What you did, was put some words down only tenuously related to the words in the question. Would you like me to try you with multiple choice?
Obviously you cannot personally make anyone do anything. The government are not there to be your Nanny. I see no benefit from people like you demanding the government legislates to restrict our personal choices. People like you could be the reason why the government increasingly thinks it is acceptable for them to limit our personal rights. If motorcycles are banned "for the common good" together with rugby, snow ski ing, eating too much and smoking will that make you happy? If you are correct when you say some of their (governments) "choices are not intelligent" you might better use your time trying to repeal their mistakes than push your nose into other people business?
Who's angry? Not me. You didn't answer this, Exige... You mean you still would have wanted a serious head injury and would have chosen not to wear a helmet? Yes or No? Please try to use no other words (other than synonyms).
Again, you didn't answer the question but tried to distract from it by throwing out assumptions about what I want and attacking my character. Your line of argument of the salient point is poor. Again, who benefits from the poor choice of the individual to choose shorts and crash, what is the downside to enforcing PPE, and why should we put up with them being allowed to spend our money?
Freedom benefits. Choice benefits. Today we make wearing CE armour mandatory. Tomorrow most scooter and London commuters sell their bikes. Day after we start on restricting power - speed kills so make every bike only do 70 mph. Day after we make it more restrictive to get a licence. Few steps forward, and we start walking towards gps chips fitted to every child and cctv in every home. Slippery slope. Btw insurance is billed for the NHS clear up costs often, and I have no idea where you are getting this £1m from. What’s the source?
The people who are over 18 have the perfect right to make their own choices. Everyone benefits from having their personal rights upheld. This is a question of basic personal rights. Where did I attack your character?
I am saying I probably avoided one by not wearing a helmet in the circumstances I found myself in, I have already answered your first question very clearly if you read it carefully
With faces like ours you really shouldn't show them without the rest of the head in view - ears can take the eye away throw it and get a proper helmet dude
You can't answer the question. That's the point. There's no value in letting a person injure themselves when it can be avoided, especially at a cost to society.
Were you doing more than 54? You’re ok up to 54. Mind you, those Lycra lot dontend tonweat a light, think, barely useful polycarbonate helmet of sorts. Maybe you should try one of them next time?
