4 ms·

> We have a responsibility to properly accommodate someone else's specific needs, but also ensure their safety. You're not ensuring their safety by forcing the

> We have a responsibility to properly accommodate someone else's specific needs, but also ensure their safety. You're not ensuring their safety by forcing them to wear helmets. Some statistics for bi-cyclists show that helmet-wearers take greater risk, effectively increasing their risk of injury or death. We don't have similar data for motorcycles, it may well be a different tradeoff. I disagree with the premise that we need to make such decisions for people. If we really followed through with this safety ideal, we should ban all two-wheelers, they're the riskiest way to take part in traffic.

TotempaaltJ 8y ago
> You're not ensuring their safety by forcing them to wear helmets You _may not be_ ensuring. The data for cyclists may very well not extrapolate to motorcyclists. > I disagree with the premise that we need to make such decisions for people Interesting! I think ensuring citizen safety _is_ something the state should be (in part) responsible for, and history has shown that people are often too ignorant of the risks to do it through education alone. Do you also disagree with regulation requiring seatbelts?
nkrisc 8y ago
Why must we follow something all the way to its logical conclusion? We can choose where to draw the line. Requiring helmets is a reasonable compromise. Eliminating all risk is unrealistic.