Quig again, this time with the help of some lawyers from the DOT. This one lays low on the insults (at least from me) and as such, may not be very entertaining, but I posted it anyway. I also want to state ahead of time, that I have been wrong in the past, in a number of ways. But to keep my integrity intact, I will not remove anything that I have posted, even if I am wrong. I will post a retraction if necessary, or edit previous postings when I have found spelling errors or to make a point more clear, though I have found no real reason to do that, so far. Thanks for your understanding.

Quig's reply titled "read and learn...":

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/18571-a.wkm.html

note the portion that says: "NHTSA neither approves, disapproves, endorses, tests, nor grants clearances for products prior to their introduction into the retail market."

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/11371.html

note the portion that says: "As a matter of information, your use of the words "DOT approved" reflects a common misconception. We have no authority to approve or disapprove..."

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/17258.ztv.html

note the portion that says: "D.O.T. itself has no authority to "approve" or "not approve" any item of equipment and the phrase "D.O.T. approved" has no meaning and should not be used."

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/22556.ztv.html

note the portion that says: "The Department of Transportation neither approves nor disapproves parts."

Like I said, a sexual intellectual.

Don't you feel the least bit ashamed? Because you really made a fool of yourself, even AFTER I warned you against it.

I'd like to recommend you consider the concept of rational suicide. It's probably the most appropriate thing you could do for your fellow man.

now go away,

quig

My reply:

(Just a quick disclaimer to all the readers out there, what I'm writing here is my opinion of the facts, no more. I seriously doubt this would hold up in any court of law, but I'd have fun trying. Enjoy it anyway and make your own judgment, except for the asshole I'm directing this toward, you can just read it and shut-up...)

Wow, are you a bitter little man…all this over one little word, but okay. Let’s start out by saying that, maybe, you were right. The “lawyers” for the DOT state that the Department of Transportation does not approve anything, uh, but wait, I just realized something. Let’s just go over the four letters you sent me as examples.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/18571-a.wkm.html
Not about helmets.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/11371.html
Oh wait, this one, oh, not helmet related.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/17258.ztv.html
Maybe this one, nope.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/22556.ztv.html
Oh finally, wait a minute, nah…

Now, you sent me documents written by the LAWYERS stating the DOT does not approve anything. Well, first off, you could have at least sent me documents covering FMVSS No. 218. You know, the one covering helmets; the basis of this whole argument, but you didn't... I digress. Perhaps the DOT doesn't personally approve/test helmets, but they do contract out companies to test motorcycle helmets for them. It is also law, set by Standard No. 218, that all helmets must meet Department of Transportation standards before it can be sold as a motorcycle helmet. There is also DOT documentation that says they do tests (perhaps not by them, but by the Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance (OVSC), an office of the NHTSA, which is an office of the DOT). Maybe the DOT is the reason for all these so-called misconceptions your barristers are talking about. If that's the case, it's the DOT's own damn fault.

Let’s talk about the contracts. The Department of Transportation has used three different companies since, at least, 1994 to test motorcycle helmets (AUTHORIZED TESTING INC., HEAD PROTECTION RESEARCH LABORATORY, and SGS U.S. TESTING CO.). So, okay, sure, the DOT themselves are not testing, but they do contract out other organizations to test helmets for them. Wait a minute, those companies are under contract, and I doubt they are doing it for free. As a result, one would assume that the DOT pays for their services. If they hire outside companies to test for their standards on a product, and force that product to carry their logo based on these tests (though maybe not as a direct result of said tests), they are performing tests. Wow.

Not only are they having these tests performed, but they keep records of them to enforce compliance, and have since 1994. Go to http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/comply/fmvss218/ and see for yourself.

Now, even if the DOT is not performing helmet tests themselves before they are released, the manufacturer must conduct the tests exactly as stated in FMVSS No. 218. Not only does the DOT dictate what tests to perform, but the conditions of those tests, how to prepare the helmet for testing, and the equipment schematics for the testing. That is setting a clearance for sale, perhaps not directly, but a clearance, or at least a very specific "how-to" to get cleared.

Speaking of clearance, your little lawyer friend stated that the DOT does not approve or grant clearances for products prior to their introduction into the retail market. But the DOT themselves state, and I quote:

“FMVSS 218, also called “the DOT standard” was promulgated in 1974 and was revised in 1980 and 1988 [and 2001]. Helmets sold for motorcycle use in the United States are required by law to meet the minimum performance requirements set forth in FMVSS 218. Helmets qualified to other standards, such as the Snell Memorial Foundation or American National Standards Institute must also meet FMVSS 218.”

So, if a helmet sold for motorcycle use must pass their standards, it must mean that if it doesn’t pass, it can’t be sold as a helmet. The DOT says that they don’t grant clearances or approve anything, but their standards and their laws sure do. And since they wrote, promulgated, and enforce these standards and laws, that is granting clearance and giving approval, however implied. Stop listening to the lawyers and step into the little world I like to call “Common Sense.”

Maybe I should have said “DOT Standard No. 218 approved.” Can’t argue with that!

I will agree that it is up to the manufacturer to ensure it meets the DOT standards, but after all is said and done, the DOT has the final say, at one time or another, whether it can be sold for use as a motorcycle helmet, whether they are directly involved or not.

By the way, how is it, of all the things I have said, the only argument you had against me was that one little word. Nothing about the effectiveness of helmets, or lack there of, statistics, dangers, etc. Maybe because I have already defunct anything you may have wanted to say. If I haven't, I will. Speaks volumes for your side, doesn’t it. Oh, and I won’t go away, and neither will the thousands of riders who know the inherent dangers of motorcycling and properly prepare themselves against these hazards. Our numbers are large, and growing.

Red.

Back to Road Rash.