>"WHOA THERE! You were driving without your seat belt. I'm going to have to fine you hundreds of dollars for being unsafe. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to ride at extremely high speeds on my super cool motorcycle that has no means whatsoever of keeping me secure if I were to get into an accident. Don't let me catch you being reckless again."
why
Other urls found in this thread:
Please try to remain safe, officer ;_;
>I am an edgy teenager who can't accept authority
He's got a good point though.
cop harleys are useless but cops on dual sports/converted dirt bikes get shit done:
I was listening to the radio in the car saying that you should wear your seatbelt, or else you will get fined. Oh, I'm sure you'll see me through my tinted windows while my car is moving lmao.
It would be waaaayyy better if they talked about the horrible and painful facts about the horrible incidents of people who get in accidents while not wearing a seatbelt.
...
Brazilian death squad police are my favorite.
which is what?
buckling yourself to a bike would make it more dangerous for the rider
it's fucking retarded
>friend just died in a motorbike accident 2 weeks ago
DELETE THIS
...
Not really the point, bud.
this
Top That Motherfuckers
Shhhhh....
I'll give you my rarest leaf if you don't post the one with Arabic on it
If you come off a motorcycle you're going to fly, that's why they have protective gear.
If you crash in a car you have 2 tons of metal specifically designed to protect you.
>not the point
Motorcycle cops serve a very specific role, that is being able to weave in and out of traffic and being more agile than cop cars.
It's like bicycle cops, pic related. They exist for the specific purpose of chasing you through parks, alleys, and other places that cop cars can't get into.
nice equitable sharing lads!
just go with the trends and buy an OBEY t-shirt
It's not about cops, dork. If driving a car without a belt is unsafe enough to deserve a ticket, then logically why should you be allowed to legally drive a motorcycle, which is always more dangerous? It doesn't make a lick of sense no matter how you look at it.
You are sitting on a piece of chassis with two wheels, with no internal gyroscope to actually balance the thing for you, or any roll cage to protect you.
If you hit something with the motorcycle, you're going to go flying forwards and come to a stop via friction with the ground. That's why bikers wear heavy as fuck bike armour.
Keeping someone physically attached to the motorcycle will result in broken legs, brain damage and brain bleeds. Letting someone go off the bike naturally will result in them (most of the time) get up after they've stopped.
Most bikes weigh more than 400 kg. You don't want that smashing up against you and pushing you against the ground when you stack it.
Meanwhile, a car weighs 2 tons and will take the majority of the impact when you roll it, to the point where it's safer to stay inside the thing in a crash than to leave it.
YOU DIDGERIDINDU FUCK
I AM NOT ADVOCATING SEAT BELTS ON MOTORCYCLES
GETTING IN AN ACCIDENT ON A MOTORCYCLE IN ANY SCENARIO IS WORSE THAN GETTING IN AN ACCIDENT IN A CAR WITH NO SEAT BELT
THEREFORE, IT IS ILLOGICAL TO FINE THE PERSON IN THE CAR FOR BEING "UNSAFE" WHEN, IN FACT, THEY ARE BEING MORE SAFE THAN THE MOTORCYCLIST
IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE
>it's illogical
see
"Motorcycle cops serve a very specific role, that is being able to weave in and out of traffic and being more agile than cop cars."
I've already addressed this. Motorcycle cops exist for a specific reason.
...
>welcome to 2004
You Mad?
but they aren't being "more safe"
you are retarded and I recommend a motorcycle safety course
>statists unironically defending the seat belt jew
the purpose of the seatbelt is to keep the driver behind the wheel in the event of 'loss of control'