I could be knocked unconscious regardless. Seat belt or no. I could die on impact. I could be squashed by two semi's. Seat belt isn't going to help too much there. And the health code thing is to protect you from unsanitary conditions which you are probably unaware of. If you eat at a place and you are fully aware that they don't wash their hands, properly handle the meats, or clean their kitchen, that's on you. It's the unknowingly that the health codes protect you from. Just as wearing a seat belt or not wearing it is me making the decision to take the risk. I know the potential dangers. It's my call. Not the governments. Don't lecture me on my belief system. Do you have any vices? Smoke? Drink? Eat red meat? Are you over weight? I'm willing to bet you do something that isn't helping your overall health. People do a lot of things that shorten their life span. My point is, once they reach a certain age they are allowed to make that decision. Like you said before, at 18 I can smoke if I so choose. At 21 I can buy and consume alcohol. The government determined an age at which we are adult enough to make our own decisions in regards to our bodies, why/how is this any different? How is beating your wife similar to abortion? We're talking about a person's right to choose what happens to their own bodies. Seriously, do you think abortion should be legal or not? And if you do, how in your opinion is it any different than forcing someone to protect their bodies? Also I'm curious if you are pro or against firearms, because that's another preventative measure that might save your life some day, but then again you might not ever need it either.
That doesn't make much sense. You know the potential dangers of eating in an unsanitary restaurant, too. You don't know which ones are unsanitary, just like you don't know which driver is going to run a red light and hit you. On Planet Libertarian, perhaps. Not here on earth. It's not. If you smoke or drink, the government taxes you. If you drive w/o a seatbelt, the government taxes you $109. Pick your poison. Nobody said you couldn't go right back out and drive without a seatbelt again tomorrow, did they? If you are willing to do the time, go ahead and do the crime. barfo
So you think bike riders should have to register their bikes? Even children? That's a little out there, but man if you're into giving the city more money you should go to the next city council meeting and voice you're opinion. They'll laugh your stupid ass out of the building. I do agree that some bikers take unnecessary risks, sometimes. Just like drivers do, everyday. The VAST majority of bike riders are very responsible, just like the VAST majority of drivers are.
The Sam Adams thing was a joke. I thought that was obvious to everybody but you. Kind of like you have become. A JOKE. You're really referencing OT posts on the main board now? Are you mentally OK? You quite being a mod, and you seem to be stalking me at this point.
There are designated bike lanes, and bicyclists should follow the rules of the road. No reason I can think of why they can't pay for their bike lanes. If that means I get laughed at, so be it.
Bike Lanes promote people feeling safer riding their bikes. The safer someone feels on the roads the more likely they'll choose to ride their bike to work over driving. Or ride their bike to the store, ect. Aren't you in favor of less cars on the road?
oh, btw...video about why a "rolling stop law" is a good idea...check it out. [video=youtube;84eB0N-LG6M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84eB0N-LG6M[/video]
Bike lanes cost money. Why can't bikers pay their share of paved roads? I don't care if people drive, bike, walk, or ride a horse.
So instead of Grant money, it should come out of our pockets? Including yours, because I bet you have a bike in your house, you freeloader!
Grant money does come out of your pockets if you don't work for the government. I already pay property taxes for roads, and gasoline taxes to repair the roads and make the bike lanes. Are you a freeloader? Is that why you're so upset?
lol, I must be. I'm not upset, chief. I'm trying to reason with you. Do you think bikes put wear the roads down like cars do? Because if they did, I'd be on board with you, but they don't. You should try bike commuting if you haven't already. Maybe shed that extra weight you've been trying to get rid of.
How about the 160 million they're spending on that bike bridge across the willamette? Where is that money coming from?
Looks like it's for MAX. Not in favor of anything related to MAX, personally. Energy Efficient buses>>>>MAX
