# Should ski patrollers be required to wear helmets???



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 13, 2008)

Earlier when I was skiing, I noticed that a large percentage of the ski patrollers at Blue mountain do not wear helmets.  Some just wear a hat, earmuffs or a headband.  I sort of feel like the ski patrollers should set an example and ski with a helmet.  What does everybody thing?  The same for ski instructors..and I also feel that they should be required for the terrain park..


----------



## gmcunni (Dec 13, 2008)

to each his own. i just started wearing a helmet last year after many years of skiing.  i hate having somehting on my head,  i'd only wear a hat when it was absolutely necessary. i imagine this spring when it warms up i'll lose the helmet.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 13, 2008)

Over on PASR..people are saying that it should be required by all mountain employees with respect to workmans compensation insurance..Yes a helmet isn't as fashionable as a dinosaur hat but it keeps your head safe and warm..


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 13, 2008)

Voted no---personal choice


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 13, 2008)

I voted yes because 1st rule in EMS is rescuer safety.


----------



## millerm277 (Dec 13, 2008)

Voted no. In favor of personal choice as well.


----------



## deadheadskier (Dec 13, 2008)

To each their own. There's no compelling reason not to wear a helmet and after making the switch, I'd never go back.  I even wore mine on a 60 degree day last spring.  Yes it was hot, but I made it few runs without it and something just seemed off.

If I was a mountain manager, I would require all employees to wear one, but I'd also supply it for them as part of their uniform.  I've worked at plenty of restaurants over the years that required no slip shoes and supplied them for the workers.


----------



## AtomicSkier (Dec 13, 2008)

It's one thing if you're out skiing with friends, then sure, it's personal choice, though I still say you're a moron for not wearing a helmet, but when you're getting paid by the mountain, who has to pay workers comp, etc, you should be required to wear a helmet.  At that point it shouldn't be personal preference.  

At my mountain, I'd make them wear helmets   If anything, it sets a good example for all the idiots who aren't.


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 13, 2008)

AtomicSkier said:


> It's one thing if you're out skiing with friends, then sure, it's personal choice, though I still say you're a moron for not wearing a helmet, but when you're getting paid by the mountain, who has to pay workers comp, etc, you should be required to wear a helmet.  At that point it shouldn't be personal preference.
> 
> At my mountain, I'd make them wear helmets   If anything, it sets a good example for all the idiots who aren't.



Snot nice to call people morons


----------



## AtomicSkier (Dec 13, 2008)

campgottagopee said:


> Snot nice to call people morons


Sorry  I guess that was rude.

People not wearing helmets is darwinism at its finest.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 13, 2008)

For those who talk about helmets being hot for spring skiing..most good helmets have nice vents like the Giro Fuse which can be found online for $50..and you can remove the earflaps to make it similar to a bike helmet..when I start mountain biking in the spring, I'm getting a full face helmet..

Here is a good example....here in PA, there are no motorcycle helmet laws.  I'd say 3/4 of motorcyclists wear one and the other 1/4 don't.  I bet 100% of bike cops wear one..not only are they keeping their brains intact but are setting a good example..

If you still want to wear your headband...try this example.  Grab a melon..and drop it on the kitchen floor from shoulder height..Grab another melon..stick it in a ski helmet..then drop it on the kitchen floor..which melon would you rather have as your head..


----------



## skibumtress (Dec 13, 2008)

RootDKJ said:


> I voted yes because 1st rule in EMS is rescuer safety.



I agree.  Also sets a good example.


----------



## playoutside (Dec 13, 2008)

voted no.  but would hope they would do so to set an example.  I do think it's ok for a resort to require it if they are paid emps.


----------



## gmcunni (Dec 13, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> For those who talk about helmets being hot for spring skiing..most good helmets have nice vents like the Giro Fuse which can be found online for $50..and you can remove the earflaps to make it similar to a bike helmet..



yeah, i have that helmet.    just don't like wearing it when it is warm.:smash:


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 13, 2008)

gmcunni said:


> yeah, i have that helmet.    just don't like wearing it when it is warm.:smash:




My next helmet is going to be Camo..


----------



## gmcunni (Dec 13, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> My next helmet is going to be Camo..



really? i figured you had many different covers for your helmet, switching up every day depending on your mood ;-)


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 13, 2008)

AtomicSkier said:


> Sorry  I guess that was rude.
> 
> People not wearing helmets is darwinism at its finest.



Much better


----------



## millerm277 (Dec 13, 2008)

AtomicSkier said:


> It's one thing if you're out skiing with friends, then sure, it's personal choice, though I still say you're a moron for not wearing a helmet, but when you're getting paid by the mountain, who has to pay workers comp, etc, you should be required to wear a helmet.  At that point it shouldn't be personal preference.



Possibly true. But you have to realize also, that a LOT of ski patrollers are volunteers, not paid employees.


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 13, 2008)

AtomicSkier said:


> Sorry  I guess that was rude.
> 
> People not wearing helmets is darwinism at its finest.



Lol. Hahahahaha


----------



## ski63 (Dec 13, 2008)

I skiied 40 years w/out and the last 4 with a helmet.  Not skiing with a helmet would never be an option for me today. A helmet is always warmer in cold weather and a good helmet lets you remove liner parts to provide ventilation for warmer weather.

That said, it seems really strange that ALL patrollers would not wear a helmet.  A patroller is supposed  to set the example whenever they are on the slopes.

On a personal note, I had a fall the first year I wore a helmet that I am sure would have been a serious concusion.  I got up, found my skiis and had a great rest of the season.

The way I see it, a helmet maximizes that chances that I will be skiing for many more years.


----------



## 4aprice (Dec 13, 2008)

ski63 said:


> I skiied 40 years w/out and the last 4 with a helmet.  Not skiing with a helmet would never be an option for me today. .



I agree.  Funny thing is I never wore a helmut till a guy I was skiing with in the trees at Solitude Utah turned to me and said "You know you should wear a helmut because you have a wife and kids, I'm single and don't care if I become a vegetable".  I could not ski in the trees for the rest of the day and went and bought a helmut that night.

Alex

Lake Hopatcong, NJ


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Dec 13, 2008)

If you're repping the mountain, volunteer or paid, you should be wearing a helmet. Personal choice is fine if you're not wearing official garb. No different than a MC traffic cop, they wear a helmet despite state laws or local ordinances. What they do on their off time is their biz.


----------



## boston_e (Dec 13, 2008)

I also voted no.


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Dec 13, 2008)

millerm277 said:


> Possibly true. But you have to realize also, that a LOT of ski patrollers are volunteers, not paid employees.



No true...volunteer patrollers, are compensated in several ways, not least of which is a seasons pass for themselves and dependents, so many of the same employment rules and benefits apply..Plus they always get the chicks at the bar after the day is done...:wink:


----------



## andyzee (Dec 13, 2008)

GSS is a gay moron.


----------



## Rossi Smash (Dec 13, 2008)

It's very interesting that those who choose to wear a helmet, feel they must convince others to do the same. I don't and feel no need to get you to wear a hat or not. Do whatever you are comfortable with. Reminds me of the people outside the airports.....


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Dec 13, 2008)

If safety is paramount for a resort owner, it should be reflected by it's staff and reps. Helmets overrwhelmingly reduce risk of head injuries. What folks do off the clock or out of uniform is there choice. Actually, I'm kinda surprised WC insurers and OSHA don't require it by now. Maybe some do.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 13, 2008)

andyzee said:


> GSS is a gay moron.



Andy why don't you stop sniffing glue and contribute something..


----------



## SKIQUATTRO (Dec 14, 2008)

back in '94 on Spring Break, a bunch of us went skiing in VT for the week (stowe, K, Bush etc) my roommate was a beginner skiier and doing pretty good wedge turns on easy greens when he hit some ice, fell, smacked his head and was takend down in the wagon then to the ER with a massive concussion......just takes 1 little bonk and your skiing days could be over or worse...i wear mine religiously....who would ride (road or mtn) without a brainbucket??  not me....even though it dont work so well sometimez...i'll keep the brain i got....


----------



## jack97 (Dec 14, 2008)

I voted yes, it basically sets an example for everyone in the mountain. I would even go so far as ski instructors, again for the same reason. Especially for the later case, most teach noobs and kids, they are the ones that will mostly take a fall and will need that protection.


----------



## davidhowland14 (Dec 14, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Andy why don't you stop sniffing glue and contribute something..



+1

I voted yes. They represent the mountain. I always find it really funny when people who make stupid (no, I'm not afraid to say it. It's stupid to not wear a helmet) decisions act incredulous when others try to help them make the right decision. On the other hand, by allowing those who don't wear helmets to continue to do so, we're eliminating them from the gene pool. As a previous poster said, Darwinian.


----------



## skibumtress (Dec 14, 2008)

I do believe in choice.   If you choose not to where a helmet, it's your choice.  However I DO believe that parents, mountain employees who are on the hill (i.e., ski patrol, ambassadors, etc.) shouold where a helmet.  Like I said before, it sets an example.
Yes I do wear a helmet and have fallen on my head a few times, but I KNOW my injury would have been worse if I wasn't wearing my helmet.


----------



## bobbutts (Dec 14, 2008)

I wear a helmet all the time (even when I'm out for a walk or shopping or sitting here at my desk).  Anything to keep the mighty Darwin off my back.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Dec 14, 2008)

Yep ! if iam the owner of the" bidness"and  i'fn  i 'm payin   them and assuming the risk mgt overheads then  they dance by my rules  -------------------------


----------



## Bumpsis (Dec 14, 2008)

bobbutts said:


> I wear a helmet all the time (even when I'm out for a walk or shopping or sitting here at my desk).  Anything to keep the mighty Darwin off my back.



Perfect! As was another posting about the helmet heads evangelizing. Between the insults and disdain leveled at non-helmet folk here, this amounts to helmet wearing tyranny.

I voted no. It should be  a choice. The main purpose of the ski patrol is to provide a reasonable margin of safetey  on the mountain for the skiing/riding public. They not out there to "provide a good example".
As a side note, I have yet to see a ski patrolman get down a mountain in an irrespeonsible manner, yet, I have seen plenty helmet heads ski like abosolute morons, without any regard for their own, much less, others' safety.

On that point, I really do think that wearing a helmet gives people a false sense of security and thus encourages more reckless behaviour. 

I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't be wearing helmets, but  wearing one doesn't give one the freedom to be reckless. Yet, that's exactly the trend.  Studies have been published in peer reviewed science journals that cite higher rate of serious head injuries among skiers and riders despite the increased adoption of ski helmets.

This is primerly due to greater speed and greater risks that people expose themselves to.
These studies cleary show that helmets have a substantial protective effects at lower speeds (up to 15mph). Above that, a helmet is only of limited help. The higher rates of injuries are also attributed to the increase of use of the "non-traditional ski terrain" such as terrain parks, tree skiing, etc.

I do wear a helment when I'm off piste (Mt. Washington, etc.), but I really don't like wearing it when I'm at a ski area. Yet, I feel I'm being forced to wear it only because of inconsiderate helmeted a-holes who think that physical laws no longer apply to them and a anyone not wearing one is a moron anyway.


----------



## skidbump (Dec 14, 2008)

Helmets and seatbelts are a personal choice in my opinion and if you feel you should not have to wear  or use them then it should be you god given right not to do so.If it a mountain policy then iether comply or move along.But i honestly feel it is nobodys business if i do or dont and say pissoff.


----------



## billski (Dec 14, 2008)

This is an odd discussion to be having without any obvious Patroller participation (I think they all hang at Epic anyways.)   All the patrollers I know work their tails off, are overworked and underpaid.  They are fairly highly trained not just at rescue, but more important, the more commonplace EMT response.   They see the bodily damage every day.  Let them chose.  

Often patrol are not skiing, but are trailside, with their helmet, jacket and gloves off trying to stabilize another casualty.  I spent a couple days tagging along and "skiing" with patrol now and then.  It's amazing how little skiing we actually got in.  All you need to do is help in a few of these scenarios and listen to the crying, the groaning and sometimes scary silence as the patrol checked neurological vitals.  After seeing a few of these I was entirely convinced a helmet was simple common sense.  

I recently saw an ad for a east-coast resort, recruiting for a FULL TIME X-ray technician to work in Ski Patrol.  I'll let you draw conclusions on the number of "customers" this tech will see every day.


----------



## nysskier (Dec 14, 2008)

I say it is up to the individual. If it is a mountain policy then the mountain should provide them. I personally hate to have anyone dictate to me what I should and shouldn't do


----------



## skibumtress (Dec 14, 2008)

skidbump said:


> seatbelts are a personal choice in my opinion


Sure it's a person choice, but wearing seat belts is a law in most states (if not all).  OK, so personal choice to get pulled over, get a ticket, points on you license in some states and pay a hefty fine in some states.  Your choice.
This is a pet peeve of mine.  Two years ago, my cousin chose to make a choice -- NOT to wear a seat belt, was ejected from his car, killed instantly.  His four children, wife, family, friends, etc. lost a wonderful person.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 14, 2008)

jack97 said:


> I voted yes, it basically sets an example for everyone in the mountain. I would even go so far as ski instructors, again for the same reason. Especially for the later case, most teach noobs and kids, they are the ones that will mostly take a fall and will need that protection.



Ski instructors should definitely be required to wear helmets as well...along with the people who give tours..it's important..:idea:


----------



## sledhaulingmedic (Dec 14, 2008)

millerm277 said:


> Possibly true. But you have to realize also, that a LOT of ski patrollers are volunteers, not paid employees.



Although Workers' Comp laws vary by state, the volunteer patroller is an "Agent of the Corporation" in most instances.  There have been several cases where volunteer patrollers were injured and the mountain was held liable.  The old days of the Patrol being a separate entity  is long gone.  The mountain management absolutely has the right to dictate appropriate  Personal Protective Equipment.

I've worn a helmet for over ten years now.  I do believe patrollers should set a good example, as well as take any available steps to protect themselves.  I do prefer that personal choice not be infringed, so I did vote no.  That being said, I do believe helmets are a good idea.

Police, EMS and Fire are currently dealing with the new requirement to wear High Visibility Work Wear on Federally funded Highways.  Sounds like a good idea, right?  First incarnation of the Federal Reg required a vest so large, it covered the cops' gun belts.  Not really an increase in safety there.  Now, our Fire Department  has to put on the High Vis vest over our Turnout coat, but only if we're not actively involved in Firefighting.  Then as soon as we're done, we need to put it on.  It was all well intended, it just was not very well thought out.

Just curious, GSS:  If all the patrollers at Blue are like those Ski Nazi's on the Ski Patrol show, don't you think they'd be safer with sparring helmets?  (Some of that non-sense made me embarrassed to admit I'm a patroller)


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 14, 2008)

SKIQUATTRO said:


> back in '94 on Spring Break, a bunch of us went skiing in VT for the week (stowe, K, Bush etc) my roommate was a beginner skiier and doing pretty good wedge turns on easy greens when he hit some ice, fell, smacked his head and was takend down in the wagon then to the ER with a massive concussion......just takes 1 little bonk and your skiing days could be over or worse...i wear mine religiously....who would ride (road or mtn) without a brainbucket??  not me....even though it dont work so well sometimez...i'll keep the brain i got....



I was telling GSS on the lift today, that 7 years ago, I had just started to ski again and while going off a little booter (that I had hit ok on the previous run) I botched the landing and smacked the back of my head on a nice patch of ice.  The first thing I said to my self was "damn, that's why I see lots of people wearing helmets these days"  Never skied with out once since.


----------



## 2Planker (Dec 14, 2008)

millerm277 said:


> Possibly true. But you have to realize also, that a LOT of ski patrollers are volunteers, not paid employees.



As a 25 year patroller (both full time and volunteer)  the volunteers are indeed covered by Workman's Compensation.  It obviously is state regulated, but at our resort, they pay all your medical expenses if injured on the job.  They do not pay your regular salary while out of action from your "day job" though.  Plus our patrollers are reassigned to desk duty or working the clinic if they can't ski - You still need to get your 25 days in, if possible.


----------



## gorgonzola (Dec 14, 2008)

i think they should be required  as ambassadors of the mountain - but we're talkng blue. last year my buddy was trying to do some helmet cam footage (another advantage!) on barneys and was having technical difficulties so we were stopped off to the side. this rather large patroller snoplows over with a lit cigarette to see if we'er ok - we just looked at him and started cracking up, where was tru-tv then? only at blue.... tonight the ticket scanner at the valley lodge looked like a hit man! 
i only started wearing a helmet when my kids started and figured if i'm making them do it i should as well.


----------



## Johnskiismore (Dec 14, 2008)

If the mountain provides the patrollers helmets then yes, it keeps them safe and sets an example


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 14, 2008)

gorgonzola said:


> .... Tonight the ticket scanner at the valley lodge looked like a hit man!
> .




lmbfao!!!


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 14, 2008)

sledhaulingmedic said:


> Just curious, GSS:  If all the patrollers at Blue are like those Ski Nazi's on the Ski Patrol show, don't you think they'd be safer with sparring helmets?  (Some of that non-sense made me embarrassed to admit I'm a patroller)




I was thinking they should give them tasers for people violating the skiers responsibility code.  All the people from the ski patrol show who were ejected by the Blue mountain ski patrol deserved to be ejected...skiing with a bow and arrow, mouthing off to a ski patroller and hit and runs are not to be tolerated.


----------



## 2Planker (Dec 14, 2008)

Hmmmm   That might work.  Now that Tazers are  legal in most states (Not NJ, NY, MA or RI though)....  

  How about Paintball guns  ?  That would make the slow zone offenders easy to spot by the  lifties, and then stop them from getting on the lift.

  But seriously folks,  You may be able to outrun a patroller, but you ain't gonna' outrun his Motorola.


----------



## ski63 (Dec 14, 2008)

2 points.....

Ski patrollers are some of the most important people on the hill and the most visible.  I agree that I have never seen a patroller ski recklessly but while in uniform they are obligated to set a good example in today's ski/snowboard environment. So...a helmet should be part of the uniform.

As far as a sense of false security, I freely admit the fall I referred to was partially due to the poor judgement I used that first year with a helmet.


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 14, 2008)

gorgonzola said:


> i think they should be required  as ambassadors of the mountain - but we're talkng blue. last year my buddy was trying to do some helmet cam footage (another advantage!) on barneys and was having technical difficulties so we were stopped off to the side. this rather large patroller snoplows over with a lit cigarette to see if we'er ok - we just looked at him and started cracking up, where was tru-tv then? only at blue.... tonight the ticket scanner at the valley lodge looked like a hit man!
> i only started wearing a helmet when my kids started and figured if i'm making them do it i should as well.


was this a kinda heavyset guy with a cheesy mustache?


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 14, 2008)

RootDKJ said:


> was this a kinda heavyset guy with a cheesy mustache?



That sounds like about 30 percent of the people on epicski..


----------



## Geoff (Dec 14, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> For those who talk about helmets being hot for spring skiing..most good helmets have nice vents like the Giro Fuse which can be found online for $50..and you can remove the earflaps to make it similar to a bike helmet..when I start mountain biking in the spring, I'm getting a full face helmet..
> 
> Here is a good example....here in PA, there are no motorcycle helmet laws.  I'd say 3/4 of motorcyclists wear one and the other 1/4 don't.  I bet 100% of bike cops wear one..not only are they keeping their brains intact but are setting a good example..
> 
> If you still want to wear your headband...try this example.  Grab a melon..and drop it on the kitchen floor from shoulder height..Grab another melon..stick it in a ski helmet..then drop it on the kitchen floor..which melon would you rather have as your head..




No way I'm ever going to wear a helmet when it's spring mush bumps.


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 14, 2008)

It's interesting to note the percentage differences between AZ and PASR on this topic

Yes
PASR - 68.75%
AZ - 52.5%

No
PASR - 31.25%
AZ - 47.5%


----------



## hardline (Dec 14, 2008)

when i first started riding back in MASH i got one. then the first day back in the woods after wearing a helmet i was lovin it. no longer did the trees thwak my head or grab hat and goggles.


----------



## GolfingOwl (Dec 14, 2008)

Absolutely.  Ski resorts or the organization that certifies them should require it.  Motorcycle and bike cops are required to wear helmets.  The personal choice argument doesn't fly in a workplace situation.  When they are not working, the can do whatever they please.


----------



## sledhaulingmedic (Dec 14, 2008)

RootDKJ said:


> was this a kinda heavyset guy with a cheesy mustache?



Hey, hey, HEY!  Don't be dissin' cheesy mustaches!  (Or mullets)


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 14, 2008)

sledhaulingmedic said:


> Hey, hey, HEY!  Don't be dissin' cheesy mustaches!  (Or mullets)


never....but I think I saw this guy...and he, well, looks interesting


well maybe not the mullet:-o:wink::flame:


----------



## ski9 (Dec 14, 2008)

andyzee said:


> GSS is a gay moron.



That came off a tad mean, Andy. 

I'd vote yes just because most everyone I ski with is doing something that really should include protection by a helmet. There are plenty of gentle bowls out west where the nearest tree is a couple hundred yards away, but not in these parts...

I've been thinking of switching over to a goalie mask, though...


----------



## ski9 (Dec 14, 2008)

AtomicSkier said:


> It's one thing if you're out skiing with friends, then sure, it's personal choice, though I still say you're a moron for not wearing a helmet, but when you're getting paid by the mountain, who has to pay workers comp, etc, you should be required to wear a helmet.  At that point it shouldn't be personal preference.
> 
> At my mountain, I'd make them wear helmets   If anything, it sets a good example for all the idiots who aren't.




You're a gay moron x2.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 15, 2008)

RootDKJ said:


> It's interesting to note the percentage differences between AZ and PASR on this topic
> 
> Yes
> PASR - 68.75%
> ...



I'm guessing it's because AlpineZone has a much older average age.  Younger people are used to rules and regulations..older people generally follow the rules less and are more stubborn and set in their ways..Just my guess..


----------



## JD (Dec 15, 2008)

Just searching around for ski realted deaths.  Any page I found that listed causes of death indicated pretty clearly that head trauma is the main reason.  I don't really care if other people wear them, and I don't really care if patrolers wear them, but I find it amazing that this piece of gear is not madatory for patrolers, and even general public.  And two, as someone who didn't used to wear one, and now does and has for some time...I recognized they are warmer, when it's cold, and way better in he woods.


----------



## catskills (Dec 15, 2008)

When I am wearing the ski patrol parka with the white cross, I only wear my helmet on really cold days.  Ski Patrol work many times requires hard work that generates lots of body heat.  For example, skating a sled on the flats pulling a 280lb patient in the toboggan is hard work and your body builds up heat fast.   To get rid of that heat when doing many different ski patrol tasks is very easy to just take the knit hat off and tuck it in my jacket.  Helmets impair hearing.  Its important to be able to look listen and feel.  On a steep slope, if I take my helmet off to do patient care its going to slide down hill.  For me,  the helmet is one less thing I have to worry about when working on patients.  Like I said, when its real cold out, there is nothing like a helmet to keep you warm.  BTW I have the Giro helmet with lots of vents.  

When I ski on my personal time, I wear a helmet almost everyday except very late spring skiing.  

My vote is NO (personal choice).   

BTW I think I would be safer if I was required to wear my helmet  while driving to the ski area rather than wearing it while skiing.  Over 40,000 deaths on the highways in the USA every year.  Compared to 30-40 deaths each year on the slopes in the USA.  *You want to save lives,  figure out a way to make cars and trucks safer.*


----------



## SKIQUATTRO (Dec 15, 2008)

its amazing the care people taking in making sure their personal posessions are in safe and working order, but dont think their brain fits into that category....


----------



## billski (Dec 15, 2008)

RootDKJ said:


> It's interesting to note the percentage differences between AZ and PASR on this topic
> 
> Yes
> PASR - 68.75%
> ...



Me thinks it has more to do with the resorts frequented and clientele each attracts.  I would expect that the areas close to metropolitan areas have the most ill-behaved clientele.  

In those areas patrol is forced to act more like a lunch-room monitor, whereas at a place like Sugarbush, Sunday River etc. the patrol attends more to accidents and the like.

It would be interesting to contrast the PASR and AZ in terms of resorts where they most often ski.  That may explain a lot of the disparity.


----------



## davidhowland14 (Dec 15, 2008)

catskills said:


> To get rid of that heat when doing many different ski patrol tasks is very easy to just take the knit hat off and tuck it in my jacket.



It's also easy to take off a helmet and clip it to your belt.



> Helmets impair hearing.  Its important to be able to look listen and feel.  On a steep slope, if I take my helmet off to do patient care its going to slide down hill.  For me,  the helmet is one less thing I have to worry about when working on patients.
> 
> When I ski on my personal time, I wear a helmet almost everyday except very late spring skiing.



Scene and rescuer safety. Isn't it more important to keep yourself safe so that you can help patients than to worry about your helmet sliding down hill? Aren't you gonna go down the hill yourself anyways?



> My vote is NO (personal choice).
> 
> BTW I think I would be safer if I was required to wear my helmet  while driving to the ski area rather than wearing it while skiing.  Over 40,000 deaths on the highways in the USA every year.  Compared to 30-40 deaths each year on the slopes in the USA.  *You want to save lives,  figure out a way to make cars and trucks safer.*



Yeah, but that's not the point. You wear your seatbelt, don't you? That's an option. You know, if you car flips over and bursts into flame, you'll be able to get out of the car faster without a seatbelt. But you still wear one, don't you?


----------



## danny p (Dec 15, 2008)

JD said:


> And two, as someone who didn't used to wear one, and now does and has for some time...I recognized they are warmer, when it's cold, and way better in he woods.



+1

I dont care if patrollers wear them or not, but I won't go out without mine, except for super warm soft spring days.  Hard to believe 12 out of my 14 seasons I was sooo against them.


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Dec 15, 2008)

SKIQUATTRO said:


> its amazing the care people taking in making sure their personal posessions are in safe and working order, but dont think their brain fits into that category....



I'm not that surprised when I see arguments like "personal choice", which ignores the safety issue altogether,  "sweating" or pulling in auto related deaths. Much like any other "personal choice" issues like smoking, MC helmets and seatbelts, unless it is mandated, people will make that "choice". I didn't start wearing a helmet until about 3 years ago. For no other reason than I am getting older, sensing my mortality a bit more, realizing that a brain injury could put us in the poor house and feeling a sense of personal responsibility. Taking a helmet off on a steep slope and placing it on a pole seems to solve the slippage problem while assisting an injured skier.  Besides, helmets are replaceable, brain injury could be permanent.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Given the chance... .  With all the "rules" you guys want to impose on people.... You would suck the very soul out of skiing..

I really pine for the "old days"...  When we were a crazy bunch not all filled with rules and straight laced dogma...    I bet 75% of this board would want the guys from "Hot Dog" banned from skiing at their area...   Instead of celebrating their craziness as a part of the culture.....

There is hardly ever not a thread here that is judging someone or something... 

Start the flames...


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 15, 2008)

I'd vote yes, because ski patrol does set an example and does represent the mountain, and are on some type of compensation.  For all those people so adamantly
opposed to helmets, I'd bet they havent take a bad fall where they've hit their heads, .... yet! Hell why stop at helmets, why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problems solve thenselves?


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Moe Ghoul said:


> I'm not that surprised when I see arguments like "personal choice", which ignores the safety issue altogether





Beetlenut said:


> Hell why stop at helmets, why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problems solve thenselves?



Cool... If you guys had your way - we'd all be bundled up like fake sumo wrestlers...

Spine protectors keep paralysis from occurring..
Wrist protectors will stop a broken wrists...
Bindings that are allowed to be set high can lead to busted knees...
Not wearing goggles can lead to eye injury or loss...
Skis not tuned will make you slip into the woods...


Oh... and skiing is a dangerous sport... fyi....


----------



## sledhaulingmedic (Dec 15, 2008)

I find the issue of removing the helmet while give care to be an interesting concept.  One of my initial reasons for getting a brain bucket was fear of getting hit when working an incident.  Afterall, your stopped and in a situation where you are concentrating on something other than situational awareness.

I keep hearing about loosing the bucket in the spring.  That's why I have two: A Leedom for winter and a Marker, w/o ear coverage for the spring.

As said before, I'm a proponant of helmets and safety in general.  I'm not big on loss of personal choice.  In the end, I'll do what management says.  If I disagree that strongly, I'll quit.  I've been on several patrols over the years, and I choose where I patrol on a number of factors, with the general work environment being a big one.


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> Cool... If you guys had your way - we'd all be bundled up like fake sumo wrestlers......


 
Nope, just you! We wouldn't want to loose that nostalgic man on the street view you so lovingly cling to! :wink:


----------



## Superbman (Dec 15, 2008)

I patrol, I wear a helmet..

but I'm against anything mandatory.  It's a choice-I think getting more patrollers up to speed with ski-skills would do more for their general safety than forcing every old codger on the hill to don a helmet (that or wrap them in bubble wrap).


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> Nope, just you! We wouldn't want to loose that nostalgic man on the street view you so lovingly cling to! :wink:



We had good times...  none of this "you should do this or that" crap....

Speaking of dangerous...
http://forums.alpinezone.com/44307-old-school-2.html#post362847
I hope you "Neo-New School" guys pile on this one..


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Dec 15, 2008)

Superbman said:


> I patrol, I wear a helmet..
> 
> but I'm against anything mandatory.  It's a choice-I think getting more patrollers up to speed with ski-skills would do more for their general safety than forcing every old codger on the hill to don a helmet (that or wrap them in bubble wrap).



There's a point of diminishing return for safety features. Ideally, wearing a Batman suit should offer ultimate protection against injury but who wants to ski in that? If safety equipment ends up hindering enjoyment, flex, agility, etc. then it isn't worth the trade off. That said, a helmet seems to be the least intrusive, best bang for the buck protectionwise. The choice argument seems to be more about principle and less about safety. I still haven't seen a non-helmet argument that outweighs the safety factor. If somebody argued that the risk of serious head injury is extremely remote (witness all the skiers that are doing just fine without one) and few folks intentionally hit trees or do intentional headers into rockbeds, that's one thing. Simply proffering choice doesn't really address the safety or risk issue. Jeez, this thread could get borderline political....Mods are closely monitoring, lol.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Moe Ghoul said:


> That said, a helmet seems to be the least intrusive, best bang for the buck protectionwise.



Eye protection too...
And back protection...
And wrist protection...
And ass protection..
And face guards..
And transceivers out west too..

All non-intrusive..  All non-mandatory..


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> We had good times... none of this "you should do this or that" crap......


 
I hear ya. I remember spending all day on a 200' hill with a rope tow and not wanting to leave. Everything seemed to be better back then, as remembered from today. There have been some worth while improvements during that time though, to make the sport more enjoyable/safe. A helmet IMO is one of them. But I also believe in Darwinism too.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> But I also believe in Darwinism too.



So you believe that people that don't wear helmets will die and people that wear helmets will be naturally selected to survive as some sort of master race?

Darwinism would be more like... People that develop harder heads will survive...   Darwin speaks of natural selection...

For the record... I know 2 guys who died from head injuries with helmets on... 
Above higher speeds... they will just insure you leave a good looking corpse...

That being said I do wear a helmet - most of the time...


----------



## SkiDork (Dec 15, 2008)

just a slightly different angle here, FWIW...

If a safety device (like a helmet) exists and is easily available, and you "personally choose" not to wear it, thats OK with me.  However, if you end up getting an injury that would have been prevented by using that safety device. you should forego all medical insurance coverage for that accident and pay out of pocket.  Does that sound fair?


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

SkiDork said:


> just a slightly different angle here, FWIW...
> 
> If a safety device (like a helmet) exists and is easily available, and you "personally choose" not to wear it, thats OK with me.  However, if you end up getting an injury that would have been prevented by using that safety device. you should forego all medical insurance coverage for that accident and pay out of pocket.  Does that sound fair?



Why stop at helmets?  there's a plethora of safety equipment available for skiing and riding...   

In fact - the safest thing to do it to not ski...  

It's a slippery slope... A Pandora's Box...


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> So you believe that people that don't wear helmets will die and people that wear helmets will be naturally selected to survive as some sort of master race?
> 
> Darwinism would be more like... People that develop harder heads will survive... Darwin speaks of natural selection...
> 
> ...


 
Down boy, down!! I believe in Darwinism from the stand point of natural selection. People who are smarter about their safety, i.e  helmets, seatbelts, not deep frying a turkey in a pot on their gas stove at home,... will have a greater likelyhood of seeing tomorrow dawn. But at the same time,  natural selection doesn't *prevent* people from doing stupid things to increase the chances that today will be the last sunset they'll see. The people that survive won't necessarily develope harder heads, but they may develope a stronger sense of safety or mortality.


----------



## SkiDork (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> Why stop at helmets?  there's a plethora of safety equipment available for skiing and riding...
> 
> In fact - the safest thing to do it to not ski...
> 
> It's a slippery slope... A Pandora's Box...



yes, but I'm not saying you have to wear it or any safety device for that matter.  Alls I'm saying is if you want to be covered for your losses you have to do stuff to try to prevent those losses.  Like locking your front door when you leav your house, etc.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

SkiDork said:


> yes, but I'm not saying you have to wear it or any safety device for that matter.  Alls I'm saying is if you want to be covered for your losses you have to do stuff to try to prevent those losses.  Like locking your front door when you leav your house, etc.



So you shouldn't even walk out onto the slopes without a knee brace(safety device) because there's a good chance you'll twist your knee and have to take insurance?

How many people do you know that have had knee surgery?  they could've prevented those injuries by using a brace or working out more...  But they didn't...


----------



## SkiDork (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> So you shouldn't even walk out onto the slopes without a knee brace(safety device) because there's a good chance you'll twist your knee and have to take insurance?
> 
> How many people do you know that have had knee surgery?  they could've prevented those injuries by using a brace or working out more...  But they didn't...




yeah, I guess its a dumb idea.  Oh well.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> The people that survive won't necessarily develope harder heads, but they may develope a stronger sense of safety or mortality.



Oh... Morality... different issue...  that an even bigger pile of bull..  And gets to the heart of my debate about people sucking the soul out of skiing...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection

Natural selection is the process by which favorable heritable traits become more common in successive generations of a population of reproducing organisms, and unfavorable heritable traits become less common, due to differential reproduction of genotypes.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 15, 2008)

Isn't part of a job of a ski patroller to promote safety???  How can you promote safety wearing a Jester Hat???  I agree about ski patrollers getting more instruction as well.  There are patrollers at Blue who are hardly low intermediate skiers..I wouldn't want them pulling me in a sled..


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

SkiDork said:


> yeah, I guess its a dumb idea.  Oh well.



not dumb... just deeper then most people want to go...  like i said... a pandoras box...


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Isn't part of a job of a ski patroller to promote safety???



Who's idea of safety?  yours?  I think not...

the skiers Responsibility code mentions nothing about helmets...

http://www.nsp.org/1/nsp/Safety_Information/YourResponsibilityCode.asp  <<NSP Webstie btw...

"Always stay in control, and be able to stop or avoid other people or objects.
People ahead of you have the right of way. It is your responsibility to avoid them.
You must not stop where you obstruct a trail, or are not visible from above.
Whenever starting downhill or merging into a trail, look uphill and yield to others.
Always use devices to help prevent runaway equipment.
Observe all posted signs and warnings. Keep off closed trails and out of closed areas.
Prior to using any lift, you must have the knowledge and ability to load, ride and unload safely."


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

http://www.nsp.org/1/nsp/Safety_Information/HelmetSafety.asp  <NSP Website

"A helmet is one additional tool for slope safety, and the National Ski Patrol recommends wearing one while skiing or boarding. However, it's important to remember that helmets have limitations. Studies show that helmets offer considerably less protection for serious head injury to snow riders traveling more than 12-14 mph. Safety and conscientious skiing and riding should be considered the most important factors to injury prevention, while helmets provide a second line of defense. Don't let a helmet give you a false sense of security: When wearing a helmet, ski and snowboard as if you're not."


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 15, 2008)

SkiDork said:


> just a slightly different angle here, FWIW...
> 
> If a safety device (like a helmet) exists and is easily available, and you "personally choose" not to wear it, thats OK with me.  However, if you end up getting an injury that would have been prevented by using that safety device. you should forego all medical insurance coverage for that accident and pay out of pocket.  Does that sound fair?



Not to me because peeps skiing w/out buckets aren't breaking any laws so why should they be punished????


----------



## Sparky (Dec 15, 2008)

I can’t believe that this thread has gone on for 8 pages. We have been through this several times in the past and every  time it generates a heated response. I have observed that most of the heat comes from those that have chosen to wear helmet. I’m not really sure why. The only thing I can think of is that it was a difficult decision for them and they want to impress upon the rest of us that the logic was irrefutable, therefore everyone should wear a helmet.  The folks that choose (as they are still allowed to for the moment) not to wear a  helmet state that it is just that a “choice”, and they don’t seem to care if someone made the “choice” to wear one. These opposing attitudes say a lot more about today’s skier population. There seems to be a force bent on regulating everything to the point that there are no decisions left to make. Which is about as opposite to the basic idea of the individual freedom that skiing provides.  When I say freedom I’m obviously not talking about abandoning all the responsibilities we share with the rest of the population. I’m talking about those all too brief moments where we are in charge of our own destiny, those moments when we are guiding ourselves down whatever trail we choose. 

As far as patrollers and instructors being role models, I semi-politely say 
“bull” . Parents are role models. If you are teaching your kid to do something just because someone else does it you are on a slippery slope. It is easy for a kid to pick the wrong role model or to have his model revealed as something less then desirable. Just check the news, sports figures are doing all sorts of things they shouldn’t, along with teachers, priests, governors. There are fallen role models everywhere. I tried to teach my kids to think and made smart decisions. They like everybody made some mistakes, but in general I think they ended up with a better mechanism for making decisions. A  better mechanism  then just following someone else.


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 15, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Isn't part of a job of a ski patroller to promote safety???  How can you promote safety wearing a Jester Hat???  I agree about ski patrollers getting more instruction as well.  There are patrollers at Blue who are hardly low intermediate skiers..I wouldn't want them pulling me in a sled..



Yes, but I think it's best demonstrated by skiing in control and not by what you may or may not wear...just sayin


----------



## jack97 (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> Oh... Morality... different issue...  that an even bigger pile of bull..  And gets to the heart of my debate about people sucking the soul out of skiing...
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection
> 
> Natural selection is the process by which favorable heritable traits become more common in successive generations of a population of reproducing organisms, and unfavorable heritable traits become less common, due to differential reproduction of genotypes.




From my pov, it's not morality. Health care and insurance is sucking this country dry. Somebody wants to make a choice on not wearing a helmet thats fine with me. However, when my health care cost or insurance goes up because of their choice then it not longer becomes an independent choice, we all pay to some extent by the darwinian factor.

Stupid people are costing me mula.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Sparky said:


> There seems to be a force bent on regulating everything to the point that there are no decisions left to make. Which is about as opposite to the basic idea of the individual freedom that skiing provides.




DING DING DING!!!  2 rounds for you next trip to Jiminy..

FREEDOM!


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

jack97 said:


> From my pov, it's not morality. Health care and insurance is sucking this country dry. Somebody wants to make a choice on not wearing a helmet thats fine with me. However, when my health care cost or insurance goes up because of their choice then it not longer becomes an independent choice, we all pay to some extent by the darwinian factor.
> 
> Stupid people are costing me mula.



Stupid people are ruining my sport!

Stay off the slopes...  It's dangerous.. and many people get hurt...  Stay out of the trees too... most injuries occur there...


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

campgottagopee said:


> Yes, but I think it's best demonstrated by skiing in control and not by what you may or may not wear...just sayin



So you can't replace technique with a helmet?


----------



## jack97 (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> Stupid people are ruining my sport!
> 
> Stay off the slopes...  It's dangerous.. and many people get hurt...  Stay out of the trees too... most injuries occur there...



lol.... big brotha!!  You're gonna luv the next four years.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

jack97 said:


> lol.... big brotha!!  You're gonna luv the next four years.



Don't start with me about that...  

What is Obama going to keep the Patriot Act?  :???:  

lame...


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> ...That being said I do wear a helmet - most of the time...


 
So why do you wear a helmet if it apparently goes against everything you believe in?


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> So why do you wear a helmet if it apparently goes against everything you believe in?



..you don't get it...

thats ok..


----------



## JD (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> Above higher speeds... they will just insure you leave a good looking corpse..



My brother suffered a sever concusion with a helmet on.  W/O one he could well be a vegetable or dead.  There is no reasonalble argument that helmets don't improve your chances of surviving a blow to the head.  At this point, it's a choice, but  don't try and say they don't do anything.  At higher speed crashes they may well turn a sever laceration into a deflected shot to the head.  
DMC, do you wear your seat belt?  Crashes at higher speeds involoving head ons with tractor traillers will kill you anyway...so why bother to wear one at all?


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

JD said:


> My brother suffered a sever concusion with a helmet on.  W/O one he could well be a vegetable or dead.  There is no reasonalble argument that helmets don't improve your chances of surviving a blow to the head.  At this point, it's a choice, but  don't try and say they don't dop anything.  At higher speed crashes they may well turn a sever laceration into a deflected shot to the head.
> DMC, do you wear your seat belt?  Crashes at higher speeds involoving head ons with tractor traillers will kill you anyway...so why bother to wear one at all?



Glad your bros OK...

Do you wear a facegaurd?  Or kneebrace?  Goggles all the time?  Wristguards?  neckbrace?  Spine protector? Ass protector?

these have all shown to prevent injuries and even death in some cases...  
Wearing a seatbelt is a law...  I've worn a seatbelt all my life...  

At higher speeds... Helmets keep head injuries from becoming the first cause of death..


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 15, 2008)

The next time I ride the lift with somebody smoking a cigarette..I'll give them my business card..


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> Glad your bros OK...
> 
> Do you wear a facegaurd?  Or kneebrace?  Goggles all the time?  Wristguards?  neckbrace?  Spine protector? Ass protector?
> 
> ...



All injury risks, but none compares to brain and nervous system injuries. That's why this thread is about helmets and patrollers. It's spilled into a much broader issue of "Choice" and ass protection, and somehow mortality morphed into "morality". Maybe if we refocused it to the narrow issue at hand, we don't have to "go there", lol.


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> ..you don't get it...
> 
> thats ok..


 
Oh, I get it!  But you took the discussion over the edge of subverting a mans freedom to choose. The original thread was about ski patrollers being required to wear one. Not taking away another freedom or imposing another government regulation on the public at large. You prove the point, by choosing to wear one because you know it has more to do with personal safety than it does about people sucking the soul out of skiing!  Pandoras box indeed!


----------



## gmcunni (Dec 15, 2008)

i voted no in the beginning and would do so again. to me it IS about choice.. but i'll admit, i feel a little differently now.  if it was required the patroller still does have a choice, he/she could choose to patrol elsewhere (or not at all).


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Moe Ghoul said:


> All injury risks, but none compares to brain and nervous system injuries. That's why this thread is about helmets and patrollers. It's spilled into a much broader issue of "Choice" and ass protection, and somehow mortality morphed into "morality". Maybe if we refocused it to the narrow issue at hand, we don't have to "go there", lol.



This is a multifacited debate...

But it comes down to choice unless you make a law...  

Ass protection is important..  You break a coxix bone and your down for the count...  Spine protection can prevent nervous system injuries...
A facegaurd on your helmet can protect from tree and rocks with could cause injury or death...
A kneebrace will keep you from hurting yourself in the woods and starving to death because nobody knows where you are...


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

gmcunni said:


> i voted no in the beginning and would do so again. to me it IS about choice.. but i'll admit, i feel a little diffeetnly now.  if it was required the patroller still does have a choice, he/she could choose to patrol elsewhere (or not at all).




right... it's like Hunter... You can't have a beard and work for Hunter... If you want to have a beard... You work for Windham...  Their choice...


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> right... it's like Hunter... You can't have a beard and work for Hunter... If you want to have a beard... You work for Windham...  Their choice...



Really no beards allowed at Hunter..next thing you know ski resorts will be drug testing employees...then all the liftees will lose their jobs..lol


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Really no beards allowed at Hunter..next thing you know ski resorts will be drug testing employees...then all the liftees will lose their jobs..lol



No mustaches below the lip either..  Orville is an old Army guy...


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 15, 2008)

I like SibHuskys response over on PASR...

*I think everyone should be required to wear a helmet. Except for maybe Doug and Papasteeze...... 

Seriously, if someone my age, not a cliff jumper, been skiing 30-something years, towards the end of the season, in prime skiing shape, on a green trail just cruising, can slam into a tree, then ANYONE can. Now, maybe it's not so bad to be dead (at least for you), but being a vegetable is also a possibility. Who wants to be fed through a tube the rest of their life? Yeah, a helmet will only do so much and, yeah, "it'll never happen to you", well, guess again. I hadn't had a serious accident in 30 years of skiing, in fact, I went entire seasons without falling. I AM TELLING YOU, IF YOU ARE NOT WEARING A HELMET, YOU ARE AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF DARWINIAN SELECTION! 

I didn't use to feel that way and skied without one for probably 20 years. And initially I felt they interfered a bit with my hearing. But THERE'S NOTHING LIKE A CLOSE ENCOUNTER WITH A TREE TO CHANGE YOUR MIND DAMN FAST. I think anyone who skis without a helmet should need to buy a "waiver" before they're allowed on the chair. *


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> No mustaches below the lip either..  Orville is an old Army guy...



Darn..I guess I'll have to shave my soul patch Flavor Savor if I ever want a job at Huntah..lol


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> This is a multifacited debate...
> 
> But it comes down to choice unless you make a law...
> 
> ...



Should ski patrollers be required to wear helmets? Excuse my stricter interpretation of the thread title while y'all "go there"............


----------



## JD (Dec 15, 2008)

As I said before, head injuries account for the VAST majority of life threateing injuries, why not protect youself agains the most likely cause of fatal injury.   Just becaue you decide to put the most useful piece of protective gear on, doesn't mean you automatically have to wrap yourself in bubble wrap.  DMC, you wear a helmet on a bike?


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> I AM TELLING YOU, IF YOU ARE NOT WEARING A HELMET, YOU ARE AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF DARWINIAN SELECTION!



So they are going to genetically have babies that have hard heads and can withstand a hit to a tree?

Natural selection requires genetic changes to a species.


----------



## JD (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> This is a multifacited debate...
> 
> But it comes down to choice unless you make a law...
> 
> ...



I find your argument pretty funny. I think that's what you're going for.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

JD said:


> As I said before, head injuries account for the VAST majority of life threateing injuries, why not protect youself agains the most likely cause of fatal injury.   Just becaue you decide to put the most useful piece of protective gear on, doesn't mean you automatically have to wrap yourself in bubble wrap.  DMC, you wear a helmet on a bike?



I don't believe those stats...

Of course I wear a helmet when i bike..  in fact I refuse to ride with someone not wearing a helmet.  There's a big difference between falling on a mtb and a snowboard..

I've seen 1000 times more ugly incidents on a bike then on skis or boards...  You fall off a mtb at speed.. Your probably going to hit your head and it's going to involve rocks..  not so on snowboard...

It's totally apples and oranges...


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

JD said:


> I find your argument pretty funny. I think that's what you're going for.



yeah... it's not meant to be totally serious..  It's like saying if we let gays marry then the next thing is people marrying their dogs...


It's my way of interjecting caution into the debate... I do wear helmets...  not all the time but lot's of the time...  But the times i don't - i don't need some snot nosed kid from PA telling me to put one on...


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Moe Ghoul said:


> Should ski patrollers be required to wear helmets? Excuse my stricter interpretation of the thread title while y'all "go there"............



So... what you want is a YES of NO answer or a debate that suits you with no outside ideas...

Didn't we just go through 8 years of that crap?


----------



## SkiDork (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> I don't believe those stats...
> 
> Of course I wear a helmet when i bike..  in fact I refuse to ride with someone not wearing a helmet.  There's a big difference between falling on a mtb and a snowboard..
> 
> ...



I would disagree with that.  I have personal experience..  Ice can be just as hard as a rock.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

SkiDork said:


> I would disagree with that.  I have personal experience..  Ice can be just as hard as a rock.



Fair enough... But my point is.. a fall off a bike is a lot worse then a fall skiing..  Most of the time..   
think about what racers wear when they ride dh on a MTB...  Total Kevlar body armor..

 Why would they do that?   And why do you not wear body armor while skiing some of the same exact trails at Killington?


----------



## jaywbigred (Dec 15, 2008)

Of course, its silly for this thread just to devolve into another helmet v. no helmet thread.

That being said, it always comes back to seatbelts for me. I would wear a seatbelt even if it were not a law. It just makes sense. And I would respect other motorists' decisions not to, if it weren't for the costs associated with same (uninusred motorist issues, cost of private car insurance, etc...).

I would apply the same formula to wearing a helmet. I have to imagine that, for example, a mountain that was brave enough to require customers to wear a helmet (and offer them for cheap rental) might also see some insurance premium benefits from their carrier, which could be translated into cheaper lift tickets. 

And I'd guess the flip side is also true, the insurance and litigation involved in skiing is probably worst in relation to the most severe injuries, i.e. serious head injuries. Thus, to me, every person who chooses to not wear a helmet is, in a small way, costing me (and the industry as a whole) money.

Lastly, I don't think it is a slippery slope at all; though a broken wrist or an ACL tear is a painful enough injury, people do not routinely die from them, and thus they do not have the attendant litigation/insurance trickle down cost effect on my wallet.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

jaywbigred said:


> Lastly, I don't think it is a slippery slope at all; though a broken wrist or an ACL tear is a painful enough injury, people do not routinely die from them, and thus they do not have the attendant litigation/insurance trickle down cost effect on my wallet.



Seatbelts are for restraint..  helmets are for protection.. I don't want to be restrained while skiing...  i don't wnat to wear a helmet while driving...

don't people die from head injuries while driving a car?  maybe we should all wear helmets then as well...?

What about spinal injuries?  Face injuries?   A broken leg can kill if the artery is broken you know...


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> It's my way of interjecting caution into the debate.....


 
Not its not. It's a total hijack of the original question. We've had the mans freedom debate ad nauseam! This thread, correct me if I'm wrong GSS, had more to do with Ski Patrol wearing helmets in order to set a good example, or for safety's sake, or because they're compensated by the mountain, etc... Simple fact is we all know why we wear helmets. 



> Natural selection requires genetic changes to a species.


Genetic changes also include intelligence, new ways of thinking, expanded consciousness, etc...


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 15, 2008)

I think the intent of the thread was if you're on the job, should a helmet be required?


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> Not its not. It's a total hijack of the original question. We've had the mans freedom debate ad nauseam!



You are so one dimensional it nauseates me...  

how can things be so "cut and dry" and binary in your world?  

Yes/no... thats all I get to say???

Come on...  this goes a lot deeper then yes or no...  And you know it... You just don't like me messing up you little lame thread... WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

RootDKJ said:


> I think the intent of the thread was if you're on the job, should a helmet be required?



No - because...  Oh wait.. Beetlenut  doesn't want to hear it...  wow...


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> Genetic changes also include intelligence, new ways of thinking, expanded consciousness, etc...



It's still genetic genius...


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> So... what you want is a YES of NO answer or a debate that suits you with no outside ideas...
> 
> Didn't we just go through 8 years of that crap?



Yes or no and a reason would suffice.  Doesn't matter what I want, frankly everyone can take this thread over the cliff, imo.....with or without a helmet.

True about the last 8 years, but that goes back to exercising choice.....like voting.


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> It's still genetic genius...


 


dmc said:


> No - because... Oh wait.. Beetlenut doesn't want to hear it... wow...


 


dmc said:


> You are so one dimensional it nauseates me...
> 
> how can things be so "cut and dry" and binary in your world?
> 
> ...


 
Wow! Can I get some of what you're smokin? Cause based on this thread, its got to be some ass-kickin stuff!!


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> Wow! Can I get some of what you're smokin? Cause based on this thread, its got to be some ass-kickin stuff!!



Well it doesn't make me myopic so you'd probably hate it...


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Moe Ghoul said:


> True about the last 8 years, but that goes back to exercising choice.....like voting.



Exactly but the difference is.. it really is my choice or a Ski Patroller's choice to wear a helmet...  And a vote you either win or you don't...

Now you all can organize and contact your representatives to have laws created to force people to wear helmets and this debate would end...


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

http://www.birf.info/prevent/prev-articles/prev-ski-helmet.html

Interesting article with quotes from a Patroller


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> So they are going to genetically have babies that have hard heads and can withstand a hit to a tree?
> 
> Natural selection requires genetic changes to a species.



Yes they will have babies with horns...


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 15, 2008)

dmc said:


> Well it doesn't make me myopic so you'd probably hate it...


 
How does me answering the original question *ONLY*, make me myopic? Because I choose not to go down your rabbit-hole or drink your "Come on... this goes a lot deeper then yes or no" koolaid, I'm one dimensional and living in a binary world? What kind of crackinise are you talkin dude? You're obviously pretty bitter about the government, and rightly so, but no need to project that into this thread and onto the thread contributors. It was just a question about a narrow subject. I think most people that answered got that. Personal insults a side, it's about choice, the ski patrollers, the mountain that employs them, us.


----------



## Marc (Dec 15, 2008)

I'm no expert in the subject of how, and by how much a helmet would protect a ski patroller in the course of doing his required duties but let me say this much-

On the one hand, I'm with d on the choice to wear helmets at ski areas, as well as government mandated use of seatbelts, MC helemts, etc. ad naseum.

On the other hand, I see the ski patrollers as a completely separate issue.  Coming from a background in public safety- I'm a pretty fit 26 year old, and I'm required to have a full physical, including pulmonary function, vision and ecg yearly to continue to voluntarily enter a burning building.  Not only am I required to prove on an annual basis I'm healthy enough to do the job without dropping dead of a heart attack, I'm required to wear NFPA approved turnout gear, boots, helmet and gloves and an OSHA/NFPA approved SCBA for atmospheres commonly found in burning buildings (elevated temperatures, levels of particulates, SO-x, NO-x, CO and a host of other nasties).

On a medical call I'm required to don appropriate body substance isoluation protection which can include nitrile gloves on up to splash mask and smock.

Emergency services these days have regulations coming out the a hole.  And for the most part, combined with better training for any new equipment, have shown in dramatically reduce line of duty deaths and injuries.

So, if (and this is the 'big if') donning a helmet protects a ski patroller such that they can perform their job better and not become a vic- yes, a requirement from the appropriate governing entity, whatever that is, should exist.

As far as setting a good example- I could see how the argument could be made.  Patrollers for the most part are required to ski in control, at reasonable speeds, stop in safe places and generally set good examples in all other facets of on mountain behavior.. no?


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> How does me answering the original question *ONLY*, make me myopic? Because I choose not to go down your rabbit-hole or drink your "Come on... this goes a lot deeper then yes or no" koolaid, I'm one dimensional and living in a binary world? What kind of crackinise are you talkin dude? You're obviously pretty bitter about the government, and rightly so, but no need to project that into this thread and onto the thread contributors. It was just a question about a narrow subject. I think most people that answered got that. Personal insults a side, it's about choice, the ski patrollers, the mountain that employs them, us.




Myopic in the sense that you want me to narrow the subject...

It's not a narrow subject..  Unless it become law...


----------



## catskills (Dec 15, 2008)

Marc said:


> ......On the other hand, I see the ski patrollers as a completely separate issue.  Coming from a background in public safety- I'm a pretty fit 26 year old, and I'm required to have a full physical, including pulmonary function, vision and ecg yearly to continue to voluntarily enter a burning building.  Not only am I required to prove on an annual basis I'm healthy enough to do the job without dropping dead of a heart attack, I'm required to wear NFPA approved turnout gear, boots, helmet and gloves and an OSHA/NFPA approved SCBA for atmospheres commonly found in burning buildings (elevated temperatures, levels of particulates, SO-x, NO-x, CO and a host of other nasties).
> 
> On a medical call I'm required to don appropriate body substance isoluation protection which can include nitrile gloves on up to splash mask and smock.
> 
> ...


Ask yourself what is the biggest killer of firemen.  Answer heart attack. Maybe the reason for that is all that damn hot gear they are wearing and the added stress to their bodies.  Maybe ski patrollers should have to wear full turn out gear with an air pack when responding to an accident. Most patrollers are a lot older than the age of interior fire fighters.


----------



## dmc (Dec 15, 2008)

catskills said:


> Ask yourself what is the biggest killer of firemen.  Answer heart attack. Maybe the reason for that is all that damn hot gear they are wearing and the added stress to their bodies.  Maybe ski patrollers should have to wear full turn out gear with an air pack when responding to an accident. Most patrollers are a lot older than the age of interior fire fighters.



No doubt..   they can carry a lot of gear..
Didn't a patroller die a Mammoth from asphyxiation when a volcano vent opened?  Wonder if they carry O2 now...


Keep it going.. I can hear my new buddy mumbling about the highjack...


----------



## Creakyknees (Dec 15, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Really no beards allowed at Hunter..next thing you know ski resorts will be drug testing employees...then all the liftees will lose their jobs..lol



Snowbird has random drug testing for all their employees, and yes we did lose a few liftees after a random drug tests. Random drug testing causes lower insurance rates. Snowbird is one of the only ski areas that all liftees are able to ski when they are working; one hour bumping chairs next hour to ski, it was a great deal.:wink:


----------



## jack97 (Dec 15, 2008)

Marc said:


> As far as setting a good example- I could see how the argument could be made.  Patrollers for the most part are required to ski in control, at reasonable speeds, stop in safe places and generally set good examples in all other facets of on mountain behavior.. no?



I think they should get rid of the ski patrollers, any skiers going into terrain over the head without the proper techniques, skills and outerwear should be left hanging out there on their own. This way we can ensure the weak will die off and leave the really radical terrain to the true experts since they really don't need that safety net.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Dec 15, 2008)

skibumtress said:


> Sure it's a person choice, but wearing seat belts is a law in most states (if not all).  OK, so personal choice to get pulled over, get a ticket, points on you license in some states and pay a hefty fine in some states.  Your choice.
> This is a pet peeve of mine.  Two years ago, my cousin chose to make a choice -- NOT to wear a seat belt, was ejected from his car, killed instantly.  His four children, wife, family, friends, etc. lost a wonderful person.



When my father was 30 years old he was driving when hit by another vehicle.  The seat belt he was wearing snapped his hip.  He has had many years of issues from that accident.

I do not think that there should be seat belt laws or helmet laws for skiers or motorcycle riders.  Having said that I always wear my seat belt, and helmet.  I just want the option(even though I always do).

However I could agree with a mountain having a requirement of there employees(paid or volunteer) to wear a helmet.


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 15, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Really no beards allowed at Hunter..next thing you know ski resorts will be drug testing employees...then all the liftees will lose their jobs..lol


When I was an EMT, the company had adopted a "no beards" policy:evil:.  I can't even begin to tell you how many times I was written up for my goatee.


----------



## 2knees (Dec 15, 2008)

i think snowboarders should have to wear helmets while smoking cigarettes in the liftline at mad river glen.


----------



## sledhaulingmedic (Dec 15, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> People who are smarter about their safety, ... not deep frying a turkey in a pot on their gas stove at home,... will have a greater likelyhood of seeing tomorrow dawn.



Shhhhhhhh!  Don't let the word out.  It's job security for me.  (My unofficial moto: Stupidty is my job security.  A close second was: I interfere with Natural Selection.)


----------



## davidhowland14 (Dec 15, 2008)

Hawkshot99 said:


> When my father was 30 years old he was driving when hit by another vehicle.  The seat belt he was wearing snapped his hip.  He has had many years of issues from that accident.


I'm sorry, and i mean no insult to your father, but I cannot accept that line of reasoning. If your father had not been wearing a seatbelt, he could have gone through the windshield and been killed. Would he rather have hip issues, or be dead?


----------



## 2Planker (Dec 15, 2008)

Hawkshot99 said:


> When my father was 30 years old he was driving when hit by another vehicle.  The seat belt he was wearing snapped his hip.  He has had many years of issues from that accident.
> 
> I do not think that there should be seat belt laws or helmet laws for skiers or motorcycle riders.  Having said that I always wear my seat belt, and helmet.  I just want the option(even though I always do).
> 
> However I could agree with a mountain having a requirement of there employees(paid or volunteer) to wear a helmet.



Where was thePoint of Impact ?  

  I find it hard to believe that the seatbelt broke a hip.  Center console or door maybe...

 The impact itself certainly on the driver's side could have broken the hip , or impact on the pass. side, that means that him hitting the drivers door could have done it.  If he wasn't wearing a seat belt the damage would have been a lot more severe

Seat belts Fx. Clavicle's + Ribs - but they save  lives.  I was hit head on (@ 45mph)  and walked away w/ broken ribs - But the belt + an airbag saved my life !


----------



## 2Planker (Dec 15, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Really no beards allowed at Hunter..next thing you know ski resorts will be drug testing employees...then all the liftees will lose their jobs..lol



Some resorts DO drug test !  SR did in the 90's


----------



## o3jeff (Dec 15, 2008)

Don't forget that back when his dad was 30 the cars only had lap belts, no shoulder belts.


----------



## Marc (Dec 15, 2008)

catskills said:


> Ask yourself what is the biggest killer of firemen.  Answer heart attack. Maybe the reason for that is all that damn hot gear they are wearing and the added stress to their bodies.



Yeah that... or maybe it's because a lot of firefighters are volunteer (and a fair share of full timers I guess) 40 and 50 year olds who never exercise, drink too much beer, smoke and eat crap all the time.  I guarantee, despite that the leading cause of LODD's is heart attack, that burn injuries or other exposure related injuries would by far take over MI's if all firefighters stopped wearing bunkers.  All that proves is more firefighters should be in shape, and that we have really good gear.

I say that because we haven't gone into actual numbers of LODD's... just what's the highest.  Ok, heart attacks are highest percentage but still only account for about 40 deaths average in the US annually out of ~110 average LODD's.  What do you think that would be, and what do you think the injury rate would climb to be without bunker gear.  Do you know what kind of LODD numbers we saw before near universal acceptance of bunker gear?  I don't even get what asinine point you're trying to make.



catskills said:


> Maybe ski patrollers should have to wear full turn out gear with an air pack when responding to an accident. Most patrollers are a lot older than the age of interior fire fighters.



Don't be infantile.  Clearly when talking about helmets, there's at least an outside chance it will let patrollers perform their job safer, enough of one to warrant a more in depth look, at any rate.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Dec 15, 2008)

davidhowland14 said:


> I'm sorry, and i mean no insult to your father, but I cannot accept that line of reasoning. If your father had not been wearing a seatbelt, he could have gone through the windshield and been killed. Would he rather have hip issues, or be dead?


O, I know he would have way more messed up than broken hip, but maybe he would have been perfectly fine.......  What I was trying to say, was leave it as a choice to the people.  I hate all of the stupid laws, requiring seat belts and helmets.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 15, 2008)

http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2579651430085941270fdEBcg


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 15, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2579651430085941270fdEBcg


and there you go....the SP can no longer count to 6 due to all the head injuries:roll:


----------



## Shorty (Dec 15, 2008)

Having been a volunteer FF, and currently an active voli patroller, I still voted no we should not be required to wear a helmet.  I do, and as a FF I always kept my pack on during overhaul(something most guys didn't do)
As far as making it safer for us to do our jobs, yes they can but I see it as my responsibility to ski safely and set an example that way not by what I wear.  I have found that having a cross on my back is sometimes mistaken as a target which is where the helmet can benefit.  We are most vulnerable while we are attending to a skier/rider in need.  
If we had to set examples by what we wear, I would never see people out without gloves on, or skiing in jeans that are soaked and frozen, or any of the other numerous WTF's I see each weekend.
We have seatbelt laws on the books, yet I know and see many cops that do not wear a seat belt in their patrol car (although they wear in in their personal vehicle) I have ben told that it slows their exit during a switch to a foot pursuit (I disagree) but this is an example of do as I say not as I do.  
I just don't beleive I have the right to tell someone else they have to wear a helmet.  It is a personal choice


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 27, 2008)

RootDKJ said:


> and there you go....the SP can no longer count to 6 due to all the head injuries:roll:



There was a concussion victem the othernight at the end of Barneys Bumps..the kid was justing laying there on his back..and the ski patroller with his baseball hat was there to assist..:sad:


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 27, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> There was a concussion victem the othernight at the end of Barneys Bumps..the kid was justing laying there on his back..and the ski patroller with his baseball hat was there to assist..:sad:



Isn't the important thing that he was there to help???


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 27, 2008)

campgottagopee said:


> Isn't the important thing that he was there to help???



Yeah..but maybe patrollers should be reps for helmet companys so when a kid gets a Concussion they can sell them a helmet..brilliant..


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 27, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Yeah..but maybe patrollers should be reps for helmet companys so when a kid gets a Concussion they can sell them a helmet..brilliant..



Always be sellin'----I dig it GSS


----------



## Starter Jackets Rule! (Dec 27, 2008)

Freedom FROM Choice!
what a dumb question.
How bout the government make it THE LAW?
After all are they not here to save us from our selfs? whats next we have to wrap our self's in bubble wrap, every time we want to go and have some fun?
Do we don't fall down go boom?
or pop-pop-pop-POP!


----------



## davidhowland14 (Dec 27, 2008)

Starter Jackets Rule! said:


> Freedom FROM Choice!
> what a dumb question.
> How bout the government make it THE LAW?
> After all are they not here to save us from our selfs? whats next we have to wrap our self's in bubble wrap?
> Do we don't fall down go boom?



SENSE: THIS POST MAKES NONE


----------



## RootDKJ (Dec 27, 2008)

love that picture!! LOL


----------



## abc (Dec 27, 2008)

It depends on whether the mountain provides helmet for them though. 

If the mountain management say "here is your uniform for working here", which consist of a red jacket and a (maybe red?) helmet, I think it's alright. Anyone object to wearing the red jacket just can't be a patroller. Same goes for helmets.

If the mountain requires helmet without providing for it, I'd say NO! They'll have to find other sheeps who's willing to do it.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 28, 2008)

I saw a Blue mountain race coach skiing today with no Helmet..


----------



## Starter Jackets Rule! (Dec 28, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> I saw a Blue mountain race coach skiing today with no Helmet..



So?
Today I saw  a Dead Head Sticker on a Cadillac.
Freedom From Choice!
You can't all ways get what you want.


----------



## JasonE (Dec 28, 2008)

Yes, of course ski patrol should be required to wear helmets. It shouldn't just be a mountain rule, it should be a regulation of the NSP as well!  I also think that all ski instructors should be required to wear helmets and any student in the ski school should have to wear a helmet.

Also, I am a firm believer that when mountains are developing their web sites or brochures, any photograph they are using should show only people wearing helmets. Mountains should not in any way, shape, or form be promoting skiing without a helmet. They can't require people to wear one, obviously, but they have total control over what they put on their web site or brochure and should not be using photos of people without helmets.

I recognize the fact that in a catastrophic crash a helmet probably won't save your life. However, in a more minor crash, it can mean the difference between getting up and skiing the rest of the day versus a trip in an ambulance. I think helmets should be promoted everywhere they can be, and required of anyone in a position of responsibility where they are dealing with the safety of the customers of a mountain.


----------



## Edd (Dec 29, 2008)

I don't care if they wear them as a customer but, if it were my mountain, they would be required to.

On a sidenote, it's odd to me that helmets aren't more common in ski magazine pictures.  Ski, Skiing, and Powder all show photos with VERY few helmets featured....to the point where I wonder if it's intentional.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 29, 2008)

Edd said:


> I don't care if they wear them as a customer but, if it were my mountain, they would be required to.
> .



times 2


----------



## Starter Jackets Rule! (Dec 30, 2008)

Edd said:


> I don't care if they wear them as a customer but, if it were my mountain, they would be required to.
> 
> On a sidenote, it's odd to me that helmets aren't more common in ski magazine pictures.  Ski, Skiing, and Powder all show photos with VERY few helmets featured....to the point where I wonder if it's intentional.



take a look at the tgr/wmiller/mhead films.
notice the lack of brain buckets?
And the skiers in those films take 1,000 times the risk than ANY nsp person.
Ya,Nanny Nation,Freedom From Choice Wimps!


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 30, 2008)

Starter Jackets Rule! said:


> take a look at the tgr/wmiller/mhead films.
> notice the lack of brain buckets?
> And the skiers in those films take 1,000 times the risk than ANY nsp person.
> Ya,Nanny Nation,Freedom From Choice Wimps!



Because those people are lacking brains so there's nothing to protect..


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 30, 2008)

Starter Jackets Rule! said:


> take a look at the tgr/wmiller/mhead films.
> notice the lack of brain buckets?
> And the skiers in those films take 1,000 times the risk than ANY nsp person.
> Ya,Nanny Nation,Freedom From Choice Wimps!


 
Yea, ok rebel without a clue! The skiers in those films have mad skilz, most of the gapers on the slopes need all the protection they can get!


----------



## ctenidae (Dec 30, 2008)

AtomicSkier said:


> People not wearing helmets is darwinism at its finest.



I have no problem with that.

I voted "No," but only because teh question is too vague. Should a particular mountain require its patrollers to wear helmets? Probably, to save on insurance costs, set an example, etc. Should there be a law requiring it? No.


----------



## Starter Jackets Rule! (Dec 30, 2008)

ctenidae said:


> I have no problem with that.
> 
> I voted "No," but only because teh question is too vague. Should a particular mountain require its patrollers to wear helmets? Probably, to save on insurance costs, set an example, etc. Should there be a law requiring it? No.


Not an issue, nsp has its own insurance
"Freedom From Choice"!


----------



## Starter Jackets Rule! (Dec 30, 2008)

A victim of collision on the open sea
Nobody ever said that life was free
Sank, swam, go down with the ship
But use your freedom of choice

Ill say it again in the land of the free
Use your freedom of choice
Your freedom of choice

In ancient rome there was a poem
About a dog who found two bones
He picked at one
He licked the other
He went in circles
He dropped dead

Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom of choice!

Then if you got it you dont want it
Seems to be the rule of thumb
Dont be tricked by what you see
You got two ways to go

Ill say it again in the land of the free
Use your freedom of choice
Freedom of choice

Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom of choice!

In ancient rome
There was a poem
About a dog
Who found two bones
He picked at one
He licked the other
He went in circles
He dropped dead

Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom from choice
Is what you want...


----------



## 2knees (Dec 30, 2008)

you know, there really is an uncanny resemblance.


----------



## Starter Jackets Rule! (Dec 30, 2008)

HaHa good 1!


----------



## 2knees (Dec 30, 2008)

ya gotta appreciate good photo mining.


----------



## Stache (Dec 30, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Ski instructors should definitely be required to wear helmets as well...along with the people who give tours..it's important..:idea:



Spoken (typed) by someone who obviously has never watched a beginner student (sans helmet) spook, freak, and then freeze up when the instructor donned their shiny black CRASH Helmet prior to beginning the lesson.

Time and place. Parks I have no problem with a helmet requirement, trees prolly a good idea, but dammit let me enjoy the GREAT out doors without wrapping myself in a bubble wrap suit with armored shin guards and arm guards and a bunch of other stuff. Might as well ride around in a snow cat with a tempreature controlled cab and air ride seat so you never feel the bumps.

PS Ski Instructors fall into the "Teacher" category and as such present a very low cost Workers Comp rate for the Mountain (legal loophole #247) even though that is where most of the claims come from. It also allows the Mountains (depending on state) to ignore minimum wage and other compensation laws and rules.


----------



## Stache (Dec 30, 2008)

JasonE said:


> Yes, of course ski patrol should be required to wear helmets. It shouldn't just be a mountain rule, it should be a regulation of the NSP as well!  I also think that all ski instructors should be required to wear helmets and any student in the ski school should have to wear a helmet.
> 
> Also, I am a firm believer that when mountains are developing their web sites or brochures, any photograph they are using should show only people wearing helmets. Mountains should not in any way, shape, or form be promoting skiing without a helmet. They can't require people to wear one, obviously, but they have total control over what they put on their web site or brochure and should not be using photos of people without helmets.
> 
> I recognize the fact that in a catastrophic crash a helmet probably won't save your life. However, in a more minor crash, it can mean the difference between getting up and skiing the rest of the day versus a trip in an ambulance. I think helmets should be promoted everywhere they can be, and required of anyone in a position of responsibility where they are dealing with the safety of the customers of a mountain.



Didn't you say you worked for Giro??? Or was it Briko??


----------



## gmcunni (Dec 30, 2008)

was thinking about this thread yesterday while @ okemo. my informal count was about 66% of the folks wearing OKEMO and/or Ski Patrol jackets wore helmets.  i dont think i saw an ski patrol without one, most of the official folks not wearing them were instructors.


----------



## Trekchick (Dec 30, 2008)

I believe in wearing my helmet and won't go without it, but I don't feel its my place to force others.

IMO its a personal choice, no matter the job.


----------



## skiing is life (Dec 30, 2008)

land of the free*

*Void where prohibited, restrictions apply

^ 
how very european of me;-)



seriosley tho, patrollers decision.


----------



## Starter Jackets Rule! (Dec 30, 2008)

2knees said:


> ya gotta appreciate good photo mining.


Is that what Ralphie is doing with his finger?
Hey All I have to say on this matter is "Up To 60% Off At REI.COM"
That should put an end to the Freedom of/from choice issue !
So what is every ones choice of wax for the new year?
Tally-Ho!


----------



## abc (Dec 30, 2008)

JasonE said:


> I think helmets should be promoted everywhere they can be, and required of anyone in a position of responsibility where they are dealing with the safety of the customers of a mountain.


So we should start promoting helmets in the homes! Think about all the cabinet doors you can bang your head into. And falls in the bath tub would not require a trip in the ambulance!!! ;-)

And, don't forget your helmet while crossing the street.


----------



## Starter Jackets Rule! (Dec 30, 2008)

Think Bubble Wrap
good night john boy..


----------



## davidhowland14 (Dec 30, 2008)

good night sue ellen!

I once saw a woman raking leaves in her driveway wearing a helmet. you never know!


----------



## ski63 (Dec 30, 2008)

Wow, some very interesting perspectives.  Especially, the beginner observing the instructor in the helmet and being intimidated.

It seems that first lesson w/out a helmet is OK.  The education provided in the lesson would encourgae a helmet once the beginner becomes a novice and can venture past the bunny slope.  Maybe require a helmet if the beginner starts on a rope tow vs. todays "magic carpet".   Any instructor past the bunny slope should always have a helmet.  Set the example.  As for patrollers, they are not ski area employees as far as I know.

The employer sets the rules and the employee either takes the job and follows the rules or they look for another job.  

Personally, as I've said before, I can't imagine not skiing with a helmet.  Warmer, safer etc.


----------



## JohnGD33 (Dec 31, 2008)

No one should be made to do anything!!!


----------



## davidhowland14 (Dec 31, 2008)

you file taxes because you want to? The point of democracy is giving up some personal freedoms in exchange for the protection you get from the government. Sure you can debate whether or not a helmet law (and isn't that way off topic from the way this thread started?) is protecting you, but don't say that no one can make you do anyhting.


----------



## Starter Jackets Rule! (Dec 31, 2008)

ski63 said:


> Wow, some very interesting perspectives.  Especially, the beginner observing the instructor in the helmet and being intimidated.
> 
> It seems that first lesson w/out a helmet is OK.  The education provided in the lesson would encourgae a helmet once the beginner becomes a novice and can venture past the bunny slope.  Maybe require a helmet if the beginner starts on a rope tow vs. todays "magic carpet".   Any instructor past the bunny slope should always have a helmet.  Set the example.  As for patrollers, they are not ski area employees as far as I know.
> 
> ...



OMG!OMG!OMG!
another advocate of "Freedom From Choice"!
Stay safe while protecting your self from your self!
Encase your self in Bubble Wrap the ski fast and take chances, after all you will "Be Safe(helmet and all) Live the nanny nation way of Life, you will All be better off!


----------



## billski (Dec 31, 2008)

Starter Jackets Rule! said:


> OMG!OMG!OMG!
> another advocate of "Freedom From Choice"!
> Stay safe while protecting your self from your self!
> Encase your self in Bubble Wrap the ski fast and take chances, after all you will "Be Safe(helmet and all) Live the nanny nation way of Life, you will All be better off!



Rules to live by:
1. Buy the large bubble-sized wrap.  Better yet, get a Michelin Man suit.
2. Buy bread and milk early and often.
3. Stay off the road, don't go to work if it snows.
4. When it snows, spend the day watching the tube weatherbabes tell us how wicked it is outside.  
5. Read the tabloids to find the worst possible ski accident you can and remind your family it could happen to them.
6. Brag about how you are "roughin' it."

Then, when the sun comes up and the roads are clear, get into your 4x4, drive like hell, cut off grandma sending her into the ditch, avoid eye contact, drive 85mph in a school zone to pass the @$%#$ slow mailman and save 5 minutes, park illegally, all to get to the mall for that not-to-be-missed "never again" sale.  
Hey, you killed five people along the way, but you got a great deal on the skis you'll use once.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 31, 2008)

billski said:


> Rules to live by:
> 1. Buy the large bubble-sized wrap.  Better yet, get a Michelin Man suit.
> 2. Buy bread and milk early and often.
> 3. Stay off the road, don't go to work if it snows.
> ...



LMBFAO!!!!!...from now on I'm wearing my ski helmet..everywhere..and my next one is gonna be full face..you can never be too safe..that's why ski patrollers at Blue mountain are always having safety meetings in the ski patrol shack,,smells like a freakin Phish concert in there..lol


----------



## billski (Dec 31, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> LMBFAO!!!!!...from now on I'm wearing my ski helmet..everywhere..and my next one is gonna be full face..you can never be too safe..that's why ski patrollers at Blue mountain are always having safety meetings in the ski patrol shack,,smells like a freakin Phish concert in there..lol



I wore my helmet in the shower this morning, so if I fell I'd be OK.  But I had a helluva time washing my hair.  Suggestions?  Maybe I should shave it bald, but I might risk cutting myself....:blink:


----------



## Trekchick (Dec 31, 2008)

True story:
One day when I was running the snowblower in my driveway, I couldn't find my hat, so I wore my helmet which still had the goggles attached from the day before.  It was amazingly warm while clearing the driveway and the goggles helped the blow back from being so annoying. 

I know that I probably looked like a dork running my snowblower with my helmet and goggles, but gee wiz, it worked.!!!


----------



## Beetlenut (Dec 31, 2008)

Starter Jackets Rule! said:


> OMG!OMG!OMG!
> another advocate of "Freedom From Choice"!
> Stay safe while protecting your self from your self!
> Encase your self in Bubble Wrap the ski fast and take chances, after all you will "Be Safe(helmet and all) Live the nanny nation way of Life, you will All be better off!



I don't think I've ever read a single post from you that made any sense!


----------



## billski (Dec 31, 2008)

Beetlenut said:


> I don't think I've ever read a single post from you that made any sense!


Ummm, is that a problem?  Drinking the cool-aid is good   Happy new year!
now. where should I ski tomorrow?  Recommendations accepted until 6am!


----------

