What a silly punt.

[wesw]

when did the English stop assisting those who were drowning?

[Gob]

When we found they were Americans.


Stop that!

[wesw]

ohhhh, were only buddies when the germans get uppity, eh?

[oldr_n_wsr]

if you couldn't swim and were in a boat that could easily dump you into the water, wouldn't you wear some sort of flotation device or avoid riding in such boats? If not, why not?

I don't remember a time in my life of not being able to swim. But I would imagine that during my younger years wearing a life vest, even if I couldn't swim, would be considered "dorky" and thus I would go without.

[Big RR]

Younger as in the times when you couldn't rent a punt without your parents (who should then force you to wear a life jacket)? Or older, when you clearly should have known better?

[oldr_n_wsr]

All of my teens into mid 20's. Whatever that fits into.
And I still don't "know better".

ETA
I passed the Sr Life Saving swimming course and the Life Guard exam at 11 years old.

[Big RR]

Well, you can't save people from their own stupidity; I usually don't wear a helmet while I bicycle (and never while skiing), but then whatever happens is my fault.

[rubato]

Well, you can't save people from their own stupidity; I usually don't wear a helmet while I bicycle (and never while skiing), but then whatever happens is my fault.

But we'll pay when you wind up in the ER, later in a neurosurgical suite, getting home care ...

And you'll pull an Ayn Rand and take the money.


yrs,
rubato

[Big RR]

If my health insurance wants to limit my coverage because I choose not to wear a helmet, I would adjust my behavior or not in view of that change as I saw fit and live with the consequences. However, in my state helmets are not required for riders over the age of 18, so I doubt it would or could--especially since obese people are covered for heart disease, uncontrolled diabetics are covered for complications, hypertensives are covered for strokes, etc. However, I would not blame anyone for my choice, even if I did take the insurance coverage offered. Ayn Rand has nothing to do with it.

And FWIW, do not presume to say what I will or will not do. We do not know each other and you have nothing to base your idiotic predictions on.

[MajGenl.Meade]

you have nothing to base your idiotic predictions on

You think?

[rubato]

If my health insurance wants to limit my coverage because I choose not to wear a helmet, I would adjust my behavior or not in view of that change as I saw fit and live with the consequences. However, in my state helmets are not required for riders over the age of 18, so I doubt it would or could--especially since obese people are covered for heart disease, uncontrolled diabetics are covered for complications, hypertensives are covered for strokes, etc. However, I would not blame anyone for my choice, even if I did take the insurance coverage offered. Ayn Rand has nothing to do with it.

And FWIW, do not presume to say what I will or will not do. We do not know each other and you have nothing to base your idiotic predictions on.

Your "health insurance coverage" includes those facilities maintained by public funds at the common expense which you will certainly exploit at need.


The only 'idiotic prediction' is that you won't go to an emergency room when you have a concussion. Please, stop arguing like a child. Other's poor choices in controlling their body weight, their blood sugars, or quitting smoking do not justify your own poor choices. They only give you a larger crowd of idiots to hide in.


If you really have the balls for it, move to Mexico. They really will let you enjoy the fruits of your own decisions.


yrs,
rubato

[rubato]

I think it's the extremely low (one-inch?) freeboard that does it.

Apart from 1978, Cambridge sank in 1859 and Oxford in 1925 and 1931. In 1912, they both sank.

So they HAVE learned how to make boats that don't sink as easily, right? Tell me that they've learned their lesson at last.


yrs,
rubato

[MajGenl.Meade]

There's a fine line, actually. The free board cannot be above a certain height for practical reasons due to the angle of the oarsmen's reach and the angle of the oar. The trick is to go with the lowest possible freeboard to reduce weight etc. and yet not so low that the shell sinks. Sometimes there's a misjudgment and a slight chop on the otherwise placid Thames does 'em in. I think there's a real possibility they've been encouraged in more recent years to go for the safer margin!

In the early days, following launches were notorious for trying to swamp the boat of the team they had bet against. The most recent sinking was an accident when the Cambridge boat hit a barge before the race.

[Econoline]

Well, you can't save people from their own stupidity; I usually don't wear a helmet while I bicycle (and never while skiing), but then whatever happens is my fault.

But we'll pay when you wind up in the ER, later in a neurosurgical suite, getting home care ...

And you'll pull an Ayn Rand and take the money.

I don't currently have a working bicycle, but when I did (and when I will in the future) I didn't and won't wear a helmet when riding. I also don't wear a helmet when driving a car, which is much much more likely to result in a head injury.

[Lord Jim]

You have to understand rube's perspective on this...

He wears a helmet pretty much whatever he's doing and wherever he goes...

(Ever since that unfortunate walking while chewing gum incident many years ago...he wound up spending 3 weeks in the hospital)


His insurance company insists on it...

[Guinevere]

Well, you can't save people from their own stupidity; I usually don't wear a helmet while I bicycle (and never while skiing), but then whatever happens is my fault.

But we'll pay when you wind up in the ER, later in a neurosurgical suite, getting home care ...

And you'll pull an Ayn Rand and take the money.

I don't currently have a working bicycle, but when I did (and when I will in the future) I didn't and won't wear a helmet when riding. I also don't wear a helmet when driving a car, which is much much more likely to result in a head injury.

Got support for that stat Econo? Per mile traveled, I would bet you are wrong. And regardless, why would either of you risk your beautiful brains by not wearing a bicycle helmet???? That's seriously ridiculous. They can and do save lives. You wouldn't let your kids ride without one. Why do you deserve less?

My Swede used to only wear one in races where it was required, but I begged, and badgered, and cursed, and pleaded and threatened long enough that he wears one now (and even skiing, too, finally). He took a fall this summer and that helmet saved him from serious injury. Please, don't be disrespectful of your brains, wear the goddamed helmet!!!!!!!!

[wesw]

per mile traveled? typical liberal distortion of stats.

per time in the seat would give an accurate correlation.

you have become a bizzaro rush Limbaugh. congrats.

[Guinevere]

What are you talking about? What in gods name does Rush have to do with it? And why do you feel the need to insult me when I give my opinion about wearing bicycle helmets??

[No Greater Fool]

Um, I believe wesw was referring to Econoline's post above yours.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Um, I believe not.