Forum Moderators: open
Roethlisberger lost most of his teeth, fractured his left sinus cavity bone, suffered a nine-inch laceration to the back of his head and a broken jaw, and injured both of his knees when he hit the ground, police said.
Sounds rather optimistic for that type of crash.
Story [pittsburghlive.com]
Unbelievable he could be riding a Suzuki Hayabusa [pittsburghlive.com] with a top speed of 189 with no helmet.
Hope he makes a full recovery.
And he was/is in violation of his contract.
My brother suffered a catastrophic head injury (not motorcycle related), so I shudder to think what he may be in for, or if surviving is a good thing.
Without regard to fault, or the specific circumstances of the incident; how incredibly stupid; for anyone, but certainly for someone so privileged.
I am generally opposed to the pervasive trend toward protecting everyone from everything, regulating peoples lives to death (so to speak) - but these kinds of things, people deliberately opting for the most foolish of choices make it difficult to defend their individual rights.
</rant>
Unbelievable he could be riding a Suzuki Hayabusa with a top speed of 189 with no helmet.
Hope he makes a full recovery.
Almost sounds like you hope he's maimed for life.
Hopefully, when he finally succeeds, he won't take out some innocent bystanders at the same time.
Do you know of some other source that says he was driving recklessly or under the influence or otherwise might have been at fault or was breaking the law in any way?
Do you know of some other source that says he was driving recklessly
In May 2005, Cowher lectured Roethlisberger about the dangers of riding without a helmet.
Do you know of some other source that says he was driving recklessly or under the influence or otherwise might have been at fault or was breaking the law in any way?
Just the laws of common sense .. you ride a motorcycle without a helmet and the ODDS are that soemday when we hit the pavement we finally realize we are not invincible .School of really hard knocks!
His fault was not adhering to the laws of common sense
And while Roethlisberger doesn't wear a helmet, he made it clear to Cowher that he is far from reckless when he hits the road.
He lawfully exercised his right not to wear a helmet, he's the only one who got hurt. Even if we ignore the law and apply an extremely broad definition of recklessness, he behaviour put no one at risk except himself.
Hard to tell exactly what injuries he would have sustained had he been wearing a helmet. Maybe none; maybe he still would have inherited a face full of pavement.
Probably most would agree wearing a helmet while operating a bike is prudent. But taking the original poster to task because he hoped the biker makes a full recovery raises meanness to a new level.
I also hope he makes a full recovery, his common sense or lack thereof notwithstanding.
[edited by: lawman at 6:13 pm (utc) on June 13, 2006]
Maybe he didn't put anyone else at risk, but he did ignore his responsibility to himself, his teammates and his sport. I certainly hope he makes a full recovery. Just seems lately that a lot of sportsmen are ego-centric. Castillo show up overweight for a fight, baseball players use steroids for personal gain regardless of what damage they do to the sport, criminal basketball players...
Remember when you were a kid and the coach said no swimming before practice or games for baseball and football? Did you go swimming anyway? ; )
behaviour put no one at risk except himself
I would have had sympathy if Roethlisberger made a comment afterwards like, "Gee, that was really stupid- I can't believe I was riding without a helmet. I learned my lesson and certainly won't do that again!" Instead, with his "Yeah, I know it's dangerous, but I'm going to continue to do it anyway" attitude, he doesn't get any sympathy from me.
As a famous athlete, he's supposed to be a role model for people. Also, as DG mentioned, he has responsibilities to other people besides himself.
Ben was not at fault here. The other driver turned left across his lane (Ben had the right-of-way) and into the path of the motorcycle.
The Pennsylvania law allows for motorcycle riders to not wear a helmet (as does New Hampshire, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, among other states with minor restrictions). You may think he's reckless and has a death wish, but that's not entirely relevant to what happened.
There is no "given" that you're going to crash in a motorcycle. Anything you say to the contrary is insane. Wish the man a full recovery and leave any other agendas at home. Sometimes life just hands you a lemon and you have to deal with it. Get well Ben.
Athletes are not role models!
Many riders simply enjoy the feeling of the wind in the hair etc. and find a helmet too confining and restricting. For those people that are true riders, you simply won't change their mind. You don't have to agree with it or even like it, but to say they will likely hurt someone else because they aren't wearing a helmet is just silly.
I have no problem with that statement. But somehow I get the feeling that you are not only NOT neutral about it, you get some kind of righteous satisfaction that it occurred. Maybe I'm wrong - I hope so.
Wouldn't that make a certain someone a sadist of a sort?
Anyways, my argument is as follows:
Here, it is illegal to not wear a helmet when riding a pedal bike. I find that law is somewhat lame, and therefore I don't abide by it. That is not to say I ride my PEDAL bike in the middle of the road, that I don't look both ways before crossing, never signal, or refuse to get off and walk at a cross walk. It just means I think wearing one makes you look slightly idiotic. (No offense to anyone who may)
So the question is, if I get mangled by a car, is it my fault? Am I a dangerous bicycle rider? No. Whether I have a helmet on or not, some schmuck in a CAR is going to inflict a LOT of pain on me.
I mean come on people, that's like saying someone hit crossing the street at a cross walk should have been wearing a helmet... Wait, that's not such a bad idea.
(Pedestrian Helmets ©)
Basically, this is not something anyone wishes upon themself when venturing out of the house.
Okay, I will admit that I jumped to conclusions about Roethlisberger's character based on his reckless riding without a helmet. Without any other evidence one way or the other, it wasn't fair to assume that he is reckless in everything else he does. It's certainly possible that he except for the helmet issue, he always rides defensively, never speeds, and is otherwise a very safe rider.
But the fact that this accident apparently wasn't his fault just gives more credence to how reckless it is to ride without a helmet. You can be the safest driver in the world, but that isn't always going to help you when the other driver does something incredibly stupid and causes an accident with you. Sometimes your safe driving skills can help you avoid the accident, other times they won't. But wearing a helmet is going to go a long way in determining if you're going to walk away from that accident.
Because if it ends his career (which it sounds like it could), he just passed up tens of millions of dollars to exercise his right to ride without a helmut.
Very stupid thing to do.
Nevertheless, in the State where the accident occurred wearing a helmet is optional - a freedom allowed under the law. If you're only allowed to do the sane, rational and reasonable thing, then there is no freedom. You must also be allowed to do the things that seem irrational and unreasonable.
He exercised his freedom to put his noggin at risk. He paid the price. If he's such a dunderhead as to continue to exercise his freedom not to wear a helmet, that's OK with me - it's not my pumpkin.
I still hope he makes a full recovery.
I would have had sympathy if Roethlisberger made a comment afterwards like, "Gee, that was really stupid- I can't believe I was riding without a helmet. I learned my lesson and certainly won't do that again!" Instead, with his "Yeah, I know it's dangerous, but I'm going to continue to do it anyway" attitude, he doesn't get any sympathy from me.
Those comments were made well before this incident. From the sound of it, he isn't able to talk as it sounds like they had to reconstruct his face.
Reckless to ride without a helmet, probably, but riding w/o a helmet doesn't make him a reckless biker. Stupid and selfish maybe, understandable none-the less. Probably lots of people here who ski, mountain or road bike w/o a helmet which is pretty safe if you are careful....and at least one who had a massive head trauma mountain biking w/o a helmet and still hardly ever wears one. :)
Seems like when you have a SuperBowl team counting on you to play the upcoming season, season ticket holders who have paid thousands to see you lead your team to another SuperBowl, (people in PIttsburgh will take out a second mortgage to get Steeler tickets! :))fans all around the world gearing up for the next season, plus the family and other people that us mere mortals have depending on us, if you must engage in a relatively dangerous activity, wearing protective gear isn't to much to ask. At the age of 24, though most still feel indestructable and don't quite grasp how a huge insury like that would affect so many other people.
You must also be allowed to do the things that seem irrational and unreasonable.
I'm all for this, as long as I don't have to pay for the consequences of the irrational and unreasonable acts of others.
In this case the guy may well have enough cash to pay for lifelong care if needed, if so, and if needed, good for him.
But that's not always (not usually?) the case.
Which is bad for the rest of us who are left to pay the bills for the irresponsible.
Carry on.
Whether I have a helmet on or not, some schmuck in a CAR is going to inflict a LOT of pain on me.
A bit of an OT reply from a longtime cyclist: bike helmets are to protect you from the drop when something goes wrong. There are a million ways to fall off your bike and land on your darned head when there are no cars for miles...
-b
There are a million ways to fall off your bike and land on your darned head when there are no cars for miles...
I should add that I am also a long-time bike rider who would love the freedom of swooshing down a long hill with the wind blowing through my unhelmeted head. Yet I wear a helmet EVERY time I ride. Not because I have to- local laws make helmet wearing optional for the 18+ crowd. But because I know how many things can happen through no fault of my own. I've broken 2 helmets in crashes that were not my fault. I'd hate to think about what my head would've looked like if I hadn't been wearing a helmet. Of course, after the first crash, I probably wouldn't have had to worry about the second one.
-b
"
Sorry if I didn't make it clear that this scenario was alluding to the topic at hand...
I give up. This thread has taken on the trappings of a nut house. I hereby leave the nuts in charge.
Finally, some freedom.
I mean come on people, that's like saying someone hit crossing the street at a cross walk should have been wearing a helmet...
Exactly. We should all be screaming at our respective lawmakers to make wearing a helmet mandatory for everyone at all times. Cars account for many head injuries, and just plain falling accounts for quite a few as well. If you are walking anyplace without a helmet, even with no cars or people around, it is quite reckless behavior.
If you play professional american football, or any type of fighting sport, you should be forced to be enclosed by a bubble of some type... like a body helmet. By stepping into a ring or taking the field, you are choosing to substantially increase your risk of physical injury.
