Comments on: Another Potential Meaningless Victory for the Nanny State: Bike Helmets http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html Advancing liberty with responsibility by promoting market solutions for Missouri public policy Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:56:48 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Legislating Common Sense | www.statehousecall.org http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html/comment-page-1#comment-3906 Legislating Common Sense | www.statehousecall.org Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:45:04 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2057#comment-3906 [...] surgeons as they do in California, but we have our own version of the nanny state. Targets include kids riding bicycles, playground equipment sitting in the sun, and now haunted houses. No Related [...] [...] surgeons as they do in California, but we have our own version of the nanny state. Targets include kids riding bicycles, playground equipment sitting in the sun, and now haunted houses. No Related [...]

]]> By: vroman http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html/comment-page-1#comment-1295 vroman Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:12:52 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2057#comment-1295 you are correct. if we already had Complete Streets ubiquitously, and then the decision was on the table to return one of them to Normal Street, then I would be in favor of that. you are correct. if we already had Complete Streets ubiquitously, and then the decision was on the table to return one of them to Normal Street, then I would be in favor of that.

]]> By: Eric D. Dixon http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html/comment-page-1#comment-1294 Eric D. Dixon Fri, 28 Nov 2008 03:53:49 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2057#comment-1294 "so in a sense this is govt redistribution, by extracting surplus from the city in general, and handing it out to a localized group of property owners." Much like development tax credits... but through a different mechanism. “so in a sense this is govt redistribution, by extracting surplus from the city in general, and handing it out to a localized group of property owners.”

Much like development tax credits… but through a different mechanism.

]]> By: vroman http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html/comment-page-1#comment-1293 vroman Thu, 27 Nov 2008 16:49:02 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2057#comment-1293 I wikid "Complete Streets" bc the capitalization clearly screamed "This is a politicized buzzword!". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_streets The economic consequences are probably misleading. it claims that by making streets deliberately less efficient for cars, it increases the surrounding land value by 30-100%. however, there is no talk of the downside, additional travel time for motorists who are passing through that area. there are lots of streets in stlouis that frequently jam up which could be completely ameliorated w an extra lane. the first example that springs to mind is mcknight between manchester and 40, which always moves at a crawl in the section that is one lane (atleast before, and presumably after, the hwy construction). also Elm between lockwood and 44 is another one-lane auto-jam. so *reducing* lanes can only make these kinds of problems more widespread. I suspect that if the inconvenience of all those extra manhours spent in traffic were dollarized, it would grossly outweigh the property value increase. so in a sense this is govt redistribution, by extracting surplus from the city in general, and handing it out to a localized group of property owners. I wikid “Complete Streets” bc the capitalization clearly screamed “This is a politicized buzzword!”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_streets
The economic consequences are probably misleading. it claims that by making streets deliberately less efficient for cars, it increases the surrounding land value by 30-100%. however, there is no talk of the downside, additional travel time for motorists who are passing through that area. there are lots of streets in stlouis that frequently jam up which could be completely ameliorated w an extra lane. the first example that springs to mind is mcknight between manchester and 40, which always moves at a crawl in the section that is one lane (atleast before, and presumably after, the hwy construction). also Elm between lockwood and 44 is another one-lane auto-jam. so *reducing* lanes can only make these kinds of problems more widespread.
I suspect that if the inconvenience of all those extra manhours spent in traffic were dollarized, it would grossly outweigh the property value increase. so in a sense this is govt redistribution, by extracting surplus from the city in general, and handing it out to a localized group of property owners.

]]> By: Jack http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html/comment-page-1#comment-1288 Jack Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:11:00 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2057#comment-1288 Many more people travel in motorized vehicles than on bikes. More lives and injuries could be prevented by requiring all occupants to wear helmets too, many more than on bikes. Safety efforts via laws should be implemented where they have the largest impact and only when public benefits exceed public costs. Safety is very important and if that is the main concern than Complete Streets should be offered instead of restrictions on freedom and choice. Otherwise image once again trumps sincerity. Many more people travel in motorized vehicles than on bikes. More lives and injuries could be prevented by requiring all occupants to wear helmets too, many more than on bikes. Safety efforts via laws should be implemented where they have the largest impact and only when public benefits exceed public costs. Safety is very important and if that is the main concern than Complete Streets should be offered instead of restrictions on freedom and choice. Otherwise image once again trumps sincerity.

]]> By: Nick Loyal http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html/comment-page-1#comment-1287 Nick Loyal Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:17:38 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2057#comment-1287 I'll agree that this law may be unfounded, but as someone who himself got hit by a car on his bicycle, in front of a local area coffee shop while NOT wearing a helmet (I was fine...and then promptly went and bought a new skull-protector, thank you) I feel compelled to make a little PSA. WEAR A HELMET...TRUCKS ARE BIGGER THAN YOU. I’ll agree that this law may be unfounded, but as someone who himself got hit by a car on his bicycle, in front of a local area coffee shop while NOT wearing a helmet (I was fine…and then promptly went and bought a new skull-protector, thank you) I feel compelled to make a little PSA.

WEAR A HELMET…TRUCKS ARE BIGGER THAN YOU.

]]> By: Mike S. http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html/comment-page-1#comment-1285 Mike S. Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:20:35 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2057#comment-1285 On a similar note, expect to see a lot more of the "cost to society" argument as the country moves to a more universal, tax-funded health insurance system. As in, "we must enact helmet laws/outlaw smoking/ban fast food restaurants because of the cost to taxpayers of providing health care for people who engage in these bad behaviors." On a similar note, expect to see a lot more of the “cost to society” argument as the country moves to a more universal, tax-funded health insurance system. As in, “we must enact helmet laws/outlaw smoking/ban fast food restaurants because of the cost to taxpayers of providing health care for people who engage in these bad behaviors.”

]]> By: Josh Smith http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html/comment-page-1#comment-1284 Josh Smith Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:04:30 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2057#comment-1284 My point is not that it's "just bad" but that it is inconclusively good. Of all the intrusions into liberty the government could be making, this one is particularly ineffective, ie if they're going to make some group wear helmets, it should be motorists. My point is not that it’s “just bad” but that it is inconclusively good. Of all the intrusions into liberty the government could be making, this one is particularly ineffective, ie if they’re going to make some group wear helmets, it should be motorists.

]]> By: David Stokes http://www.showmedaily.org/2008/11/bike-helmets.html/comment-page-1#comment-1283 David Stokes Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:01:46 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=2057#comment-1283 I don't know if it really is so meaningless. It is meaningful in that it is another reach by elected officials to tell us how to live our lives. It is my job to raise my son safely, not the governments, and just because some parents do a poor job at it does not mean it gives the government the right to tell us how to live every minor deatil of our lives. But the vast majority of people will go along with it, because the vast majority of people are entirely willing to outsource their freedom. I don’t know if it really is so meaningless. It is meaningful in that it is another reach by elected officials to tell us how to live our lives. It is my job to raise my son safely, not the governments, and just because some parents do a poor job at it does not mean it gives the government the right to tell us how to live every minor deatil of our lives. But the vast majority of people will go along with it, because the vast majority of people are entirely willing to outsource their freedom.

]]>