Motorcycle Deaths Up...

[TopCatGr58]

A RIGHT can't be LEGALLY taken away from you without first changing a law to do so.

I don't know about the changing part vs. just MAKING a law that allows the stripping of said rights...ie. convicted felon looses the right to vote, carry or possess firearms. SO...yep, even rights can be taken away with Due Process of LAW.

Now before this thread turns into a hot button topic type discussion....if it already hasn't... ... remember, proper discussion techniques shall be observed. Folks get passionate at times regarding their opinions and feelings...it's okay to express them, but not at the expense of lashing out at others on here, no insults or demeaning inuendos please!!!

[jimbyjimb]

OK, how about this then. A RIGHT can't be LEGALLY taken away from you without first changing a law to do so. You have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. (As long as it doesn't infringe on others' rights to do the same) Your idea that something is a right simply because you pay taxes on it is absurd. If you think you own a portion of highway simply because you pay taxes on it, try to sell some of it. Your taxes pay for a multitude of things, but that doesn't make you part owner in any of it. It may give you an oportunity to vote on things concerning that highway, but you retain no ownership. You pay taxes on government lands, yet you retain no rights to use them if they say you can't.

Do some reading and you'll see that driving is indeed a privelege whether you actually like it or agree with it or not. Just about any driver's ed book for any type of vehicle in any state is going to start out saying this.

I don't see how it's absurd at all. If I go to Safeway and buy a sandwich it is my sandwich. I pay for use of the roads, therefore I receive use of the roads. I may not be able to sell it but I am paying to use it. Paying for a service isn't a privilege at all. You could say it's rent, though that may be a somewhat flawed comparison.

I understand many of your points and they're valid, but I still don't see road use as a privilege. I'm not looking for a fruitless argument or to intentionally make anyone mad, I simply do not understand that point of view.

A bought and paid for service is just that. As long as I can operate a vehicle to legal standards and I pay my monetary dues I am absolutely entitled to use the services I pay for.

Road use is not a peculiar benefit, advantage or favor because I buy it. If a plumber told me it was my privilege to pay him a hundred bucks an hour to not allow me to use my toilet I wouldn't handle that very well. I don't recall ever buying a favor. Welfare is a privilege if the above is applied. Road use for an illegal immigrant is when the above is applied. Road use for a qualifying American citizen isn't.

[kwats]

I don't see how it's absurd at all. If I go to Safeway and buy a sandwich it is my sandwich. I pay for use of the roads, therefore I receive use of the roads. I may not be able to sell it but I am paying to use it. Paying for a service isn't a privilege at all. You could say it's rent, though that may be a somewhat flawed comparison.

I understand many of your points and they're valid, but I still don't see road use as a privilege. I'm not looking for a fruitless argument or to intentionally make anyone mad, I simply do not understand that point of view.

A bought and paid for service is just that. As long as I can operate a vehicle to legal standards and I pay my monetary dues I am absolutely entitled to use the services I pay for.

Road use is not a peculiar benefit, advantage or favor because I buy it. If a plumber told me it was my privilege to pay him a hundred bucks an hour to not allow me to use my toilet I wouldn't handle that very well. I don't recall ever buying a favor. Welfare is a privilege if the above is applied. Road use for an illegal immigrant is when the above is applied. Road use for a qualifying American citizen isn't.

Not a bad argument....but if the state revokes your license for any reason, you are still able to use the roads...you just can't legally drive....anything...

[BA80]

Not a bad argument....but if the state revokes your license for any reason, you are still able to use the roads...you just can't legally drive....anything...

LOL......I can testify to that. Lost my licence for 4 years when I was 18. (points) I always had a hot rod.

I learned to spot a cop from FAAAAR away in that 4 years.

[b1lock]

b1lock

When I was a kid my dad busted his skull in a motorcycle accident, but he lived through it. I had the privelege of seeing him before he went to the hospital, and it stuck with me. When we were riding our dirt bikes, if we didn't wear a helmet he'd a dad our buts for sure. My helmet probably saved my life at least once. But riding without a helmet is fun, and now that I am older sometimes I do just that. I am a 20+ year veteran of the army. This IS a free country, and you DO have choices, and they are all yours to make. Ya know, what the Wright brothers was doing looked pretty foolish, too.

[jamak]

Motorcycle deaths up...

Many good points & viewpoints here. Statistic's can be arbitrary & misleading.
There are many good reason's to wear a helmet. There have been many 'studyies & statistic's' showing how helmets can be a detriment in certain types of accident's. No matter how you see it; America has aways been about choice. But all that is beside the increase in accidents.

A bike acccident is largely a matter of a % of experience, luck, the actual circumstance, and God; in no special order. I personally have always put the final factor at the forefront of anything I've survived. No matter whether you high side it, T-bone an SUV, or slide off or under another vehicle; the same players attend every event.

But for me, two words explain this new assault on bikers; cell phones, I kept reading the above posts, waiting for someone to kick this in. Can you think of anything that's made riding more dangerous in the last 5 years? The influence is incalculable. Texting sealed the deal. Now, not only is the user's attention elsewhere-so is their vision.

More riders and/or DRIVER'S; inevitable. Helmets helping/hurting folks; as always, debateable. The result of operating a motor vehicle while talking or texting on a cellphone; unacceptably fatal. Unless laws change-harshly-for this practice, those 'statistic's' will keep increasing. Is it really about helmets?
Or who's responsible for ins. premium's?

I totalled my bike a week ago. I've been riding 48 years, and haven't gone down in 30. A 74 yr. old woman pulled out who admittedly, 'didn't see me', and then froze when she finally did-blocking both traffic lanes. I kissed her car, and the bike spit me off into a pole that I hit with my shoulder. My last glimpse before I hit the pole was my face about to take the hit. Somehow I moved it inches.

I was wearing a helmet, and in this

[zookey]

Technically that is only a 200% increase..... 3-1=2 ..... 2/1=2.00 ..... move the decimal ..... add the percent ..... 200%.

Yes, but 3 would be 300% of the year there was only 1. You see how easily numbers are manipulated?

Yes 3 would be 300% of 1, but you originally used the word "increase". The increase from 1 to 3 is 2 which makes the percent of increase only 200%, that is what I meant to point out. I only mentioned that because I am a tutor.... and just covered the percent increase/decrease in class the other day, but that is beside the point. If you were using these numbers to make a point the "300% of the previous year" does sound much higher than to say "this represents a 200% increase from the previous year"

But you are right numbers can be manipulated and changed simply by the terminology used with them. I see (saw) your point. By the use of terminology and the way they are presented they can make or break a debated argument. I didn't mean any disrespect to you, my apologies if you took offense, none was intended.

[BA80]

Yes 3 would be 300% of 1, but you originally used the word "increase". The increase from 1 to 3 is 2 which makes the percent of increase only 200%, that is what I meant to point out. I only mentioned that because I am a tutor.... and just covered the percent increase/decrease in class the other day, but that is beside the point. If you were using these numbers to make a point the "300% of the previous year" does sound much higher than to say "this represents a 200% increase from the previous year"

But you are right numbers can be manipulated and changed simply by the terminology used with them. I see (saw) your point. By the use of terminology and the way they are presented they can make or break a debated argument. I didn't mean any disrespect to you, my apologies if you took offense, none was intended.

Non taken zookie. You helpd make my point wonderfully.

[crazy steve]

Well, being the guy who started this thread, I'll see if I can't sum up...

As was stated, those on both sides of this aren't really interested in hearing the other side. Talk about safety vs rights, manipulated statistics (both sides are guilty of this), passed-through costs, etc can be argued until the cows come home. But a few things do seem clear, at least to me...

It's pretty hard to argue with the raw numbers. Motorcycle deaths have over doubled since 1997, there's no way to 'spin' that. As to the reasons, there can't be that many. In no particular order, they could be...

1. Motorcycle ridership has doubled.
2. Motorcycle mileage has doubled.
3. Riding conditions have gotten twice as dangerous.
4. Medical response has declined.
5. Motorcycle training has declined.
6. Helmet use has declined due to helmet law repeals.


1 and 2 can be ruled out, as there are raw statistics for these. Averages for ownership and mileage have stayed resonably flat for the years measured. Yes, there's been increases (as well as descreases) some years, but certainly nowhere near double.

3 may be a possible or a contributing factor, but given the overall decline in all fatalities, that's a bit of a tough sell.

4 may be a possible. Anybody want to entertain the thought that the first responders might be performing 'triage' on-site? As in 'another dumb-azz biker with no helmet; looks like a vegetable-level injury to me, just bag him and tag him...'? The 'roadkill' comment cited may be more telling than we think..

5 may be part of it. Although the comment by the MSF president is another telling observation...“Maybe the training does not change someone’s true behavior for the long term,” he speculated. Translation: stupid is as stupid does...

Which brings us to 6, the start of all this. Most reasonable people will look at this and say 'Well, duh. If you don't use the safety gear, of course you'll have more fatalities'. In spite of all the crying by the 'it's my choice' crowd, safety equipment has a proven record (safety gear while at work, organized sports) that's hard to deny. One major difference between work/sport safety rules and 'public' safety rules like helmets is that the costs can be calculated, and as the responsibility falls on a particular entity (employer, league), they do do something about it. When the costs are diffused across the public at large as in this case, few have a large enough stake in it to raise a fuss about it.

As to the other 'possibles', while 1, 2, and 3 could all be contributors to the increase, I personally can't see any or even a combination of these resulting in twice the fatalities. Number 4, well you'll never get anyone to publically admit to this, but if you end up unresponsive on the ground without a helmet I wouldn't rule it out; this may be the best reason of all for wearing a helmet. Number 5 could be a biggie too, but again, there's almost no way to prove or disprove this; and as has been said, you can't fix stupid. Except by forcing these people to do the right thing...

[Elevener]

Well Steve, if you visit sites not to specific motorcycles you will see an increase in real dumba$$ riders buying first bikes.

They have no experience and get bikes to powerful for them. How many you tube videos are there of buyers leaving the dealer and getting on the throttle and wrecking them?

We are dumbing down as a society ya know.

So I guess you need to add manufacturers to your list?

[trbig]

I know around here, when gas got up to $4 a gallon and more, as Elevener states, many many people went out and bought motorcycles for the first time to start riding and saving gas. And of course they didn't start on the Honda 250 Rebel, they went and bought a GSXR 1000, a 'Busa, or such, then went out and killed thierselves. Here on the Talimena Trail in Oklahoma/Arkansas that attracts riders from all over the country, you used to never see a cop on there, but when people started zip-splatting all over, they started patrolling heavily.

So, even though motorcycle ownership may remain steady, which means older riders stopping riding are being replaced by newer riders at @ an even pace, the inexperience of the new riders along with the mentioned explosion of cell phone use, (My son was just clipped and run off the road two weeks ago by a person texting that apparently didn't even know she hit him...) I think there is a likelihood of deaths rising. Data suggests that the fastest growing group for motorcycle fatalities is the 40+ year age group. So is it slower reflexes in new riders possibly hitting midlife crisis? Someone that hasn't ridden since their early 20's deciding they can still riide just as fast? What exactly is to blame and why is just assumptions and guessing at this point.

As Steve stated, many have their minds made up and many refuse to see the facts stated by BOTH sides. What I also see is that helmet people seem to have an "I know what's best and you're an idiot if you don't agree with me" attitude, despite facts to the contrary. It's not just people on here, it's the general population as a whole.

I know with my posting on here, many would probably think I belong to the "No helmet" group. I wear mine 99.9% of the time along with a padded jacket and boots, but I refuse to take away a person's right to choose their destiny and will not presume to know that I know what's best for them. Part of my love for riding is the open, free feeling. I absolutely LOVE the feeling of the wind blowing across me and through my hair and wouldn't try to deny anyone the right to feel that. Nobody can look at the price of motorcycle insurance here in the states and gripe about outrageous insurance rates being jacked up becaue of helmetless riders. Medical insurance is high whether you live in a helmet law state or not, so that's not an issue either. So what really is the issue for those that think everyone should have to wear one?

[BA80]

You forgot to factor in one thing Steve. Modern motorcycles. Most of the popular models, will run 150 -200 MPH right off the showroom floor and ANYBODY can buy one.

I'm sorry but at those speeds all a helmet will do is contain the gore.

I'm not saying everyone should just jump on a bike and ride without safety gear, I have quite a bit of experience riding and if I'm going to ride dangerously I'll dress accordingly. As Tod said, I ride to enjoy the ride and under some circumstances the gear, including the hemet, make it unenjoyable. (if that is a word)

The choice is mine and that is how it should be.

[ViperRon]

Sociaty

We here in America have tried to develop a sociaty in which people can have personal possessions and share the resources of this country. Due to differences in geographic areas people have chosen to impliment different laws regulations and requirements so as to keep harmony and allow all equal opportunity to live happy sharring the resources.

It cost me to pay for police to ride the road trying to make people follow these rules and this makes me unhappy so when you fail to follow the rules of sociaty it costs me money therefore I am unhappy and you have infringed on my right to be happy and share resources.

If you ride wheelies at 100 miles an hour in traffic with no shirt shorts and tennis shoes with no helment because you are exercising your rights remember I also have my right as a car owner to drive not having to fear waking up in the middle of the night thinking of the sound of your head popping when I ran over it. I do not care what you do whan you are away from trafic but do not drive like hell in trafic its just asking for it and endangering others. It's kinda like this I have guns but you do not want me shooting in your direction wrecklessly so do not aim a 500 lb 150 mph bike full of gas anywhere around me.

Helments are reguarded as nessisary device on motorcycles ATV's scate boards roller skates and even bicycles because of the consistant nature of the head banging the ground and other things when a misshap occurs. Accidents do happen quite frequent to many people. Therefore be a part of sociaty and consider wearing one so I do not spend more money in taxes to have someone spoon feed you or for the funeral home to deal with you cause your family doesn't care and you have cheap insurance .


Rules are part of sociaty and your rights end where you affect others rights.
If you are out on open roads where your faliure and mistakes do not cause others greif I say be free cause you will more than likely only hurt yourself. If you are in a city or freeway with many other drivers then I think you need to be social and do your part to drive in a manner that is socially acceptable. That way I will be praying that you do not get hurt instead of going to hell for thinking someone should run over the idiot .

I hope all here read this and understand its intended to open eyes and focus on people accepting responsibility for acting responible in public and explore their freedom away from others.

[Elevener]

We here in America have tried to develop a sociaty in which people can have personal possessions and share the resources of this country. Due to differences in geographic areas people have chosen to impliment different laws regulations and requirements so as to keep harmony and allow all equal opportunity to live happy sharring the resources.

It cost me to pay for police to ride the road trying to make people follow these rules and this makes me unhappy so when you fail to follow the rules of sociaty it costs me money therefore I am unhappy and you have infringed on my right to be happy and share resources.

If you ride wheelies at 100 miles an hour in traffic with no shirt shorts and tennis shoes with no helment because you are exercising your rights remember I also have my right as a car owner to drive not having to fear waking up in the middle of the night thinking of the sound of your head popping when I ran over it. I do not care what you do whan you are away from trafic but do not drive like hell in trafic its just asking for it and endangering others. It's kinda like this I have guns but you do not want me shooting in your direction wrecklessly so do not aim a 500 lb 150 mph bike full of gas anywhere around me.

Helments are reguarded as nessisary device on motorcycles ATV's scate boards roller skates and even bicycles because of the consistant nature of the head banging the ground and other things when a misshap occurs. Accidents do happen quite frequent to many people. Therefore be a part of sociaty and consider wearing one so I do not spend more money in taxes to have someone spoon feed you or for the funeral home to deal with you cause your family doesn't care and you have cheap insurance .


Rules are part of sociaty and your rights end where you affect others rights.
If you are out on open roads where your faliure and mistakes do not cause others greif I say be free cause you will more than likely only hurt yourself. If you are in a city or freeway with many other drivers then I think you need to be social and do your part to drive in a manner that is socially acceptable. That way I will be praying that you do not get hurt instead of going to hell for thinking someone should run over the idiot .

I hope all here read this and understand its intended to open eyes and focus on people accepting responsibility for acting responible in public and explore their freedom away from others.

WOW. Almost speechless. Good luck on voting for obama. Way things are headed your gonna get your way.

[BA80]

Dang Wayne, this has been a fairly spirited discussion and I have enjoyed it. No need to make it political and get it locked down.

I don't think it's going that way anyhow.

Helmets are not a "necessary device" on a motorcycle any more than a cigarette lighter. It is merely a recommended safety item and I don't disagree with that.

Condoms are a recommended safety item during social sex also but they aren't required by law. I don't disagree with that either. Both involve life and death and could affect you but still it's an individual choice.

I fail to see the difference.

Who exactly would enforce that law anyway. The bedroom police?