Kawasaki VN750 Forum banner

21 - 40 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Should we even be allowed to ride a motorcycle at all? Can there be any doubt that motorcycles are more dangerous than cars? Surely motorcycles are too dangerous and the costs to society to high to allow people to ride on motorcycles. Consider how dangerous the activity is even with the appropriate gear. By what factor do you really think the risk is mitigated with the appropriate gear. What, maybe 1/3 less likely to be killed? Surely the risk is just too high. Society simply can't afford the risks and costs associated with motorcycle use.

You see, there is NO logical point whereby to draw the line. Having gear doesn't make motorcycle riding safe. Those who advocate ATGATT seem to think that they are protecting the activity for the rest of us. In fact, the very arguments they make can just as easily turned against motorcycle riding in general.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,750 Posts
So, ride naked to show the oppressive government we are still free. Interesting concept.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,750 Posts
Don't make any dares you don't want to see!!!
That was done by a Yahoo member (maybe two?), with pics to prove it!!
I was speaking figuatively, not literally, and with tongue firmly in my cheek! Don't want to emotionally scar any innocent bystanders!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,834 Posts
Should we even be allowed to ride a motorcycle at all? Can there be any doubt that motorcycles are more dangerous than cars? Surely motorcycles are too dangerous and the costs to society to high to allow people to ride on motorcycles. Consider how dangerous the activity is even with the appropriate gear. By what factor do you really think the risk is mitigated with the appropriate gear. What, maybe 1/3 less likely to be killed? Surely the risk is just too high. Society simply can't afford the risks and costs associated with motorcycle use.
You see, there is NO logical point whereby to draw the line. Having gear doesn't make motorcycle riding safe. Those who advocate ATGATT seem to think that they are protecting the activity for the rest of us. In fact, the very arguments they make can just as easily turned against motorcycle riding in general.

I think that statement would have some, (not alot) validity if EVERYONE rode a bike instead of driving a car. (and doing that in itself would make the road safer...)

Motorcycles , no matter what you think, are a minority, and are a minority when it comes to ways to die or be injured. CARS kill , injure and maim more people per year than anything (some of them folks on bikes), so by your logic we should get rid of cars first. I'm with you on that vote.

Society bears risks and costs? Not usualy. More folks die of heart disesse, and cancer, so picking out motorcycles as one of "societys ills" is just stupid.

I am not sure but it sounds like you are trying to rationalize not wearing any gear under the pretext that there are no guarentee's that it will be helpfull in an accident. That is about as stupid as telling a cop not to wear a bullet-proof vest because he might just get shot in the head anyway.

Helmets are a law in some states, but proper gear is not (as far as I know) I know some states "suggest" one to wear proper riding attire, but no actual law covers it. I have seen shirtless shoeless riders with non-DOT approved helmets and shorts pass cops and not get pulled over.

The bottom line it is your ass and your choice on how well you wish to protect it.

Now I am also unsure how promoting wearing protective gear works against us as motorcyclists. Are you saying that wearing gear is just pointing out to everyone that bike riding may be dangerous? Well bikes are dangerous and just about everypone knows this, so wearing a helmet and protective gear is showing the world you realize this too...as opposed to the shirtless fool that is simply showing everyone how stupid he is or that he just doesn't care. And when "society" sees folks that don't care that tends to make them more angery than anything else...and THAT IS working against us.

Look, I am not going to give anyone crap on what choices they make. If you do not wear a helmet , your just being careless and stupid...but that is my opinion. If you don't wear head to toe protective gear...that is your choice, but again, you are just adding to your risks....and providing the rest of "society" with more ammunition to make protective gear a law , or, to outlaw to bikes altogether...


And when it comes to not being killed, I'll take that 1/3...it may mean alot.



EDIT- some numbers for you:
http://cbs2.com/national/Traffic.deaths.US.2.795108.html

And it is estimated that over 1 MILLION people with die this year from cancer and heart disese.
KM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
I've been hospitalized plenty of times in my life. I also have close family members that have spent a good deal of time being hospitalized (my wife and I have joked that we need to write a book someday rating hospitals by the quality of their cafeterias. Anyone who has spent any time in a hospital, either as a patient or visitor, particularly between the hours of 2200-0600 knows *exactly* what I'm talking about). While it probably doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out, I've decided that it's generally best to spend as little time as possible in the hospital.

When I ride, I use a full-face helmet, Tourmaster Intake Air II jacket, boots, mc gloves and jeans (even in the North Texas heat). I've found that with all of the options that the jacket gives and all of the venting in the helmet, there's no reason *not* to wear this stuff when I ride. Given all of this, I figure that if I were to involuntarily be introduced to the pavement, I'd feel pretty stupid lying in the hospital undergoing skin grafts and doing physical therapy for where my shoulder or elbow hit the road (and unable to get a decent snack at 0200 b/c the cafeteria is closed), all because I wasn't wearing the gear. Of course, I may not feel all that stupid since my un-helmeted head would probably have also bounced off of something hard, turning me into a vegetable and making me blissfully ignorant of the way I was *before* I decided to not wear the gear.

Yes, riding the bike is a risk, but I judge the reward (the enjoyment of riding) to be worth the risk. Riding without gear is a risk, too, but given the advanced state of the gear available, I just don't see how the reward of riding without it outweighs the risk.

--FA
 
  • Like
Reactions: flitecontrol

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
Yep, lose the jeans and get a pair of mesh pants...you'l be safer and cooler.

(skin grafts on thighs and knees hurt just as much as shoulders..)


KM
That's my next piece of gear, KM. Just haven't had the $$ to contribute to the economy just yet. The tax refund is, however, a-comin'. Any brand / model you'd recommend?

--FA
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,834 Posts
That's my next piece of gear, KM. Just haven't had the $$ to contribute to the economy just yet. The tax refund is, however, a-comin'. Any brand / model you'd recommend?

--FA

Yes. Fieldsheer. In particular their "Titanium Air Pant"
Newest model here:
http://tinyurl.com/96nmas

I am lucky enough to have a rather large motorcycle dealer near me , Donelson Cycles , http://www.donelsoncycles.com/

Their main store carries ALOT of gear that one can actualy try on before buying. I tried on all the mesh pants they had there, which included the Firstgear line, Joe Rocket, Fieldsheer, Tourmaster/Coretech and a few off brands. Of all of them , the Fieldsheer 'Titanium' pant was the most comfortable and the coolest to wear. Alot of the others actualy made my legs sweat just standing there. Now I know they are meant to be worn on a bike that is moving...so airflow would increase and they would not be so hot. But there are times when you are not moving...at a traffic light or just running into a 7-11 for a soda...that you don't want to feel like you are wearing plastic bags on your legs.
The FS pant also had the most amount of mesh than any of the others, a key reason for them being cooler I would think. They also had removable CE armor , knee pads you could adjust, and velcro at the cuffs to prevent the pants from riding up your leg should something go wrong.

The ones I bought were the Titanium Air Pant 2...seems they now make a "3"... which seems to include a liner for cooler or perhaps wetter days.

The Killer was the price was less than all the others..just a hair over 100 bucks.
I have worn them for 3 summers now and they simply rock when the temps hit the 90's or higher.


KM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
Thanks. I'll check 'em out.

--FA
 

·
Love My Baby
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
Hey guys, today while riding my baby to work on Interstate 95, I was passed by a fellow biker on a Ninja who was going at least 100 mph and weaving in and out of traffic. This guy was less than a pubic hair away from eating the road he was flying on. BUT... he was wearing ATG. Yep, he must have felt invinsible with all his armor on. So invinsible that he could justify riding like a complete moron because he had "protection." Reminds me of the young men in their 30's and 40's I see on the AIDS wing of the hospital I work in, who swear they always wore "protection" whenever they had sex with their various gay partners or with prostitutes. The moral of this true story is that prudence trumps protection. I'm not saying not to wear ATGATT, I'm just saying that no matter what you wear, you need to ride attentively and defensively or your gear just might be useless, maybe giving you a false sense of security. Gear or no gear, PLEASE ride sober and safely.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,750 Posts
There is no protection from stupid!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,750 Posts
My gear is to help protect me from other people's stupid that my brain can't protect me from...

--FA
True. In my case, there is a possibility of self inflicted stupid too! :drool: :doh:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
117 Posts
I think that most riders acknowledge that ATGATT it the right thing to do. Some people choose not to wear gear because it's inconvenient / uncomfortable, reduces the 'fun factor' or because it doesn't fit their image of a 'biker' (they want to fit in with their riding buddies.) Just as many smokers are tired of being reminded to quit, some riders don't like to be reminded to wear protective gear after they have already made their decision not to. Thats OK with me.

But,
Who pays the hospital bill when a motorcyclist is injured? You and I do of course. That's the reason we have insurance.

Insurance companies base their rates in part on risk factors of the insured. Many companies heve higher health insurance premiums for smokers. I get a 10% discount on my motorcycle insurance for completing an MSF training course. I would also like to get a discount for wearing protective gear.

Conversely, this means that those who choose to ride without gear should pay higher insurance rates to cover their higher medical costs.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,834 Posts
........... those who choose to ride without gear should pay higher insurance rates to cover their higher medical costs.


I agree with you totally. Problem is you can have "legal" insurance ...but NOT have medical coverage. When you insure your bike you are insuring it, not you.
Many folks have no medical coverage on their bike policy...except for others they might injure.

There is no check box on the medical coverage I have on myself (through where I work) that says I ride a bike at all. They go by my age, my health history and smoker/non smoker, and where I live.

So I am not sure how you can get riders with no gear to pay more for their medical coverage.

KM
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
117 Posts
You're right KM of couse. I knew that mc insurance generally doesn't include medical coverage - DUH.

I do believe there will be continuing emphasis on reducing healthcare costs nationally. (I sure hope my medical insurance company doesn't include a "motorcycle" checkbox in the future.) But as motorcycle injuries increase, there will be motivation to reduce those costs - either by a $$ incentive to discourage risky choices or through regulation.

As you pointed out there doesn't seem to be a mechanism in place right now to fairly assess those that make poor choices. So we're back to regulation.

I still believe the message is - "As motorcycle riders we should encourage motorcycle safety practices (including AGATT) or we risk increased regulation in the future."

In plain words, helmets along with other protective gear? will be required by law. (Next to come will be riding restrictions for highways, cities, nighttime...Stricter licensing / testing... Licensing based on engine cc / hp... periodic retesting)

All we need is for a couple of serious (high visibility) accidents this summer and our CT State Legislature will be under pressure again to pass a helmet law (or more). In the current economic environment, if someone produces a study that shows them the State can save $$ in Medicaid costs by mandating protective gear, I believe there is good chance of it passing.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,834 Posts
....All we need is for a couple of serious (high visibility) accidents this summer and our CT State Legislature will be under pressure again to pass a helmet law (or more). In the current economic environment, if someone produces a study that shows them the State can save $$ in Medicaid costs by mandating protective gear, I believe there is good chance of it passing.

But as I mentioned in my other post here, it is all a numbers game. And even with the increase in motorcycle deaths, we are still a minority. Over One Million people will die this year from heart disease and cancer (And for the first time, Cancer has beaten out Heart Disease as the #1 Killer)
about 42,000 folks will die in Automotive accidents, while only 5,000 will die from riding a motorcycle.

Insurance companies care about the big numbers, not the little ones. (This is why biker insurance in states that have either removed , or added a helmet laws ... see no changes in insurance costs) They are not a big enough factor in the equation. Granted, 5,000 lives is still 5,000 lives and should not be taken lightly.

If motorcycle owners continue to rise (ownership has doubled in the last 10 years) and we become more noticed as a whole, I would not be surprised to see serious talk about legislation of some kind occouring.

(This post was edited to remove politically biased commments)


KM
 
21 - 40 of 55 Posts
Top