Raged motorist strikes two cyclists

In article >, Bill Sornson wrote:
> Brent P wrote:
>> In article >, Bill Sornson
>> wrote:
>>> Brent P wrote:
>>>> In article >, SMS wrote:
>>>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ANd yet the AHZs try to use whole population studies and gross
>>>>>> statistics to support their every view.
>>>>>
>>>>> They do the only thing they can do. Facts, science, and logic have
>>>>> no place in the world of the AHZ's.
>>>>
>>>> Really? It's only those opposed to being -forced- to wear these damn
>>>> things that bothers with facts, science, logic, and engineering
>>>> while those wanting to do the forcing
>>>
>>> BBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT. Wrong. Wrong wrong wrong
>>> wrong wrong. People who are "pro lid" -- that is, believe that
>>> they're a good idea and effective in preventing or diminishing
>>> injury -- are NOT therefore in favor of mandatory helmet laws. STOP
>>> THIS DISINGENUOUS BULL****.
>>
>> That's quite bull****. I've had your kind yell at me, pull along side
>> me, etc telling me how I need to wear the foam hat. I've had more
>> interactions with bicycle helmet zealots 'preaching' to me in the last
>> decade than I've had from all other religions combined.

> You're a weak-minded liar.

no lie at all... there was this one woman who pulled along side me and
honked and then proceeded to block traffic to tell me about the virtues
of foam hat wearing. I've had oncoming drivers yell 'wear a helmet' at
me. It's in 3rd place after 'get off the road' and 'get on the sidewalk'
for things yelled at me while riding.

> PLONK

Giving up so easily in your quest to convert a nonbeliever?

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:40:50 -0700, SMS >
said in >:

>historically that's been the problem with measuring the
>effectiveness of protective gear, the very usage of the gear reduces the
>number of emergency room (or other medical office) visits

Yup. As Thompson, Rivara and Thompson proved so well, helmets
prevent over 70% of lower limb injuries. Yay for helmets!

Oh wait, we were looking at the *proportion* of head injuries. Looks
like you haven't read the evidence, then. Again.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:36:29 -0700, "Bill Sornson" >
said in >:

>ANd yet the AHZs try to use whole population studies and gross statistics to
>support their every view.

They might do, I've never seen an anti helmet zealot so I wouldn't
know about that. Who's proposing a law forbidding helmet use?

Incidentally, the reason for looking at population studies is that
the hospital-based prospective studies claim to be predictive. It's
reasonable to measure those predicted effects against what happens.
And as it turns out the prediction is not borne out.

The same applied to HRT and heart disease.
http://chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Observational_studies

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:28:16 -0700, SMS >
said in >:

>They do the only thing they can do. Facts, science, and logic have no
>place in the world of the AHZ's.

Once again Steven M Scharf falsely accuses others of his own worst
faults. Here's a checklist for you, Scharf - how many of the
following have you read?

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki...idence/By_date

Note that several of your opponents in this debate show familiarity
with the literature and cite it frequently. Whereas you... don't.
Yup, your spectacularly stupid statement is in fact a precise
reversal of the truth.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Brent P? wrote:
> ...Of
> course your pro-helmet arguments are about on par with Frank's
> pro-speed-hump arguments.

Nothing wrong with the occasional quick..., oh sorry, family newsgroups.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Brent P? wrote:
> ...
> no lie at all... there was this one woman who pulled along side me and
> honked and then proceeded to block traffic to tell me about the virtues
> of foam hat wearing. I've had oncoming drivers yell 'wear a helmet' at
> me. It's in 3rd place after 'get off the road' and 'get on the sidewalk'
> for things yelled at me while riding....

Next time I am in The Great City of Chicaguh (sic), I am going to yell
"wear a magic foam hat" at every lidless cyclist in case it is Brent P.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

~

With the help of our friend from Ontario and some helmetless cyclists
the goal should be met.

~

In article <ubmAi.964$j23.151@trndny06>,
Lobby Dosser > wrote:
>
>Get to the decision makers and leaders in the legislature. Don't do it
>publicly. In a word, Lobby. )

As for adopting the ways which the State has provided for remedying
the evil, I know not of such ways. They take too much time, and a
man's life will be gone. I have other affairs to attend to. I came
into this world, not chiefly to make this a good place to live in, but
to live in it, be it good or bad. A man has not everything to do, but
something; and because he cannot do everything, it is not necessary
that he should do something wrong. It is not my business to be
petitioning the Governor or the Legislature any more than it is theirs
to petition me; and if they should not hear my petition, what should I
do then?
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article om>,
Woody Brison > wrote:
>On Aug 21, 5:07 pm, Festivus > wrote:
>
>> But I don't have any problem with allowing personal choice in any of
>> this. Motorcycle helmets, seat belts, whatever - once you hit 18, you
>> ought to be able to make your own call.
>
>If all individuals paid for their own hospitalization,
>that'd be fine, but we pay as a group. Insurance premiums
>and taxes. It makes sense to try to protect the group
>from excessive levies.

Once that principle is accepted it leads directly to totalitarianism
with no intervening qualitative distinctions.

Unless you're my insurer (not another policyholder, but the insurer
itself), you've got no business trying to restrict my activities. If
the government, the hospitals, or some other organization I did not
contract with to provide care offers to do so, I incur no obligations
-- particularly, no obligations to avoid activities which would result
in them providing care -- as a result.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article .com>,
Woody Brison > wrote:
>
>This is persuasive on the one hand, yet walking goes maybe
>5 mph and cycling goes around 15 to 20, more for serious
>riders. The energy goes up with the square of the velocity
>so an increase from 5 to 25 is an increase in kinetic
>energy of 25X. That's why. You're about as likely to hit
>a post riding as walking. Yet, I've seen people do it
>walking.

More likely to hit it walking, I'd wager, because people less often
pay attention to where they are going when walking than when cycling,
probably precisely because the consequences of hitting something while
walking are usually small.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.