Quote:
Originally Posted by MTNFSH
You beat me to posting this article but I think it shows that the debate raging elsewhere on the forum about Federal officials calling for mandatory helmet laws misses the big picture. More powerful sportsbikes, new or returning riders with little or no riding experience or training, lack of helmets or protective gear all add up to more motorcycle fatalities. For that matter, there are a lot more SUVs on the road today compared to 20 years ago which probably increases the chance of a motorcycle fatality when two-wheel metal hits much bigger metal.
Question is what do individual riders do about it and what is the role for the government. For myself as a guy who returned to riding last year after 15 years, I wear a helmet and protective gear, practice my riding skills and plan to sign up for an experienced rider course. For the government, I would support levying an extra fee for people who don't want to wear a helmet if people have a problem with mandatory helmet laws, mandatory rider training in order to get the M endorsement and funding to make the training available, and hefty fines or jail time for anyone - cager or motorcyclist - who causes an accident by failing to yield the right of way.
|
There are other data missing from this report, too. Not that I don't agree with the basic points in the report... yes, motorcycles are rising in popularity and population, and perhaps there are more "new" or "renewed" riders too, but
I'd like to see several other breakdowns...
-percentage of "new" riders (whether pure noob or re-entry) killed/in accidents who have less than 6 months/3000 miles logged
- a breakdown of exactly what types/models of motorcycles are involved
-percentage of cages involved in these fatal incidents that fall into one or more of the following categories....
* "tuner" car/hot rod/ ridiculous 4x4 driven by persons with less than one year's driving experience.
* SUV, RV or minivan driven by someone with less than one year driving OR by someone who classifies as a "senior citizen" with no previous "large vehicle" experience. (This is a huge issue in our area. We regularly see monstrous RV's being driven or towed by someone who's only other driving experience is in a car or small truck, or people that are moving from their Hyundai Accent to a SUV or larger minivan, or worse yet, some kind of converted Greyhound bus as an RV)
* cage of any kind that had a cell phone/laptop/dvd player/superstereo system/GPS in use at the time of the accident.
*AND/OR an improperly restrained child, pet, or cargo. "Improperly restrained child" referring as well to children who are perhaps secured well, but allowed to scream, yell, thrash about, or otherwise distract the driver.
-a breakdown of fault.... as in, who was responsible for the accident.
-percentage of "at fault" drivers, either cagers or riders, who have previously been involved and at fault in accidents. (IE, bad drivers are bad drivers, no matter what they're driving at the time)
I think we might find that the survey/report might take on a different flavor if we had those details. The author makes it sound as if the only significant differences between 1987 and now are the size and power of motorcycles, and the relative experience or lack of it that riders are displaying.
I've seen similar reports regarding the increase in popularity of SUV's, minivans, and such, and those reports combined with this one might show a different picture.
Not only have we handed fair to poor drivers more complicated, more difficult vehicles to drive, we've also created a veritable smorgasbord of electronic distractions to help them stay unfocused and dangerous.
All that said, "remember, they're ALL out to get you" along with "ATGATT" will remain 2 of my main riding rules.
Interesting article, though. Thanks, J