Protective Clothing

[dex]

It's true - I'm smoking like a chimney right now just to try and help you maniacs who won't wear the right riding gear!

[Guest]

I'm probably in the minority Mike but I'd be happy to take out private health care..because I've made a lifestyle choice and I am happy to take responsibility for my actions.

 

You shouldn't have too.

Lot's of people make dangerous lifestyle choices.

As I pointed out on another thread.

Smokers cost the tax payer £1.5 billion a year for health services.

What is always conveniently omitted is the fact that the Government collect £8.5 billion a year in revenue from tobacco products.

Yeah I hear wot ur saying but if I came off my bike and needed a life saving operation...that costs the health service money...and probably at the expense of things like new cancer drugs etc... I'm constantly hearing or reading articles which seem to say that the NHS can't afford to introduce life-saving medication because of their cost. Kind of makes me think...if you take risky life choices maybe you should pay for them rather than taking away the opportunity for someone else to live, which is not due to their life style choice.

I'm aware that this probably isn't a view shared by many.

[Guest]

Kind of makes me think...if you take risky life choices maybe you should pay for them rather than taking away the opportunity for someone else to live, which is not due to their life style choice.

I'm aware that this probably isn't a view shared by many.

 

Admirable sentiment, but at the end of the day, we all pay for our NHS service and are entitled to it, regardless of the reasons we need it.

Next we'll be saying, that car driver who needs a life saving operation.

Let's investigate to see if his journey was absolutely necessary.

Maybe he could have used a bus, and so on.

Outside of work, virtually everything we do is a lifestyle choice.

Some are more dangerous than others but at the end of the day, we cannot be denied treatment.

There are other reasons the NHS is in dire straights at the moment.

One of them, for example is that we allow foreign NHS tourists who have never contributed a penny towards it, to claim treatment.

Oh no.

Better not get started on that one.

[Guest]

There are other reasons the NHS is in dire straights at the moment.

One of them, for example is that we allow foreign NHS tourists who have never contributed a penny towards it, to claim treatment.

Oh no.

Better not get started on that one.

 

LOL yeah best not...although I'm sure you wudn't be a lone voice.

[Guest]

Actaully Mike I will often chat to riders about their choice of riding gear, and why shouldnt I? Most of all I am genuinly intersetd as to why they make the choices they do. everyones idea of the correct level of protection is different and I know people may think what i wear sometimes is innapropriate, but I would happily chat to them about the choices I make.

 

But at the end of the day, what business is it of yours.

It's their safety.

It's not affecting you in any way.

I have this image of you at bike meets, clipboard in hand seeking out in appropriately dressed riders to interview, like you're on some sort of mission to convert people.

As I said.

You can't stand up for a persons right to not wear full protective gear, and then in the same breath condemn them for doing just that.

That's just a complete contradiction.

It's a bit like saying that it's irresponsible to do 70mph in a built up area, and then saying there shouldn't be a law to prevent people doing it.

[techno]

I'm probably in the minority Mike but I'd be happy to take out private health care..because I've made a lifestyle choice and I am happy to take responsibility for my actions.

 

You shouldn't have too.

Lot's of people make dangerous lifestyle choices.

As I pointed out on another thread.

Smokers cost the tax payer £1.5 billion a year for health services.

What is always conveniently omitted is the fact that the Government collect £8.5 billion a year in revenue from tobacco products.

Yeah I hear wot ur saying but if I came off my bike and needed a life saving operation...that costs the health service money...and probably at the expense of things like new cancer drugs etc... I'm constantly hearing or reading articles which seem to say that the NHS can't afford to introduce life-saving medication because of their cost. Kind of makes me think...if you take risky life choices maybe you should pay for them rather than taking away the opportunity for someone else to live, which is not due to their life style choice.

I'm aware that this probably isn't a view shared by many.

 

Sheesh lets not do anything, were all hearing about people having accidents with trousers lol theres risks in all things we do , afterall we all set fire to gas in an enclosed space on a regular basis!

I pay my taxes and expect to get a service when I need it no matter what i do!

While ever the government is wasting money on creating shit jobs in all walks of life and in the NHS itself then am sorry if get hurt bloody fix me!!!!

[Guest akey]

Actaully Mike I will often chat to riders about their choice of riding gear, and why shouldnt I? Most of all I am genuinly intersetd as to why they make the choices they do. everyones idea of the correct level of protection is different and I know people may think what i wear sometimes is innapropriate, but I would happily chat to them about the choices I make.

 

But at the end of the day, what business is it of yours.

It's their safety.

It's not affecting you in any way.

I have this image of you at bike meets, clipboard in hand seeking out in appropriately dressed riders to interview, like you're on some sort of mission to convert people.

As I said.

You can't stand up for a persons right to not wear full protective gear, and then in the same breath condemn them for doing just that.

That's just a complete contradiction.

It's a bit like saying that it's irresponsible to do 70mph in a built up area, and then saying there shouldn't be a law to prevent people doing it.

 

Mike you just dont get it do you, I DO NOT LECTURE POPLE, yes I am interested in their choices. I'm glad you seem to misread my post to make them fit into your opinion of me.

You are right i have no right to talk to other people, I have no right to form opinions of other people but guess what I am human and do so. You seem to form opinions of me by reading my words so I dont see why I cant form an initial opinion of someone by the choices they make.

I remain to be convinced that this is duplicitous, I think that its daft to ride a bike in shorts and flip flops, but I do not want to see it outlawed, my god imagine if there was a law for everything someone concidered stupid FFS.

I do not force my opinoions on others at any time, I may talk to people but then I am a pretty rounded human being and can deal with social engagment! I often talk to people about their choice of bike, their choice of kit and many other things - it called discussion.

Oh and on your speeding point, its not illegal to ride at 70 mph over a rouged up field (if you have permission to do so) but I would suggest its stupid, its not illegal to ride at 70 mph on dual carrigeway in the snow, but I would sugest its not the most intelligent thing you can do.

I wish to remain free to make my own decisions and to be able to form opinions of others, at least initial ones and then improve that opinion thorugh dialogue. I do not condem people for the kit they ride in, but I am always interested in why they make that choice, and will remain so. I will also have my personalopinions of that. Mind you I supose you have never formed an opinion of someone because of how they look, dress, what bike they ride or what capbadge they wear or wore have you?

[Guest]

Mike you just dont get it do you, I DO NOT LECTURE POPLE, yes I am interested in their choices. I'm glad you seem to misread my post to make them fit into your opinion of me.

 

 

On a mountain I will always try to educate people as to why they should wear appropriate cloting as I would on a river (as a kayak coach).

[Guest akey]

Yep thats right, educate, talk to, engage with and discuss

All of these are far from lecturing people.

Most on here know I love a lively debate about most things, shame you have run out of ideas and are trying to use my posts against me

[Guest]

Yep thats right, educate, talk to, engage with and discuss

All of these are far from lecturing people.

Most on here know I love a lively debate about most things, shame you have run out of ideas and are trying to use my posts against me

 

Not at all.

You said you don't lecture people.

Lecturing and educating amount to pretty much the same thing.

As I said, it's the individuals choice at the end of the day.

You've agreed that people should be free to dress as they like on a bike without oppressive laws.

So again I ask.

Why are we so critical about people simply excersizing their right to the very choices we are in favour of.

[Guest akey]

Simple and now I see your view.

Lecturing to me implies a very different attitude to education and discussion, a lecture is a one way process the others are 2 way.

When people to not meet our personal standards we will critisize them, does not mean it should be mandated. Social nature, we all do it, while we may not vervalise we do all do it - I wouldnt wear that on that bike etc.

However I have and will continue to fight for people to have freedom of choice, who am I to dictate what people should wear, I have opinions but that is what they are, what you are clearly saying is that opinion should be progressed to dictation, this is far to black and white.

the easiest way to put this is that the law dictates, we as a social group have formed social norms as to what we believe people should wear this is over and above the law and we as a social group (generally) would not wish the law to be changed.

the difference you fail to see, or dont want to see is that between opinion or social norms and dictated minimum measures, they are different and there is no need for them to be convergant.

[dex]

You can't stand up for a persons right to not wear full protective gear, and then in the same breath condemn them for doing just that.

That's just a complete contradiction.

It's a bit like saying that it's irresponsible to do 70mph in a built up area, and then saying there shouldn't be a law to prevent people doing it.

 

No it's not. It's not even a little bit like saying that.

70mph in built up area - likely to cause increased risk to others.

No gloves/boots/jacket - increased risk to rider.

Completely different.

As I understand it Akey is saying that where someone's personal choices don't affect others, but may be unwise, they may benefit from education rather than legislation.

[Netmeister]

You can't stand up for a persons right to not wear full protective gear, and then in the same breath condemn them for doing just that.

That's just a complete contradiction.

 

Yes you can, because they're two totally different things. One is someones RIGHTS, the other is disagreeing with someones CHOICE.

And it's not a contradiction at all. A contradiction is me saying that someone should wear protective clothing, then not wearing it myself.

[Guest]

Yes you can, because they're two totally different things. One is someones RIGHTS, the other is disagreeing with someones CHOICE.

But you and several others are saying that it is totally irresponsible and stupid not to wear protective clothing on a bike whilst at the same time standing up for the individuals right to do just that.

I assume that if a law were passed making PT compulsory, you would be posting on here to say what an outrage it is that people have had the right to be irresponsible, taken away from them.

That's a complete contradiction.

No it's not. It's not even a little bit like saying that.

70mph in built up area - likely to cause increased risk to others.

No gloves/boots/jacket - increased risk to rider.

Let me put it another way.

There are laws in place to protect drivers and riders.

Helmets and seatbelts for example.

For arguments sake, let's say we're back in the 60's and these new laws have been suggested but are not actually in force.

Would you be suggesting that these laws infringed on personal liberty, or would you say they are a good thing that should be enforced.

Akey, you're post is far to long too point by point but I will pick up on one thing.

When people to not meet our personal standards we will critisize them, does not mean it should be mandated. Social nature, we all do it, while we may not vervalise we do all do it - I wouldnt wear that on that bike etc.

There is a big difference between being critical, and making observations.

I may think, i wouldn't wear that on a bike.

I might also think, I wouldn't jump off a bridge and plummet to the ground attached to a giant rubber band.

It maybe safe, but there's a hell of a lot more risk involved than staying on the bridge with feet firmly planded on the ground.

It's not being critical at all.

Just because a person does not understand someone's choices, does not mean that they are being critical by default.

I don't believe I am so arrogant as to criticise a person for meeting "my personal standards"

You maybe, but can you, hand on heart say that there is nothing in life that you do, or have ever done, that involves un necessary risk.

It's part of being human.

We are risk takers by nature.

The fact that we have chosen such a dangerous form of transport in the first place is illustration of that.

As I have said.

Biking is significantly more dangerous than any other from of road transport, even with protective gear.

Am I stupid and irresponsible if I take the bike out, with all it's vulnerability issues, instead of my much safer car ?

It does after all, have air bags, impact protection and a nice steel safety cage.

What's between me and the road on my bike ?

1.5mm of leather and a few plastic coated polysterene pads.

Hardly the same, but despite knowing that a small impact that would cause nothing more than a dent in my car, could cause serious injury or even death on my bike, I still choose the bike, and sod anyone who seeks to lecture / educate me ont on the risks I'm taking.

I'm a grown up.

I know what I'm doing and don't need telling thankyou.

[Guest akey]

Mike, yet again you read my post but you dont seem to comprehend what I am actually saying. I am pretty much agreeing with on on the points you make above.

I discuss and chat with other bikers, I am genuinly interested in their choices. I do not walk up to them and say 'oi mate you must be an idiot for wearing that' I may think it but like you I dont verbalise it. I have been saying this all along.

As you point out, I have done, and continue to take avoidable risks, and as you say this is human nature.

In discussion with bikers I will often say I wouldn't wear that on a bike because xxxxxxxxxxx, but thats their choice, but then people used to take the pee out of me for wearing full leathers, but at that time it was my choice to do so.

I think we have been violently agreeing on many points!

[Guest]

In discussion with bikers I will often say I wouldn't wear that on a bike because xxxxxxxxxxx,

I!

 

Would you ?

Personally I wouldn't because I wouldn't consider it any of my business.

I'm just trying to visualise the scenario

Hello Mate - Nice Bike

Cheers.

Had it long

Yeah about three years

Oh nice one, by the way you're wearing shorts on your bike

Personally I wouldn't

Far too dangerous.

Don't you see how that comes across.

You might not think you're being judgemental, but it sure as hell looks that way.

[Guest]

Yeah - Bloody trouble maker that Akey!

He often pops over to Afghanistan and look what happened there!

[Guest akey]

Yes really I do talk to other riders about kit, theres and mine, although I dont push the subject.

As we naturally get chatting about all sorts of things I will comment on their kit if it comes up naturally. I didnt intend my posts to come accross as if I walked round bike meets starting a conversation with 'i cant believe you wear that on a bike' what sort a chump would that make me.

I suppose its more if it comes up or if we are chatting about kit I will always air my views, I'm not the sort of person to not say what I think, so if we are talking about kit and someone says well I always wear shorts and tee when its hot, then I will say 'I wouldnt wear that it would scare me in case I came off'.

Trust me I'm really a nice guy lol

[Netmeister]

But you and several others are saying that it is totally irresponsible and stupid not to wear protective clothing on a bike whilst at the same time standing up for the individuals right to do just that.

 

So if someone wanted to play on the fruit machine at the pub, but due to religious reasons you don't agree with gambling as you think it would send them to hell, would you FORCE them not to play it in an attempt to save them?

[Guest]

As I have no religious affiliations, I cannot answer that question.

[Netmeister]

But do you see where I'm coming from? It's the exact same thing.

[Guest]

But do you see where I'm coming from?

 

Frankly no, but I'd love to have some of whatever it is you're on.

[Netmeister]

My mind is totally made up now. This dude is an out and out troll.

[Guest]

My mind is totally made up now. This dude is an out and out troll.

 

Think of me as you like.

I can't answer questions that just don't make any sense

[Netmeister]

Ok I'll try and give you the benefit of the doubt.

If you didn't agree with someone gambling, would you force them to stop as you think you are doing them a favour?