[Author Index] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

RE: Protective clothing was RE: [ST] Uploaded pics



>(You may be interested to know that in Texas I
>cannot mention in a trial that an injured passenger in a vehicle was not
>wearing a seatbelt.  Even though the law requires all drivers and
passengers
>to wear seatbelts, the failure to wear one cannot be mentioned to the jury

If I were king, I'd change this. Seatbelts are part of defensive driving.

>Think about this:  Although I personally think it is dumb to ride without a
>Arai, Shoei, or other "premium" helmet.  Should someone have their damages
>reduced because they prefer a low cost helmet?  

All retail helmets are tested to meet DOT standards. We may (and probably!)
don't think highly of those standards, but they do set the threshhold for
what is considered reasonable head protection. I'd simply like to extend
this to body/skin protection as well.

> be held responsible for some
>of his injuries because he could have worn a one piece leather racing suit
>with CE armor instead?  Do you really want 12 people on a jury (who
probably
>do not even ride a motorcycle) deciding this issue?

You can't hold someone responsible because they didn't choose the absolute
best protection out there. But, did they take reasonable precautions? Shorts
and a tang top sure don't qualify...


     *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
      The ST/RS Mailing list is sponsored by Jack Lilley Ltd.
          http://www.TriumphNet.com/st/lilley for more info
   http://www.TriumphNet.com/st for ST, RS and Mailing List info

=-=-=-= Next Message =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=