Michigan Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Great Lake State.
Welcome to Michigan Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 08-26-2007 11:15 AM by Rabidog. 8 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (9 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-01-2001 12:00 AM

    2007 House Bill 5098 (Limit injury coverage for helmetless motorcycle riders )

    Introduced in the House on August 8, 2007

    Click here to view bill details.
  • 08-15-2007 10:32 AM In reply to

    Control Control

    Run the world and everyone and everything they do and everything they wear. It's seat belt bells, it's punish the guy who doesn't conform. It's old.
  • 08-15-2007 3:20 PM In reply to

    I agree

    The State just needs to get out of our lives all together.
  • 08-15-2007 3:43 PM In reply to

    Hmmm...

    While I agree that government should back off, I do see their point. If someone doesn't want to wear a seat belt or a helmet, that's their choice. But, I shouldn't have to pay for their choice (with higher premiums) when they sue the crap out of my insurance carrier for an injury that could have been prevented by taking saftey precautions (legislated or not).
  • 08-15-2007 6:08 PM In reply to

    • Rabidog
    • Top 75 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on 11-22-2008
    • Berrien County

    Not Even Close

    If this law were to pass, would it also exclude helmetless motorcyclists from having to pay for the insurance? If this law were to pass, would it allow the helmetless motorcyclists to collect insurance on injuries not related to the head? We know what the answers are. And the answers to the helmet issue are out there for the taking. Many other states have repealed their helmet laws, all we have to do is go get the information from them. Get a grip, quit trying to make a buck on the backs of motorcyclists. Get a hold of the research and it will show you what to do. Do the right thing - give riders the freedom they deserve!

     

  • 08-15-2007 6:17 PM In reply to

    I agree with this law

    I am a motorcyle rider and it enjoy it but if I choose to ride my motorcycle without proper safety equipment than the tax payer shouldn't have to pick up the tab that only seems fair.I mean I don't like paying for abortion,idiot legislators wages,ect.I say elimnate all foolish tax money pay outs and cut the government by at least half,personal freedoms with personal finiacing than should be the law of the land.
  • 08-19-2007 2:35 PM In reply to

    5098

    Does this mean if I am on a moped [no helmet required or insurance] and get wacked by a soccer mom on her cell phone that I not eligble for medical coverage?
  • 08-19-2007 3:27 PM In reply to

    you weren't eligible for

    coverage BEFORE, what makes you think you would be covered now? you are just out of luck.
  • 08-26-2007 11:15 AM In reply to

    • Rabidog
    • Top 75 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on 11-22-2008
    • Berrien County

    Ass-uming

    Your statement makes it sound as though you have information showing that there will be larger medical expenses incurred. Do you know this to be fact, or are you assuming it is fact due to the propaganda? Do you have studies showing how insurance payout would change as a result of repealing a helmet law? If not simply emotional, what are your sources?

     

Page 1 of 1 (9 items)
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems