Originally Posted by
hagen2456
Weird reasoning. Leaves out that a large segment of helmet bearers are also helmet law advocates (at least here on these pages). Helmet skeptics fight helmet laws. Ergo will helmet skeptics have to try to convince some helmet bearers that helmet laws are bad, because helmets are not what helmet law advocates believe them to be.
Please apply some basic logic to this issue.
Not weird at all. Who here is advocating helmet laws? If you oppose specific laws, then why not single them out and argue against them and their
actual proponents, instead of hypothetical ones? Again, though, I see no evidence here of anyone actually discussing real laws and how to repeal them.