wrote in message
oups.com...

Shaun aRe wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Zilla wrote:
For safety, and for keeping the bike trails opened for
bikers. If someone without a helmet gets hurt, then
the park managers may close the trails for the rest
of us.


If someone trips on a shoelace will they require everyone to wear
velcro?

Not the issue here, is it? The issue is, someone gets hurt, riding
without a
helmet, in that park, it goes toward making the park close - right or
wrong,
that's the way it is.

Yes it is the issue. Joe Blow can approach the park commission with the
same stupid shoe lace analogy and convince them to take measures to
prevent an accident. Anyone can dream up a dangerous situation and
bring it up before the board resulting in park closure or stupid rules.
What happens when someone wearing a helmet is still injured? It's going
to happen sooner or later. What then? No bikes will be my guess. A more
sensible approach would be a warning that it may be dangerous to ride
and people accept that risk by using the trails.

Look - we aren't talking about *sensible* here, or rational, or right -
we're talking about how the park sees it - they're just trying to cover
there arses. Now whether or not this is a well informed way to go about it
doesn't count - they've made their decision already. How likely do you think
it is, that they would listen to a rational argument contrary to their
decision? It'd be like arguing with that ****wit Vandeman.

HTH.


Shaun aRe