I wrote that Roethlisberger had ridden his motorcycle legally without a helmet legally (over on the Institute page), and that was based on this Pennsylvania law.
Dominique commented that he had not. I questioned this, since I hadn't found a single article to claim that (and it seems hard to believe the media would miss it), but apparently they did. Dominique sent this article from the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. (she has a source there, although she wouldn't tell me how. Me thinks there is some nefarious deeds going on there.)
If that article is correct, it means that Ben Roethlisberger potentially broke three laws:
Operating a motorcycle without a license
Having an accident without a license (you're always at fault if you don't have a license)
Not wearing a helmet
At this point, the helmet would be the least objectionable thing, although if Roethlisberger doesn't have a motorcylcle license, then by default he has to wear a helmet (although that seems like of nit-picky, you know how Johnny Law likes to pile it on).
Now, Roethlisberger is the Golden Boy in Pittsburgh, just recently leading the team to a Super Bowl victory. However, I if these allegations are true, I don't see how the Pittsburgh Police can get away with not throwing the book at Roethlisberger for two reasons:
If they don't, the media scrutiny will be intense; letting a celebrity get away with breaking the law, etc.
Because of the helmet thing, this is a very big deal. By throwing the book at him, they will set an example for kids, which they should do anyway.
Note that I am still against a helmet law for competent adults who want to be idiots. (As I wrote about.) However, I would say two additional things to my column.
1) A person not wearing a helmet should have to pay for additional costs of cleaning up his body once he's creamed by a car
2) There is no way on Earth we should feel sorry for someone who gets in an accident that is exacerbated by not wearing a helmet. Thus, while I don't wish Roethlisberger any specific harm, my thoughts and prayers etc. etc. ARE NOT with him and his family. He can do what he wants, and it's on him whatever happens.
Aitch out.
4 comments:
There has been some breaking news on the story:
Your site for breaking news
Ok maybe not, but it is funny isn't it?
I say, if you're dumb enough to ride around without a helmet or a seatbelt, then I'm glad you're going to be culled from the genepool. I do think that children should be required to wear them until they're deemed adult enough to make the decision themselves though.
Darwinism!
I'm with Sea Hag!
Post a Comment