Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

Biker riding in "Helmet Law Protest" dies of head injury


Jochi1543

Recommended Posts

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/07/parish_man_protesting_motorcyc.html

 

Town of Onondaga, NY – A Parish man who was participating in a motorcycle helmet protest ride was killed this afternoon when he went over the handlebars of his motorcycle and injured his head on the pavement, state police said.

 

Philip A. Contos, 55, of 45 East St., Parish, was not wearing a helmet while driving a 1983 Harley Davidson motorcycle south on Route 11 in Onondaga with a large group of other motorcyclists, troopers said.

 

About 1:30 p.m., troopers said, Contos hit his brakes, the motorcycle fishtailed and went out of control and Contos went over the handlebars.

 

Contos was taken to Upstate University Hospital where he was pronounced dead, troopers said.

 

Evidence at the scene and information from the attending physician indicate Contos would have survived if he had been wearing a Department of Transportation approved helmet, troopers said.

 

The protest in which Contos was riding was organized by American Bikers Aimed Towards Education, Trooper Jack Keller said.

 

 

 

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/07/parish_man_protesting_motorcyc.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh boy. I wouldn't say tragic...tragic is something that happens...unfairly. This is sad and, as posted above, ironic. People fail to realize that we regulate things (seatbelts, helmets, alcohol, etc.) not to take away their freedom, and not because we believe they are all untrustworthy, but because accidents happen...precautions should and must be taken to prevent as much damage to themselves and to others as possible.

 

For god's sake...wearing a helmet is a small, small inconvenience to suffer through in order to protect your life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh boy. I wouldn't say tragic...tragic is something that happens...unfairly. This is sad and, as posted above, ironic. People fail to realize that we regulate things (seatbelts, helmets, alcohol, etc.) not to take away their freedom, and not because we believe they are all untrustworthy, but because accidents happen...precautions should and must be taken to prevent as much damage to themselves and to others as possible.

 

For god's sake...wearing a helmet is a small, small inconvenience to suffer through in order to protect your life.

 

I feel that this IS a tragic and (tragically ironic death). The argument for such regulation is not as iron-clad as you make it sound.

 

In short, one can argue that forcing motorcycle drivers to wear helmets reflects a highly paternalistic attitude by the state, infringing on our personal freedoms. If wearing a helmet in your car was found to dramatically improve your safety (as has wearing a helmet while motorcycling), I doubt that would we be so quick to approve of a law forcing us to wear one while driving our car.

 

An interesting read on this topic is available here. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1781413/

It concludes in favor of enforcing helmet legislation but is most interesting IMHO in its summarization of the legal arguments for and against these efforts of the government.

 

 

Also, whereas motorcycle helmets have been quite strongly demonstrated to reduce injuries and fatalities, such paternalistic laws can easily spread into areas where there efficacy is far less certain. See this recent article http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/06/24/chris-selley-swim-without-a-life-jacket-while-you-still-can/

specifically the last tongue in cheek paragraph. Where we should draw the line is not so clear as you make it seem....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As "paternalistic" as some believe it is, my mom would still have a brother if 40 years ago they had (never mind legislated) bike helmets. A simple accident, and a family is torn apart (granted, it was on a bicycle, not a motorbike, but the principle is the same regardless). I wonder if this guy's friends and family still feel that you shouldn't have to wear a helmet when on a bike (assuming of course they felt as he did)....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As "paternalistic" as some believe it is, my mom would still have a brother if 40 years ago they had (never mind legislated) bike helmets. A simple accident, and a family is torn apart (granted, it was on a bicycle, not a motorbike, but the principle is the same regardless). I wonder if this guy's friends and family still feel that you shouldn't have to wear a helmet when on a bike (assuming of course they felt as he did)....

 

Agreed, paternalistic isn't necessarily a bad thing when it comes to the safety of our society. I would gladly place helmets on my family if it were the law and it prevented more unnecessary deaths. And no, I still don't agree--I do not believe this is tragic...what would be tragic is if this idiot killed someone else because of his "plight for freedom and rights". This is exactly WHY we have paternalistic laws, because people are stubborn and refuse to do what is best for them. My children are old enough to be in booster seats and keep begging me to upgrade them, but they are tiny children and their weight and height keep them back into 5pt harnesses...I'm not willing to risk their tiny frames flying out of an inadequate seat for comfort, ease, and because it's my ****ing right. With rights comes responsibilities. I'm tired of people whining over the things that are in place to PROTECT them.

 

If gang members can ride around wearing helmets, then you can put on your bigboy panties and do it too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are really interesting articles kickserve. Thanks! I was going to say something about how some posters are really good about adding to the discussion, but I guess I am not really adding to the discussion here, so I will hold my tongue...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, paternalistic isn't necessarily a bad thing when it comes to the safety of our society. I would gladly place helmets on my family if it were the law and it prevented more unnecessary deaths. And no, I still don't agree--I do not believe this is tragic...what would be tragic is if this idiot killed someone else because of his "plight for freedom and rights". This is exactly WHY we have paternalistic laws, because people are stubborn and refuse to do what is best for them. My children are old enough to be in booster seats and keep begging me to upgrade them, but they are tiny children and their weight and height keep them back into 5pt harnesses...I'm not willing to risk their tiny frames flying out of an inadequate seat for comfort, ease, and because it's my ****ing right. With rights comes responsibilities. I'm tired of people whining over the things that are in place to PROTECT them.

 

If gang members can ride around wearing helmets, then you can put on your bigboy panties and do it too.

 

Haha! Excatly!

 

When the bike helmet law came into effect (for those under 16) here in AB, there was a 10 year old boy's mom talking about it with my mom (my bro was around 10 at the time) (needless to say, my mom is VERY passionate about wearing helmets) and you know what this boy's MOM's arguement for thinking the law was stupid?

 

"He can't go as fast with a helmet on"

 

WTF? I'm sorry, but your little kid does not pedal fast enough for drag forces to have THAT much of an impact on his speed. That's like saying a mosquito slows down your car when you hit it going 110 down the highway. Yeah it does, but not to a noticeable about. IMO if the pros (ie Olympic athletes and those competing in the Tour de France) wear helmets, I (and my future kids) can wear them too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha! Excatly!

 

When the bike helmet law came into effect (for those under 16) here in AB, there was a 10 year old boy's mom talking about it with my mom (my bro was around 10 at the time) (needless to say, my mom is VERY passionate about wearing helmets) and you know what this boy's MOM's arguement for thinking the law was stupid?

 

"He can't go as fast with a helmet on"

 

WTF? I'm sorry, but your little kid does not pedal fast enough for drag forces to have THAT much of an impact on his speed. That's like saying a mosquito slows down your car when you hit it going 110 down the highway. Yeah it does, but not to a noticeable about. IMO if the pros (ie Olympic athletes and those competing in the Tour de France) wear helmets, I (and my future kids) can wear them too.

 

My kids both have training wheels...they're not allowed on their bikes without helmets and elbow pads and knee pads and gloves. They love their "gear" (Yes, my children call their stuff "gear") anyways. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My kids both have training wheels...they're not allowed on their bikes without helmets and elbow pads and knee pads and gloves. They love their "gear" (Yes, my children call their stuff "gear") anyways. :)

 

I still remember how much I loved my "gear" when I was a kid. It was all neon pink and green and I had a bike bell with a Ghostbusters sticker on it. It didn't bother me at all to have to wear a helmet and elbow and knee pads. I would have been scared to ride my bike without them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still remember how much I loved my "gear" when I was a kid. It was all neon pink and green and I had a bike bell with a Ghostbusters sticker on it. It didn't bother me at all to have to wear a helmet and elbow and knee pads. I would have been scared to ride my bike without them!

 

I had a ghostbuster siren instead of a bell!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...