4 ms·
If you were designing a vehicle to help harvest organs, you would want a high chance of causing blunt head trauma but avoid major organ damage. You would also
by Gatsky 4y ago
If you were designing a vehicle to help harvest organs, you would want a high chance of causing blunt head trauma but avoid major organ damage. You would also want the victim to be thrown well clear of the vehicle to enable quick access for resuscitation, and to avoid smoke inhalation or conflagration. You would also want this vehicle to be highly attractive to fit and healthy young people. Namely, a motorcycle.
- jgilias 4y agoWhen I did my bike license the instructor outlined how different the approach to safety is between my EU country and the States. Here a helmet is required to drive. But not glasses. In US glasses are required, but no helmet. Meaning, the US cares about you not endangering other people, but you do you, whereas here they care about you not dying. From a purely utilitarian perspective, the US approach actually makes more sense. And more donors. Win-win.
- pferdone 4y ago> the US cares about you not endangering other people Through their rigorous license process to operate road vehicles…yeah right.
- lazyasciiart 4y agoThe US cares about you not damaging or inconveniencing cars.
- nirui 4y agoAnd this, makes all the dark humor in this thread even more dark.
- dsfyu404ed 4y agoDriving is state regulated. Most states require a helmet on a motorcycle. In general anyone making "in the US" type generalizations about stuff regulated at the state level is either misinformed and blowing smoke up your ass (more common in real life) or lying in order to support a point or agenda (more common on the internet).
- jgilias 4y agoCool, I didn’t know this. It’s hard for outsiders to follow what’s regulated at state level and what’s regulated federally! EDIT: And maybe then we shouldn’t go around spouting nonsense, but hey, that’s Internet :D
- foxyv 4y agoI was honestly shocked when I first started seeing people without helmets here in Texas. But, sure enough, if you are over 21 you are entitled to drag your skull and exposed brain across asphalt if you so choose.
- nickthegreek 4y agoHave you rode without eye protection? Riding without glasses is way more dangerous than no helmet.
- jgilias 4y agoTotally, I guess the assumption is that helmets usually have eye protection, which is not necessarily the case. The argument by the instructor was that it’s dumb, and both, a helmet and eye protection should be required in case your helmet doesn’t protect the eyes. The idea was that in case you ride without a helmet you only endanger yourself, whereas without eye protection you endanger others as well.