New Helmet Law Passed

[Unregistered user]

Originally Posted by 270person

Terrible argument as most diet challenged and mega couch-surfing individuals aren't being propelled by a gasoline engine when they cash in their chips and risking the lives of others.

I'm also pretty sure even the extreme sports indulgers are smart enough to wear helmets when so involved.

Sometimes you just have to protect stupid ya know. Like making the wearing of seatbelts mandatory when in a moving automobile. I remember the same great hullaballoo from the freedom fighters back then too. Even though they were proven to save lives. "But waaaa. what if I drive into a lake and can't free myself? Waaa". I have the right to make my own decisions" Waaa.

The point being discussed was socialised medicine and how governments can with the help of useful idiots use this as an excuse to control every aspect of your life. I commute year round on a bicycle. According to the insurance companies' actuary tables this is a very risky activity with a high rate of fatality. Should l stop so that you can save a dollar?

[genoel]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

when does freedom to not wear a helmet trump another persons freedom to not pay a portion of the first person's emergency transport and medical bills for a serious head trauma?

X1000
It is absolutely astounding how many people will go out of their way to make the point about their right or freedom to do stupid things which could potentially have devastating effects on themselves and those around them.
And to blame the government, be it the current one or the prior one which had also been working towards this for years, for begging them, encouraging them and eventually legislating them, to hopefully force them not to do stupid things, is absurd.
People felt and some still feel the same way about being legally required to wear seat belts, but I don't see any long term studies showing that was a bad idea. If there were any such studies the government would pass a law saying you shouldn't wear one.
Perhaps, without helmets, they are less likely to pass on their genetic profiles to future generations. Sadly, many all ready have.
BE SAFE OUT THERE, HELMET OR NO HELMET, IT'S YOUR HEAD! GN

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by genoel

X1000
It is absolutely astounding how many people will go out of their way to make the point about their right or freedom to do stupid things which could potentially have devastating effects on themselves and those around them.
And to blame the government, be it the current one or the prior one which had also been working towards this for years, for begging them, encouraging them and eventually legislating them, to hopefully force them not to do stupid things, is absurd.
People felt and some still feel the same way about being legally required to wear seat belts, but I don't see any long term studies showing that was a bad idea. If there were any such studies the government would pass a law saying you shouldn't wear one.
Perhaps, without helmets, they are less likely to pass on their genetic profiles to future generations. Sadly, many all ready have.
BE SAFE OUT THERE, HELMET OR NO HELMET, IT'S YOUR HEAD! GN

It is absolutely astounding how many out there will go out of their way to support the government's illogical assault on freedom. Now before you get your panties in a knot, I think anyone who doesn't wear a helmet when ripping down a trail is an idiot. But if you need the government to tell you that, you are a bigger idiot. What you pro-helmet-law people need to do is look into the leading cause of death in this province, and realize that with your logic, there are a lot more laws coming down the road. Prepare to wear a helmet while driving your car. Prepare to see fast food joints disappear. Prepare to see smoking outlawed. Prepare to see firearms banned. Prepare to see bubble wrap suits a lot more than you do now. There are so many other risky behaviors that cost the taxpayer a whole lot more, but yet nothing is done about them.

And if you believe that with this law the government has safety in mind, why do they exempt certain people based on the colour of their skin, or who they pray to? Or are they secretly hoping that these people who are exempt take care of themselves through natural selection?

And if you want to argue about seat belts, same arguments. If you don't wear one, you are an idiot. If you need the government to tell you to wear one...

[270person]

Originally Posted by Unregistered user

The point being discussed was socialised medicine and how governments can with the help of useful idiots use this as an excuse to control every aspect of your life. I commute year round on a bicycle. According to the insurance companies' actuary tables this is a very risky activity with a high rate of fatality. Should l stop so that you can save a dollar?

Nope. Just make sure to wear your helmet. It might save your life or prevent me from having to fork out coin to help mend your freedom to do whatever I want butt.

Be careful too. The drivers around you are idiots. Maybe get a safety whip with an orange flag on top?

[Unregistered user]

Originally Posted by 270person

Nope. Just make sure to wear your helmet. It might save your life or prevent me from having to fork out coin to help mend your freedom to do whatever I want butt.

Be careful too. The drivers around you are idiots. Maybe get a safety whip with an orange flag on top?

I wear a helmet of course but those bump-caps are little protection from an inattentive driver. I am lit up like a Christmas tree I am always on the look-out for bad drivers but the odds are I will get hit. I hope you are kidding about the whip, if not thank you for proving my point.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by 270person

Nope. Just make sure to wear your helmet. It might save your life or prevent me from having to fork out coin to help mend your freedom to do whatever I want butt.

Be careful too. The drivers around you are idiots. Maybe get a safety whip with an orange flag on top?

Smoking is the number one cause of preventable death, and the costs to our health care system far exceed what the taxes bring in, and yet smokers continue to rack up health care expenses that the tax payers have to pay for. So are you as concerned about having to pay for smokers medical treatment as you are about having to pay to treat a head injury resulting front atv use? As well an ATV rider riding without a helmet does not start fires that kills and injures innocent people like careless smoking does. If you are really concerned about having to pay for other people's lifestyle choices, then go after the larger causes that might hurt you or your family, as well as costing you money rather than after the much less frequently causes like head injuries suffered by atv riders.

[JohninAB]

Originally Posted by Newview01

It is absolutely astounding how many out there will go out of their way to support the government's illogical assault on freedom. Now before you get your panties in a knot, I think anyone who doesn't wear a helmet when ripping down a trail is an idiot. But if you need the government to tell you that, you are a bigger idiot. What you pro-helmet-law people need to do is look into the leading cause of death in this province, and realize that with your logic, there are a lot more laws coming down the road. Prepare to wear a helmet while driving your car. Prepare to see fast food joints disappear. Prepare to see smoking outlawed. Prepare to see firearms banned. Prepare to see bubble wrap suits a lot more than you do now. There are so many other risky behaviors that cost the taxpayer a whole lot more, but yet nothing is done about them.

And if you believe that with this law the government has safety in mind, why do they exempt certain people based on the colour of their skin, or who they pray to? Or are they secretly hoping that these people who are exempt take care of themselves through natural selection?

And if you want to argue about seat belts, same arguments. If you don't wear one, you are an idiot. If you need the government to tell you to wear one...

So have all these bubble wrap laws you state that are inevitable here happened in other jurisdictions in Canada that have a helmet law like the one recently passed here?

As for exempting Sikh's, you should read the fundamental freedoms portion of the Canadian Constitution first then rethink your way off base comment.

As for others, anyone riding their ATV on private land, does not have to wear a helmet. If a First Nations or Metis is operating an ATV on crown land, they are required to wear a helmet as far as I can tell.

[JustMe]

You're right, smoking is the cause of death and suffering for many. However, the extra health care costs related to smoking caused illness or death is largely offset by the huge tax charged on tobacco products. In other words, smokers and chewers pay their own way.

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Smoking is the number one cause of preventable death, and the costs to our health care system far exceed what the taxes bring in, and yet smokers continue to rack up health care expenses that the tax payers have to pay for. So are you as concerned about having to pay for smokers medical treatment as you are about having to pay to treat a head injury resulting front atv use? As well an ATV rider riding without a helmet does not start fires that kills and injures innocent people like careless smoking does. If you are really concerned about having to pay for other people's lifestyle choices, then go after the larger causes that might hurt you or your family, as well as costing you money rather than after the much less frequently causes like head injuries suffered by atv riders.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by JustMe

You're right, smoking is the cause of death and suffering for many. However, the extra health care costs related to smoking caused illness or death is largely offset by the huge tax charged on tobacco products. In other words, smokers and chewers pay their own way.

These numbers don't agree.

https://www.cancer.ca/~/media/cancer...t-SK.pdf?la=en

As a result, the full cost of tobacco use in Saskatchewan is estimated at $1,080 million ($2008),
or $1,063 per-capita. Only 18% of these costs are
offset through tobacco tax revenue. Thirty-four
percent of the cost, ($373 million), is borne by Saskatchewan employers; 48% ($517 million) is
borne by taxpayers, more than 76% of whom are non-smokers.

[Stinky Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Newview01

and realize that with your logic, there are a lot more laws coming down the road. Prepare to wear a helmet while driving your car. Prepare to see fast food joints disappear. Prepare to see smoking outlawed. Prepare to see firearms banned. Prepare to see bubble wrap suits a lot more than you do now. There are so many other risky behaviors that cost the taxpayer a whole lot more, but yet nothing is done about them.

Yup!

"Be Well"

[claystone]

Had mine for years for my bike and quad, on and off reserve and even out hunting out west. No big deal.

[108mike]

So I'm guessing turbans are CSA safety approved or maybe they should at least have to wear a helmet under their turban.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[270person]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

As well an ATV rider riding without a helmet does not start fires that kills and injures innocent people like careless smoking does. .

Pardon me? Quads don't start fires? Oooookay.

You have to wear a helmet while on a quad now. So what? I have to wear one on my motorcycle and I've found that my life continues to roll along just fine. Get over it man.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Unregistered user

I wear a helmet of course but those bump-caps are little protection from an inattentive driver. I am lit up like a Christmas tree I am always on the look-out for bad drivers but the odds are I will get hit. I hope you are kidding about the whip, if not thank you for proving my point.

Seriously. Check out the whip. Work like a damn on many sites I'm on.

If the odds are you're going to get hit, and you understand that already? Well that's something you have control over. Personally I'm not a fan of Russian Roulette.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by 270person

Pardon me? Quads don't start fires? Oooookay.

You have to wear a helmet while on a quad now. So what? I have to wear one on my motorcycle and I've found that my life continues to roll along just fine. Get over it man.

I haven't heard of many people dying or being burned due to ATVs, but it happens quite often due to careless smoking in the home. As I posted previously, I could accept the new regulation a lot easier if people were not granted exemptions on the basis of religion, as I am against discrimination based on race, religion, or sex. This regulation discriminates against all people that are not of the specified religion

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

I haven't heard of many people dying or being burned due to ATVs, but it happens quite often due to careless smoking in the home. As I posted previously, I could accept the new regulation a lot easier if people were not granted exemptions on the basis of religion, as I am against discrimination based on race, religion, or sex. This regulation discriminates against all people that are not of the specified religion

My Dad told me yesterday that he converted to the winning religion so he's exempt now.

[Fur]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

I haven't heard of many people dying or being burned due to ATVs, but it happens quite often due to careless smoking in the home. As I posted previously, I could accept the new regulation a lot easier if people were not granted exemptions on the basis of religion, as I am against discrimination based on race, religion, or sex. This regulation discriminates against all people that are not of the specified religion

I have yet to see a guy with a turban buring around the trails.

The exception is crazy stupid ridiculous, but worry about your own head, not someone elses.

The arguments here remind me of children. Well she/he did something worse than me, so Im better. Protect your head, it only makes sense. If your too stupid to acknowledge that, you need the government telling you what to do.

[genoel]

Originally Posted by 108mike

So I'm guessing turbans are CSA safety approved or maybe they should at least have to wear a helmet under their turban.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You have to understand that that is a basic right granted to them by the federal government.
It does not matter what kind of a law the provincial government passes, if they tried to pass a law preventing someone from wearing a turban, someone would challenge it all the way to the supreme court and win anyways, whether they have any intention of ever riding an ATV or not. No different than Sikh police officers, soldiers or whomever.
All that would do is make a whole bunch of money for a whole bunch of lawyers to fight about it and change nothing anyways.
Right or wrong, fair or not fair, there has to be exemptions from the 'LAW' because otherwise they would waste more time and more money striking down the law just to start over.
That's just the way it is. Then we could all move on and complain about something else.
If this law upsets so many people that badly and they ride ATVs, then you have the choice to abide by the law or not. Or you can ride it where it doesn't matter, join a new religion, or find some other way around it.
How many people are really convinced that wearing a helmet, while riding on crown land, to protect yourself and others from paying the cost of treating you for a potentially catastrophic injury is that much of an intrusion of your basic rights. I spend a lot of time in the bush, do not own an ATV, have no problem with people riding them responsibly, and really don't see many people out there riding without a helmet anyways.
It's as if people are wearing them anyways, but just to want to be told to do so. Wear them, don't wear them, whatever, I just hope to not have the pleasure of meeting you in the neurology observation beds I have had the opportunity to visit frequently at my job, because that room is full EVERY NIGHT of people who have a had a REAL BAD whack on the noggin.
Most importantly, just be safe out there, helmet or no helmet. GN

[58thecat]

Stupid...you can't fix it nor wrap it in bubble wrap...it will still surface and some poor person will grasp it and get injured or die...yet we still keep evolving...even with stupid by our side

[genoel]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Stupid...you can't fix it nor wrap it in bubble wrap...it will still surface and some poor person will grasp it and get injured or die...yet we still keep evolving...even with stupid by our side

That's it in a nutshell! Helmet laws, banning ATV use in certain areas, monitoring back country camping, it is all the same. All they are trying to do is legislate bans on stupidity, because obviously what we have tried up to this point is failing, so all you can do is try and force people not to do stupid things. GN

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by genoel

You have to understand that that is a basic right granted to them by the federal government.
It does not matter what kind of a law the provincial government passes, if they tried to pass a law preventing someone from wearing a turban, someone would challenge it all the way to the supreme court and win anyways, whether they have any intention of ever riding an ATV or not. No different than Sikh police officers, soldiers or whomever.
All that would do is make a whole bunch of money for a whole bunch of lawyers to fight about it and change nothing anyways.
Right or wrong, fair or not fair, there has to be exemptions from the 'LAW' because otherwise they would waste more time and more money striking down the law just to start over.
That's just the way it is. Then we could all move on and complain about something else.
If this law upsets so many people that badly and they ride ATVs, then you have the choice to abide by the law or not. Or you can ride it where it doesn't matter, join a new religion, or find some other way around it.
How many people are really convinced that wearing a helmet, while riding on crown land, to protect yourself and others from paying the cost of treating you for a potentially catastrophic injury is that much of an intrusion of your basic rights. I spend a lot of time in the bush, do not own an ATV, have no problem with people riding them responsibly, and really don't see many people out there riding without a helmet anyways.
It's as if people are wearing them anyways, but just to want to be told to do so. Wear them, don't wear them, whatever, I just hope to not have the pleasure of meeting you in the neurology observation beds I have had the opportunity to visit frequently at my job, because that room is full EVERY NIGHT of people who have a had a REAL BAD whack on the noggin.
Most importantly, just be safe out there, helmet or no helmet. GN

The provincial government would be forcing people to not wear their turbans if they did not provide the exemption., they would simply be telling them that they would have to ride in a type of atv where a helmet is not required. As far as I know, there is no right to ride atvs on public land in our charter of nights.

[Unregistered user]

Originally Posted by 270person

Seriously. Check out the whip. Work like a damn on many sites I'm on.

If the odds are you're going to get hit, and you understand that already? Well that's something you have control over. Personally I'm not a fan of Russian Roulette.

Seriously, have another donut.

[Unregistered user]

How on earth did we make it through the sixties and seventies in one piece without all you bed wetting nanny-statists? Remember those days when men were men and women were women? Gender fluidity wasn't even an idea that was puked up then either. We are in trouble as a society.

[fitzy]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The provincial government would be forcing people to not wear their turbans if they did not provide the exemption., they would simply be telling them that they would have to ride in a type of atv where a helmet is not required. As far as I know, there is no right to ride atvs on public land in our charter of nights.

I feel like your problem is all about the fact that someone with a turban doesn't have to wear a helmet rather than you do.
You just had it explained very well to you. Still having trouble with it.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by fitzy

I feel like your problem is all about the fact that someone with a turban doesn't have to wear a helmet rather than you do.
You just had it explained very well to you. Still having trouble with it.

I am still against all discrimination based on race, religion or sex, and if you agree with the exemption, then you are supporting discrimination. Not having an exemption would not in any way be discriminating against turban wearers, because they would not be forced to remove their turbans. It would be their choice to either choose an atv that does not require a helmet to be worn, or they could simply choose to not ride atvs on public land.
Before I retired, I worked n a plant where people had to wear hard hats in the field, and there were no exceptions made, yet nobody sued the company in response to this regulation. If you didn't want to wear a hard hat, you chose a job that didn't require you to go in the field, it was that simple.

[Weedy1]

OK don't freak out now but:

https://globalnews.ca/news/4122801/b..._campaign=2014

Everyone will be Ok, and you'll live another day.

[bushbug]

I will continue to wear my canadian trappers turban my TOQUE

[tool]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Then the same should apply for smokers or drunk people. These people make the choice to live those lifestyles, just as much as someone not wearing a helmet does, and our health care pays a lot more out because of smokers and drunks than it does to people injured on atvs.

That is true, but those people pay much more into those "vice taxes". A huge part of the cost of alcohol and tobacco especially in Canada is in taxes. I don't see a very clear route to charge a "helmet tax".

[michaelmicallef]

Just wear a Turban. We should all be doing something to protest. This **** is getting out of hand!