Vanagon EuroVan
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (September 2003, week 4)Back to main VANAGON pageJoin or leave VANAGON (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Wed, 24 Sep 2003 22:04:52 -0700
Reply-To:     Mike Miller <mwmiller@CWNET.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Mike Miller <mwmiller@CWNET.COM>
Subject:      Re: Am stuck in a wheel chair :
Comments: To: Tom Young <tomyoung1@COMCAST.NET>
In-Reply-To:  <001701c3831a$f4bcad20$9700a8c0@attbi.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

OK, just anecdotal evidence but the ER nurses and doctors at Stanford and a local Sacramento hospital say they're getting fewer fatalities from motorcycle accidents since the helmet law went in in CA. But many more major spinal injuries, usually the base of the neck which means total paralysis many times.

Dead is cheaper in this case, if it's true.

Mike

On 9/24/03 9:10 PM, "Tom Young" <tomyoung1@COMCAST.NET> wrote:

> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stephen Overmyer" <s.overmyer@UWS.EDU.AU> > To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM> > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:08 PM > Subject: Re: Am stuck in a wheel chair : > > >> At 04:35 PM 24/09/2003 -0400, you wrote: > >> When mandatory helmet laws were introduced in Australia (and indeed >> seatbelt laws too) the motivation was more about keeping the cost of >> post-accident medical costs down,pressured by insurance companies. >> Afterall,they only like taking our money,not giving it back. >> >> Prime motivation was cost saving,not regulating our activities or > freedoms >> although I conceed,that's been a by-product. > > In the U.S. one of the stated motivations for these laws was that it would > reduce the cost to the Government (Federal or State) for the medical care > involved in treating people involved in accidents who weren't wearing a > seatbelt or a helmet. Just an example of how any for of Socialism > inevitably results in a reduction of personal freedom; for the "greater > good" personal liberties are curtailed. As for private insurers, the issue > should be fairly trivial; victims who aren't wearing seatbelts or helmets > would receive greatly reduced post-accident benefits. Only...... that's > not possible because of the high degree of regulation (disguised as > "consumer protection") that exists. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Tom Young '81 Vanagon > Lafayette, CA 94549 '82 Westfalia > --------------------------------------------------------------- > >


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main VANAGON page

Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!


Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com


The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.

Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.