Anti-Helmet Protester Dies on Motorcycle Due to Lack of Helmet

[pppppppppppppppppp]

This happened just a few days days ago, apparently a group of motorcyclists were protesting helmet laws NYC that ticket you if you don't have a helmet on. They protested by riding in an organized group with no helmets and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/03/motorcyclist-dies-helmet-protest_n_889427.html
">one of them crashed and ended up dying.

Here's the kicker though:

"Troopers say Contos would have likely survived if he had been wearing a helmet."

So what do you guys think about this? Was he stupid and should have followed the law? Was he exercising his right as an American? Was this the most ironic death of the decade?

 

[Frostbite3789]

Darwin award I'd say. I mean, the dude was practically asking for it to happen.

 

[madwarper]

He should have been posthumously cited for not wearing a helmet.

 

[appleblush]

I don't believe there is any defined rights to stupidly disobey laws designed for the protection of the citizen and the people around them. The small minority of people who seem to think that "freedom" means "no laws at all" are the only people who think otherwise.

Also, not ironic. Because that's not what irony is.

 

[coryuk2]

I really don't know if I should laugh or cry I mean on the one hand that right there is natural selection at work but on the other hand its a dead man and another greiving family and my heart goes out to them

 

[Bags159]

We just had this thread yesterday. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.298322-Man-dies-protesting-helmet-law?page=1]

He was indeed exercising his right to be a moron.

 

[King Toasty]

This is, in fact, not irony.

I'm sorry but: "Irony (from the Ancient Greek &#949;&#7984;&#961;&#969;&#957;&#949;&#943;&#945; eir&#333;neía, meaning dissimulation or feigned ignorance) is a rhetorical device, literary technique, or situation in which there is a sharp incongruity or discordance that goes beyond the simple and evident intention of words or actions. Ironic statements (verbal irony) typically imply a meaning in opposition to their literal meaning. A situation is often said to be ironic (situational irony) if the actions taken have an effect exactly opposite from what was intended."

TL;DR: It's irony if the reaction is opposing to the intended action.

Wait, yes. It's irony. His actions were to show that helmets were unnecessary, but would have survived if he wore one.

Hm. Wikipedia proved me wrong.

 

[Iconsting]

It's called "Natural selection." The idiocy that would drive a man to bypass safety equipment and put himself in a precarious position doesn't have any place into our society. It's sad that it happened to the guy, but he honestly only had himself to blame.

 

[Lead Herring]

I'm surprised there was only one casualty. Motorcycles are dangerous enough with protective gear on, not wearing helmet is just asking for something like this to happen.

 

[RaNDM G]

Wow.

That's all I have to say about that.

 

[pppppppppppppppppp]

We just had this thread yesterday. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.298322-Man-dies-protesting-helmet-law?page=1]

My bad, don't check here often enough.

Also, not ironic. Because that's not what irony is.

"A situation is often said to be ironic if the actions taken have an effect exactly opposite from what was intended."

Intention of action by motorcyclist: prove that helmet laws are unnecessary by riding without one and not having any trouble.

Consequence of action: die in rally, thus demonstrating the necessity of helmet laws.

 

[Dense_Electric]

I don't believe there is any defined rights to stupidly disobey laws designed for the protection of the citizen and the people around them. The small minority of people who seem to think that "freedom" means "no laws at all" are the only people who think otherwise.

Tell me why exactly should a person have to obey a law that protects them? Oh, other people, sure, but why themselves? As far as I can see if someone wants to kill themselves that's really their own damn business.

Also, I think we're a bigger population than you realize.

 

[Saltyk]

I say the state should point him out when they try to tell people to wear helmets.

"There was a guy that protested wearing a helmet once. He's dead now because he didn't wear a helmet."

If you ask me, he got what he deserved. Maybe I'm evil, but whatever, I don't know him and can't feel sorry for dumb people being stupid. Sure, you have a right to be an idiot, but that doesn't mean I have to feel bad for you when your own bad decision screws you over. There's a reason it's a law to wear a helmet on a bike in so many places.

 

[King Toasty]

It's called "Natural selection." The idiocy that would drive a man to bypass safety equipment and put himself in a precarious position doesn't have any place into our society. It's sad that it happened to the guy, but he honestly only had himself to blame.

From Wiki, again: "Natural selection acts on the phenotype, or the observable characteristics of an organism, but the genetic (heritable) basis of any phenotype which gives a reproductive advantage will become more common in a population (see allele frequency). Over time, this process can result in adaptations that specialize populations for particular ecological niches and may eventually result in the emergence of new species. In other words, natural selection is an important process (though not the only process) by which evolution takes place within a population of organisms. As opposed to artificial selection, in which humans favor specific traits, in natural selection the environment acts as a sieve through which only certain variations can pass."

TL;DR Natural selection is basically bad genes not surviving to reproduce. Genes have little to do with decisions like these.

Although, you could argue natural selection is simply surviving/not surviving to reproduction. If so, you're right.


I like being right. It's a flaw. ;~;

 

[Bags159]

I don't believe there is any defined rights to stupidly disobey laws designed for the protection of the citizen and the people around them. The small minority of people who seem to think that "freedom" means "no laws at all" are the only people who think otherwise.

Tell me why exactly should a person have to obey a law that protects them? Oh, other people, sure, but why themselves? As far as I can see if someone wants to kill themselves that's really their own damn business.

Also, I think we're a bigger population than you realize.

Hospital bills (paramedics) and it costs money to clean your body off of the road. I'm sure if not wearing your helmet literally only affected you there would not be a law against it.

 

[unicron44]

First glance I thought he hated the band helmet. But yeah I saw the topic yesterday but didn't read it. How ironic, where are the hipsters when you need them most.

 

[appleblush]

I don't believe there is any defined rights to stupidly disobey laws designed for the protection of the citizen and the people around them. The small minority of people who seem to think that "freedom" means "no laws at all" are the only people who think otherwise.

Tell me why exactly should a person have to obey a law that protects them? Oh, other people, sure, but why themselves? As far as I can see if someone wants to kill themselves that's really their own damn business.

Also, I think we're a bigger population than you realize.

Not wearing a helmet means hundreds more dollars in investigations, emergency vehicle costs, and public service clean up which comes out of the pockets of tax-payers so in effect it does harm other people.

 

[Iconsting]

-Snip-

One could also argue that lack of common sense and rebellious urges are genetic qualities.

 

[King Toasty]

I don't believe there is any defined rights to stupidly disobey laws designed for the protection of the citizen and the people around them. The small minority of people who seem to think that "freedom" means "no laws at all" are the only people who think otherwise.

Tell me why exactly should a person have to obey a law that protects them? Oh, other people, sure, but why themselves? As far as I can see if someone wants to kill themselves that's really their own damn business.

Also, I think we're a bigger population than you realize.

Hospital bills, undue hardship on your family, not to mention it costs money to clean your body off of the road. I'm sure if not wearing your helmet literally only affected you there would not be a law against it.

Yeah, if you have a socialized heath care system like Canada (or even America, to an extent), then the public is paying for your stupidity. Unless you refuse hospital service.

 

[AmbitiousWorm]

HA!

I don't really like the fact that the government is telling us to put on helmets and such. A bit too babysitting nation for my liking (I'm Canadian, you can get a ticket if you don't have a bicycle helmet on).

But if you crash and crack your head open and spend the rest of your life doing an impression of a cucumber I don't want my tax dollars to go to your hospital bill.

If you are stupid enough to ride a motorbike without a helmet you shouldn't be allowed to ride one.