[17693]

No simple solution.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate any effort by the AMA to stand up for our rights, but I also firmly believe that the only way to make it safer out there is for the cagers to open their eyes, put down the cell phone, and pay more attention to the buisness at hand, namely driving. Unfortunately all the lobbying and legislation in the world will not make for a simple solution. Any ideas???

 

[KPaulCook]

Some ideas and the cruiser guys won't be happy

1. Outlaw the use of cell phones while driving. Have the Feds withhold money until States adopt this laws. Double fines for violations if a cell phone was in use.

2. Increase criminal penalities for drivers involved in accidents injuring others.

3. Educate drivers on the consequences of their actions. i.e. most folks only have a vague idea about civil liability until they get sued.

4. Mandatory FULL FACE Helment laws (I can't believe the AMA is against this). Why Full Face? Because according to a study by Ditmar Otte and Gunter Felton * accident study FULL FACE Helments significantly reduce the chance of injury. Most head injuries involve some part of the front of the head.

I know this doesn't make cruiser guys happy. But by doing this injuries go down, insurance costs go down and then rates go down

* Proficencient Motorcycling, David L. Hough, page 28.

5. Encourage motorcyclist to wear long sleeve abrasion protection jacket with body armor.

 

[10440]

Re: take responsibility for ourselves

As motorcyclists, we are a minority. Our first impulse, when beset by the forces that outnumber us, is often

to enlist outside help -- namely, the government. But greater legislative involvement in motorcycling (and the motorsport and transportation industries in general), actual or threatened, here and abroad, inevitably leads to a lessening of the freedoms that draw us to the sport in the first place, e.g., diminished off-road access; restrictions on horsepower and top-speed; reduced speed limits; and in at least one instance so far, the virtual disappeareance of an entire class of vehicle -- the three-wheeled ATV. Whenever we encourage the government to look at motorcycling more closely, we are almost inevitably the ones who lose, since riding is, generally, more dangerous than driving.

There are certainly plenty of people who can't manage to safely operate a cellphone and a car at the same time. There are also plenty of riders who are just as dangerous all by themselves on a new license and an R-1. Or a Big Twin. Or a beer and anything. It's my personal belief that ensuring a healthy future for motorcycling involves our -- ourselves, the manufacturers, and such advocates as the AMA and the motorsport press -- improved efforts at education (i.e., public relations) and responsibility. And, failing that, the willingness to sue the hell out of anybody who wrongs us. Sure, litigation is a nasty process, but, for the sake of maintaining what freedoms -- even potentially dangerous freedoms -- we have left, better to take an issue to court that to Congress.

 

[11158]

I think that one of the best ways to improve motorcycle safety is to increase motorcycle use. Here in Tokyo, motorcycles are EVERYWHERE, and car drivers expect motorcycles to be EVERYWHERE. "I just didn't see him" is not an acceptable defense over here.



Therefore, the AMA's efforts to increase MC parking and lower tolls and fees are important because these initiatives could increase MC use. More bikes on the road = More driver awareness.



Along these lines I would also suggest tax exemptions for rider safety apparal and even tax rebates for motorcycle purchases.



However, this all hinges on viewing bikes as a solution to traffic and parking problems. Most lawmakers are more likely to think that bikes ARE the problem and the solution is to discourage riding

 

[KPaulCook]

Personal Responsibility vs. Reality (the case for laws)

I agree that personal responsibility is better than more laws but pratically speaking I don't think that it has a chance. [*] Today I went riding on my favorite twisty road. I saw so many folks riding cruisers and sportbikes wearing no jackets and an inadequate helments. [*] On the freeway this week I witnessed a women driver in an SUV almost wipe out a Kia while she was talking on cell phone. After the Kia swerved to get out of the way another motorist honked at the lady. The lady then took her hand off the wheel and flipped everyone off (while still talking on the phone).

[*]Again most folks are ignorant of the litigation that can result when they cause an accident. If more folks were aware, there would be a lot less road bullys (especially agressive SUV drivers)

The Seatbelt laws have saved lives and reduced the rate of increase of insurance costs. I contend a Full Face Helment Law would do the same.

 

[KPaulCook]

Excellent post. Good points. The AMA should spend some time lobbying lawmakers that motorcycles are a good solution to traffic problems rather than fighting mandatory helment laws. Talk about wasting valuable AMA political capital. The European model of allowing teenagers to ride a small motorcyle or scooter before they drive is an excellent concept as well.

 

[17693]

Re: take responsibility for ourselves

In the way of new legislation how about a requirement that anyone applying for a motorcycle license be required to take an AMA backed course. This would be a very easy way to ensure that new riders are properly educated. Back in high school we all had to take drivers ed in one form or another including instructed behind the wheel time. In my state at least all you have to do to get the m class is pass the 15 minute street test. That's just not good enough. I also agree with the post that suggests tax breaks for bikes. Why not? Virtualy every bike out there is putting a lot less polution into the air, not to mention the fact that we are burning far less gas. Hell, just me riding to work saves me $20 in gas every week as opposed to driving my truck. I think the AMA needs to support a more balanced approach to solving the accident problem, and not rely entirely on the government, as most of us would agree, that road tends to lead nowhere. And by the way I do support helmet laws but do not by any means think that that is the great answer, just another small piece of the puzzle.

 

[longride]

Re: Some ideas and the cruiser guys won't be happy

I don't understand point 3 (mandatory helmets) in that I bet it makes just as many "sportbike" guys unhappy as well. Nobody wants to be stuck wearing a helmet all the time. Personal responsibility and basic freedom come into play. Manadatory condoms next? I hope not! Know what the #1 cause of death in car accidents is? Head injuries. Why not make the cagers wear full face helmets too? Without flip up shields so they can't talk on the phone. Good solution there I think.

Point 5 (protective gear) makes no sense after point 3. Why only encourage such flimsy body protection? You went balls out on the head, so lets do the same for the rest of the body. Full armored body suits should be mandatory, with air bags attached. Mandatory purchase with the helmet when you buy the bike. Wouldn't that reduce the chance of injury as much as the study you quoted in point 3? I'm 100% sure it would.

You didn't mention motorcycle modifications that should be manditory. How about roll cages for bikes with seatbelts so the rider doesn't hit the ground and stays put? They have been proposed as live savers, I have seen drawings of what they will be, and should easily reduce injuries even further. Combined with the mandatory helmet and mandatory armored suit, we'll be in fine shape then. You would have to agree that more mandatory laws are what we need to protect us from ourselves, right? Laws against fatty foods and playing with sharp objects should be next on the list.

 

[longride]

How we can REALLY improve.

"The American Motorcyclist Association is a nonprofit organization with more than 250,000-members. "

This in itself is pathetic. 250,000 members out of many millions that ride. Membership = money = political clout. The feds will do what they want with us because they have no fear. Unless our political muscle increases, there will be no fending off increasingly stupid laws. If you want to see clout in action watch what the NRA does.

 

[erik_squires]

Re: No simple solution.

Great ideas, but won't help with single vehicle crashes.

Understanding the nature of injuries sustained to motorcycle riders, and the ways to minimize them is something I feel is also very worthwhile.

I'll post more elsewhere.

Erik

 

[erik_squires]

More motorcycles may mean fewer cars, but if we're going to sell them as better transportation alternatives, maybe we should mandate that bikes get better gas mileage than cars.



Erik

 

[jodiesel]

Re: Some ideas and the cruiser guys won't be happy

With the level of governmental control that you suggest, it sounds like you would be much more happy living in a socialist country.

 

[erik_squires]

Re: Some ideas and the cruiser guys won't be happy

The thing most who make your argument regarding cagers and helmets miss is that cagers are already far ahead of motorcyclists in avoiding head injuries. It's called a seat belt. And most states make them mandatory at all times.

In addition, modern air bags also greatly reduce the chance of head injury. So, cagers have actually made great strides in reducing the risk of head injuries, while motorcyclists in many places have made great strides in the opposite direction, by having helmet laws repealed, or by allowing helmets without chin protection.

In comparable bare headed accidents, a cager with a seat belt has a 50:1 better chance of surviving than a motorcyclist. Even better with air bags.

As for armored suites, wouldn't it be nice if we had some way to tell what injuries were most likely suffered? What materials worked best for them? What types of armor and abrasion resistant materials worked, and which one's did not?

Erik

 

[erik_squires]

Personally, I dont' actually want my roads riddled with motorcycles. I like being special.



Erik

 

[erik_squires]

Re: Some ideas and the cruiser guys won't be happy

Could you post a little more about that study please? I'd like to get a hold of a copy of it, as opposed to the book unless it has the complete transcript.

Also, I agree about Body Armor, but damn if there are good current sources of information about what armor works, what doesn't, etc. The famous Dr. Woods article is now several years old, and American manufacturers are not doing a great job of keeping up with the science. My ass is very important to me, so I work hard to cover it with the best I can find.

Thanks!

Erik

 

[longride]

Re: Some ideas and the cruiser guys won't be happy

I alredy suggested roll cages, air bags and seat belts for motorcycles. Obviously you agree with these. We can get the motorcyclist even with the death rates of cars if we impliment my simple suggestions.

 

[erik_squires]

Re: Some ideas and the cruiser guys won't be happy

I was replying to one specific point that you made, that car drivers should wear helmets because of the potential for head injury.

My reply was that they're already much safer than bikes, so why require that?

I ignored your sarcastic suggestions regarding roll bars, ets. You then imply I'm suggesting that we make motorcycles as safe as cars, which is also a silly argument, and one that I am not making, go play that game of twisting some one's words around with a five year old, not me.

Erik

 

[KPaulCook]

Good points Erik

Excellent post. Erik you stated your case well

 

[KPaulCook]

If you don't wear a Full Face Helmet and Protective Gear you are an Organ Donor wait

For the life of me I can not understand those who ride without a full face helmet. I once had an girlfriend who was an ER doctor. She had me visit the ER where she worked. It was an eye opening experience. She said the number of folks involved in motorcycling fatalities who wear the flimsy lids and no protective gear was astounding. In fact one of the EMS guys had just come back from an accident where a sport bike rider wearing leathers and a full face helmet was hit by a car. He survived with a broken collar bone. Because of his gear his injuries were not life threatening. To me it is a disgrace that the AMA would not support mandatory full face helmet laws. In fact any attempt to fight mandatory helmet laws is dramatic waste of political capital All creditability is lost.

 

[KPaulCook]

The big difference between the NRA and AMA

The difference is that the NRA has the constitution amendment behind it. Riding a motorcycle with out a helmet and protective gear is not protected by the U.S. constitution. Also most NRA members are very safety conscious and would not respect anyone who endangered themselves or others i.e. by riding a motorcycle without the proper gear or drinking alcohol and riding.