What’s “helmet law”?
Laws that mandate helmets on motorcycles.
We don’t have that.
1 Like
Lots of states do.
I’ll be damned, we started chipping away at ours. 
1 Like
2 Likes
1 Like
“My Murcia Cosplay is better than Your’n!”
Loyalty Signalling so the tribe members can identify their own.
South Dakota does not have helmet laws.
Personally I’m of the opinion the rider should be responsible for wearing a helmet. The goobermint doesn’t need to make them other than creating another revenue generating source. I’ve been riding for 50+ years racing, cruising and touring. Had some nasty crashes too. I crashed 20 years ago In Ohio on I-77 at highway speed. There’s no helmet law in Ohio but if I wasn’t wearing mine I wouldn’t be here pissing people off and acting like an ■■■■■■■■ 
Broken bones and road rash heals, smash the noggin and it’s happy trails pard.
It’s entirely possible to believe that the Sturgis rally was every bit as dumb as Democratic acolytes also ignoring medical science to celebrate Obama’s 60th birthday with their own super spreader event.
Tsk, tsk.
The fact I was pointing out is the many examples across the country of just how ■■■■■■ up the management of large crowds are . Don’t tell me this one works but there’s an excuse for that one and that one and that one. How is Chicago doing stopping murders? That far exceeds the importance of this concert? Answer that honestly and you’ll then honestly know where I’m coming from. That concert has the same probability of COVID infections as any other gathering and to apply a double standard is pure hypocrisy and the fact that the MSM isn’t covering it to the same degree is why they in part are “fake news”.
See this is where you are incorrect from a logic standpoint. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to defend a concert over biker drinking in a bar, just pointing out the statement “the same probability of COVID infections” is incorrect.
An outside gathering where people have to either be vaccinated or show proof of a PCR test within the last couple of days DOES NOT have the same probability of infection for indoor gatherings in a close group of unvaccinated people not requiring any test for admittance.
To claim that the probability of infection is the same is wrong. Not saying there is no probability, but the probability for one is much smaller then the other.
WW
Sorry, that’s just a total load of ignorance. Lolla required vaccine proof or recent test. Sturgis did not. Lolla required masks for indoor portions of their festival. Sturgis did not.
Even if we grant that security at Lolla would not catch all those who lied about vaccine and test status, it still was much more than the ZERO measures Sturgis put in place. Statistically speaking, half measures are better than no measures, meaning the chances for infections are at least partially mitigated at Lolla.
I know. 
…and keep regurgibleating their bull feces.
1 Like
I’ll ask again, and I am sure you will deflect to the southern border or Chicago murder rates, but did Sturgis require vaccinations or negative tests? I’ll add, was Sturgis an outdoor only event?
If the answers are all yes, then the two events carry equivalent risks. If the answers are no, Sturgis is more risky than Lallpolooza.
Now, keep in mind, I’m not saying LLP is a good idea. Personally, I pulled the plug on a concert I was dying to attended because the tour had gone through Delta rich states like Georgia and Kentucky, and about have the audience would be people attending all the shows of the tour. Broke my heart, but we had some events that would have been really screwed up if any of us tested postive, so that was our decision. Without those events we would have been comfortable going for sure.
None the less, unless Sturgis required vaccinations and tests, it’s not equivient in risk to LLP.
Is that LLP?
Then all of those attendees are vaccianted or have tested negative in the last…I think it was 72 hours.
Meaningless.
1 Like
Not meaningless, but not 100% either.
