke...just because the law doesn't affect you, it is a good law. well go ahead and put a 2# DOT helmet on your little kids, strapped in your car...can you say stiff neck, and hopefully not injured spinal cord.
The bill passed through committees, with Republicans sitting on them, no opposition. It was passed unanimously by the house and senate, Republicans voting, no opposition. To some representatives credit they didn't vote on it for whatever reason but had mine been present she (republican) likely would have voted yes (as stated by her leg. director) because her Republican Leg. Consultant recommended she do so. The absurd thing here is that some people are content getting only part of an entirely absurd piece of legislation undone. That, is absurd. Had this bill been passed in the manner that it was amended we would be screaming foul about that too.
What I meant by a "good law" was its not a unreasonable law. Just like the cell phone law. We all pissed and moaned but its a law and we will learn to live with it. More people cause crashes while changing CD's, eating, talking to friends or trying to take of children while driving. It's not realistic for it to be illegal to talk, change a CD or take care of children. So cell phones took the blame.
I know a young lady who rolled a Prowler and separated her foot from her leg, as in her foot was hanging from her leg by the skin. Should the law mandate that we wear some sort of leg helmet or cast? Where does it end? Does it end? In that case a little more of a firm hand in training by her parents might have prevented it, who knows. But you can't legislate parenting now can you.
Blah blah blah. Could of lost, will loose. I keep reading this as a means to why it is ok to have liberties stomped out. I still rather fight for my freedoms than lay down because of a threat by somebody. Glad to see do many people ok with the socialist movement. At least they have you all trained. Also I keep reading how you still have liberty over this law if you want to be an outlaw. That is not ok in my book. Will I be wearing a helmet? Yes, but not because I want to but, because I believe I am over taxed as it is and refuse to let California have anymore of my money than absolutely necessary.he CPSC, a Washington, DC based US Government agency,
was responsible for the ATV 3-Wheeler demise back in 1988. We understand that the CPSC’s plan was to cease future manufacturing of UTV’s/SxS’s in response to their evaluation of accident and fatality statistics. Similar legislation has already been introduced in other states and will more than likely try to be pushed nation- wide. Rather than to lose the UTV/SxS market, ROHVA sponsored AB 1595 to protect and preserve the ROV industry.
This is from the ASA (American Sand Association) September monthly newsletter. IT SAYS WE COULD'VE LOST THE ENTIRE UTV PRODUCTION OF NEW VEHICLES! I'd rather wear a helmet and be able to buy a 101 up Maverick, than buy a used rzr or a jeep!!!
Couple of question in regards to the girl. How was the driver driving? Was it safe to conditions? Was she using a seatbelt? Was she drunk? Not pointing fingers at her just making a point that maybe the helmet would have not saved her, perhaps it would have been done other simple choices she could have made. But these laws don't make it "better off", if it did fatalities in cars would cease to exist. The truth of the matter is it may take out some variables in certain circumstances but not make "life better" at all cost. I am not telling anyone that they can't or shouldn't wear a helmet or a seat belt but you choose your path and I ll choose mine. That's what liberty is, the freedom for you to choose for you and not me and vice versa.
I don't feel people that are pro "helmet" get attack. It's being "pro helmet law" that brings fire. I am pro safety but how do you tell the next guy his safety procedures are not valid and should be changed via law because they are not in line with yours. I believe this sport has it dangers as does walking down the sidewalk but you still have to allow people to be responsible for their decisions not government.
If they all really backed it then why did it get amended so quickly? I think because once the phone calls and emails poured in they all finally read what they thought was a good bill based on the what the idiot Cook had told them. Then realized they screwed up by not doing their job and reading bills for them selfs. I by no means give any who did not read the bill and voted on it a pass they are as much to blame. But I will never give Cook a pass, he brought the bill to committee.
