You might want to stop being condescending to anyone who calls you out on your comments.

You posted about freedom, saving money, reducing inconvenience on the roadway for others when an accident happens ... anything except committing to an actual yes/no opinion.

Adults weigh the options, look at the facts, and make a decision based on objective criteria, not "I don't want to sit in traffic if someone isn't wearing a helmet."  That's about as self-centered and unempathetic as i can imagine anyone being.

Have you ever owned and/or operated a motorcycle with an engine that's at least 250cc?

Do you have a motorcycle endorsement on your driver's license?

Have you taken a motorcycle safety course?

The reason I ask those questions is because i don't think you're taking this issue seriously at all.

I await your yes/no answers to the above.  For once, you don't have to ask Google for the answers.

If CMO had actually called me out on one of my comments with something of substance I wouldn't have been condescending, but that's not what he did. He didn't take one side or the other, he didn't even bring into question any fact or opinion I made, he just started in with an insult. Remember my style, tit for tat.

Is there anything wrong with not picking one side or the other? Is there anything wrong with appreciating the strengths of the arguments on both sides of the issue?

Funny how you try to flip my argument about not backing up traffic for half the island for 4 hours to it somehow being about me not liking traffic. Maybe try a little more honest arguing here than having to strawman a point I made. Only you could turn an argument considering your fellow residents into a self centered one. But lets go with the self centered one, you are having a serious medical issue and are on your way to the hospital but because someone died due to a selfish decision to not wear a helmet now you may suffer actual harm as well.

I owned two bikes, a 600cc and a 650cc. I rode them daily, rain or shine, over the mountains and on the freeways. I took a motorcycle safety course as well. I always wore a helmet except for the rare occasion I had a passenger and then I gave them the helmet to wear.

If CMO had actually called me out on one of my comments with something of substance I wouldn't have been condescending, but that's not what he did. He didn't take one side or the other, he didn't even bring into question any fact or opinion I made, he just started in with an insult. Remember my style, tit for tat.

SWOOOSSSHHHH many days later. hahahahhahahahha.Everytime u come back, it's very entertaining.

If CMO had actually called me out on one of my comments with something of substance I wouldn't have been condescending, but that's not what he did. He didn't take one side or the other, he didn't even bring into question any fact or opinion I made, he just started in with an insult. Remember my style, tit for tat.

Is there anything wrong with not picking one side or the other? Is there anything wrong with appreciating the strengths of the arguments on both sides of the issue?

Funny how you try to flip my argument about not backing up traffic for half the island for 4 hours to it somehow being about me not liking traffic. Maybe try a little more honest arguing here than having to strawman a point I made. Only you could turn an argument considering your fellow residents into a self centered one. But lets go with the self centered one, you are having a serious medical issue and are on your way to the hospital but because someone died due to a selfish decision to not wear a helmet now you may suffer actual harm as well.

I owned two bikes, a 600cc and a 650cc. I rode them daily, rain or shine, over the mountains and on the freeways. I took a motorcycle safety course as well. I always wore a helmet except for the rare occasion I had a passenger and then I gave them the helmet to wear.

I assume you didn't live in Hawaii when you rode.  Otherwise, you'd have been hypocritically not wearing a helmet when you had a backseat passenger.

It's all definitive until you are inconvenienced by needing 2 helmets.  Then, risking backing up traffic in the event of your death is fine, since you won't be there to suffer in the gridlock you created.

If there had been a helmet law where you rode, would you have ignored the law and gone without a helmet when you had a passenger?

Whenever I rode, if I knew I might need a second helmet, I strapped it to my rear rack.  I had a helmet lock for when the bike was parked. 

When I was dating, I left a helmet with my girlfriend to use when I picked her up in case I forgot or didn't have time to go to my place on the way to hers.

Hawaii is the only state I ever lived in where helmets are not mandatory.  However, I always wore one because I needed to have one while on any military base.  Since I worked at Hickam, Pearl Harbor, Makalapa, and Camp Smith, and i routinely had to visit pretty much every installation on Oahu, it was a given I would need a helmet.

After awhile, it becomes more habit than choice. With more check marks in the "helmet benefits " column than the "bare head benefits" column, it really came down to whether I accept or reject common sense.

My first bike was a 650cc Special II from Yamaha. Next was a 700cc Honda Saber.  Last was an 1100cc Honda VT1100C2 Shadow ACE (American Classic Edition).

I still have the MC endorsement on my HI license.

SWOOOSSSHHHH many days later. hahahahhahahahha.Everytime u come back, it's very entertaining.

You are very easily entertained. Do you sniff your own turds as well?

I assume you didn't live in Hawaii when you rode.  Otherwise, you'd have been hypocritically not wearing a helmet when you had a backseat passenger.

It's all definitive until you are inconvenienced by needing 2 helmets.  Then, risking backing up traffic in the event of your death is fine, since you won't be there to suffer in the gridlock you created.

If there had been a helmet law where you rode, would you have ignored the law and gone without a helmet when you had a passenger?

Whenever I rode, if I knew I might need a second helmet, I strapped it to my rear rack.  I had a helmet lock for when the bike was parked. 

When I was dating, I left a helmet with my girlfriend to use when I picked her up in case I forgot or didn't have time to go to my place on the way to hers.

Hawaii is the only state I ever lived in where helmets are not mandatory.  However, I always wore one because I needed to have one while on any military base.  Since I worked at Hickam, Pearl Harbor, Makalapa, and Camp Smith, and i routinely had to visit pretty much every installation on Oahu, it was a given I would need a helmet.

After awhile, it becomes more habit than choice. With more check marks in the "helmet benefits " column than the "bare head benefits" column, it really came down to whether I accept or reject common sense.

My first bike was a 650cc Special II from Yamaha. Next was a 700cc Honda Saber.  Last was an 1100cc Honda VT1100C2 Shadow ACE (American Classic Edition).

I still have the MC endorsement on my HI license.

No, I was in Hawaii all the times I rode.

I gave my helmet to my passenger because I didn't usually carry around two helmets and since I was in control of the bike I had a better chance of anticipating a crash and reacting than the passenger so I gave them the helmet to give them an increased chance of survival. Plus it is simple chivalry. If I knew I was going to give someone a ride I always brought a second helmet. When I didn't have a second helmet the ride was short and on surface streets. I think maybe 2-3 times I gave my helmet to a passenger and it was driving someone to their car on the UH college campus.

No, I was in Hawaii all the times I rode.

I gave my helmet to my passenger because I didn't usually carry around two helmets and since I was in control of the bike I had a better chance of anticipating a crash and reacting than the passenger so I gave them the helmet to give them an increased chance of survival. Plus it is simple chivalry. If I knew I was going to give someone a ride I always brought a second helmet. When I didn't have a second helmet the ride was short and on surface streets. I think maybe 2-3 times I gave my helmet to a passenger and it was driving someone to their car on the UH college campus.

You didn't answer the question I asked.  What does being in HI have to do with what I asked?

"If there had been a helmet law where you rode, would you have ignored the law and gone without a helmet when you had a passenger?"

Do you have dyslexia?  Some other physical or mental defect?  Just wondering if your lack of reading skills is immutable, or if you're just lazy.

You didn't answer the question I asked.  What does being in HI have to do with what I asked?

"If there had been a helmet law where you rode, would you have ignored the law and gone without a helmet when you had a passenger?"

Do you have dyslexia?  Some other physical or mental defect?  Just wondering if your lack of reading skills is immutable, or if you're just lazy.

You said you assumed I wasn't in Hawaii, so I corrected your false assumption. Why do you then question it's relevance?

Would I have ignored the law? In limited situations such as the one I mentioned yeah, probably. Guess what else I did on a motorcycle.... I rode over the speed limit a few times too. Are you going to then imply if I speed even once I cannot recognize the need for speed enforcement?

Do you start fights with everyone in this way for fun or do you lack the ability to have a non-confrontational discussion about the pros and cons of helmets? You can't even seen to recognize the benefit of wearing a helmet has for the rest of society irrespective of whether you support the law or not. On the plus side, you managed to remain civil till page 2, quite the record for you.

You said you assumed I wasn't in Hawaii, so I corrected your false assumption. Why do you then question it's relevance?

Would I have ignored the law? In limited situations such as the one I mentioned yeah, probably. Guess what else I did on a motorcycle.... I rode over the speed limit a few times too. Are you going to then imply if I speed even once I cannot recognize the need for speed enforcement?

Do you start fights with everyone in this way for fun or do you lack the ability to have a non-confrontational discussion about the pros and cons of helmets? You can't even seen to recognize the benefit of wearing a helmet has for the rest of society irrespective of whether you support the law or not. On the plus side, you managed to remain civil till page 2, quite the record for you.

I don't consider this a fight.  If you do, then that's an admission you are unable to hold up your end of the discussion without a LOT more effort than I require.

I never considered facing a 2 MPH breeze "fighting the wind."  I guess you feel like my responses are the equivalent of a hurricane!   

As for your answer, you admit that you won't wear a mandatory helmet if you can rationalize a reason not to.  So much for the safety argument for wearing a helmet.  If you crash that one time you choose to break the helmet law, you are now the dumbass who's tying up traffic and costing people money.  Hypocritical.   

I don't consider this a fight.  If you do, then that's an admission you are unable to hold up your end of the discussion without a LOT more effort than I require.
I never considered facing a 2 MPH breeze "fighting the wind."  I guess you feel like my responses are the equivalent of a hurricane!   

That maturity of yours vanished amazingly quickly.

As for your answer, you admit that you won't wear a mandatory helmet if you can rationalize a reason not to.  So much for the safety argument for wearing a helmet.  If you crash that one time you choose to break the helmet law, you are now the dumbass who's tying up traffic and costing people money.  Hypocritical.   

My saying I would drive a passenger around campus doing 15mph doesn't invalidate an argument for wearing helmets while doing 60mph on a freeway.
You do yoga by chance? You sure are good at stretching logic.

You can't even defeat the argument that a helmet law would serve the social good, you can only try to find an example of when I would have disobeyed, thereby making it a personal attack against me to distract from your lack of rebuttal of the argument I put forth.

That maturity of yours vanished amazingly quickly.


My saying I would drive a passenger around campus doing 15mph doesn't invalidate an argument for wearing helmets while doing 60mph on a freeway.
You do yoga by chance? You sure are good at stretching logic.

You can't even defeat the argument that a helmet law would serve the social good, you can only try to find an example of when I would have disobeyed, thereby making it a personal attack against me to distract from your lack of rebuttal of the argument I put forth.

so, instead of an answer that follows my reasoning, you create an example of only doing 15mph on campus (not what I asked), and then play the helpless victim claiming I'm attacking you personally and not your lame, illogical ideas and words.

Typical.

so, instead of an answer that follows my reasoning, you create an example of only doing 15mph on campus (not what I asked), and then play the helpless victim claiming I'm attacking you personally and not your lame, illogical ideas and words.

Typical.

Again, you still didn't rebut the point I made, you act as if someone not following a traffic rule once justifies not having the traffic rule. Admit it, you can't refute the fact that motorcyclists wearing helmets is in the interest of the community.

Again, you still didn't rebut the point I made, you act as if someone not following a traffic rule once justifies not having the traffic rule. Admit it, you can't refute the fact that motorcyclists wearing helmets is in the interest of the community.

"you act as if" -- not factual, just your feeling.

Again, you still didn't rebut the point I made, you act as if someone not following a traffic rule once justifies not having the traffic rule. Admit it, you can't refute the fact that motorcyclists wearing helmets is in the interest of the community.

You sound like our anti 2a politicians and "best interest".  Once can make up anything and find a "best interest".  Lets ban forks, this will cause people to eat slower and thus reducing choking and overeating.  Thus it's in the interest of the community as a choking person won't need medical attention and an ambulance wont' hold up traffic when parked outside their home.

"you act as if" -- not factual, just your feeling.

This is an ideological argument, not some statistics based case. You didn't make any fact based arguments either. I pointed out the pros and cons and you just can't help but argue, ignoring a particular pro of helmet laws. I can certainly show you data showing helmets increase your likelihood of surviving a motorcycle crash if you like but so far all you tried to do was make my argument of not screwing up traffic for everyone into a personal dislike of traffic.

You sound like our anti 2a politicians and "best interest".  Once can make up anything and find a "best interest".  Lets ban forks, this will cause people to eat slower and thus reducing choking and overeating.  Thus it's in the interest of the community as a choking person won't need medical attention and an ambulance wont' hold up traffic when parked outside their home.

If you read everything I posted you will see that I never said we should have a helmet law, I only acknowledged the pros of a helmet law.

"best interest of the community" applies to lots of things, excessive noise, limits on street parking, burning trash in your back yard, banning drunk driving, etc etc etc.

If you read everything I posted you will see that I never said we should have a helmet law, I only acknowledged the pros of a helmet law.

"best interest of the community" applies to lots of things, excessive noise, limits on street parking, burning trash in your back yard, banning drunk driving, etc etc etc.

Did I say that you said that?  Are you begining to imagine things again?  You've been better recently.

"best interest" can be used for anything, like I posted about already.  You're not stating anything new.

If you read everything I posted you will see that I never said we should have a helmet law, I only acknowledged the pros of a helmet law.

"best interest of the community" applies to lots of things, excessive noise, limits on street parking, burning trash in your back yard, banning drunk driving, etc etc etc.

Did I say that you said that?  Are you begining to imagine things again?  You've been better recently.

"best interest" can be used for anything, like I posted about already.  You're not stating anything new.

He also never said we should not have helmet laws.

This is his MO:   (1) don't commit to either side;  (2) lecture in favor of on the side that's opposite what the majority thinks -- state why it's wrong to be on the majority                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              side; (3) argue no matter which side someone you're arguing with takes.

Simple

He also never said we should not have helmet laws.

This is his MO:   (1) don't commit to either side;  (2) lecture in favor of on the side that's opposite what the majority thinks -- state why it's wrong to be on the majority                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              side; (3) argue no matter which side someone you're arguing with takes.

Simple

You left out

Optional: Add in things that didn't happen.

You left out

Optional: Add in things that didn't happen.

That's not left out.  His lectures and arguments include that and much, much more including moving goal posts, reframing the topic to suit his argument, analogies that are totally irrelevant, lack off credible sources to back up his "facts", and so on.

I just didn't spend time listing them all individually.

Did I say that you said that?  Are you begining to imagine things again?  You've been better recently.

I didn't say you said that. Are you beginning to imagine things again?

"best interest" can be used for anything, like I posted about already.  You're not stating anything new.

In otherwords you recognize the weakness of your argument