In a message dated Sun, 6 Aug 2000 9:43:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Thomas M Mc Hugh <tmmchugh@juno.com> writes:
<< Your facts are correct.
>>The first day of the new law, a motorcyclist was >>killed because he had no
>>helmet.
>>I guess he was a Sinatra Fan. "He did it his way" >>BUT< HE IS STILL
>>DEAD.
>>Tom
Hey Tom, Watch it, your totalitariansim is showing! let's list the alternatives:
A. You would rather he hadn't died, thus paving the way for anguished cries about how he is vegged out with a head injury on state funding.(a sick socialist concept anyway)
B. You wish he was not permitted to ride a cycle at all, evil things that they are, thus preventing the above, as well as the accident which really happened. No ONE should be allowed to have that much fun without being punished for those of us that are afraid to do the same thing.
C. You wish he HAD still crashed, but had been wearing a helmet, so you could pummel the rest of us for our evil ways. You're willing to bet on HIS life that a helmet would not leave him with terrible agonizing long-term injuries, far worse than a clean quick death. It's a fact..inform yourself before putting mouth in gear.
D. Your control issue with people goes a lot farther than motorcycle riders, and you're just getting warmed up.
So, he rode, sans helmet, he died doing it, by his own hand, you lost no skin off of your nose, nor money from your pocket, so how does this affect you? Isn't life way too short to mind other people's business? Like Jim O'brien, skydiving casualty, John Denver, Flying casualty, and any other person who dares to do something risky, these folks are not irresponsible fools. Rather, they are vigorous living folks who love life so much that they cannot sit still and watch it go by...they dare to live it. Sometimes they die doing it. SO what?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 02 2000 - 09:32:25 PDT