[*]Point 1. You kind of changed the rules in the middle of the game like my daughters do to me when playing monopoly.. " Tiered licensing without any kind of meaningful rider education would have a minimal effect on rider safety in the United States." That's a big change there Gabester.
[*]Point 2 what data are you and Schizuki looking at to say "After we've compiled reports of all motorcycle accidents in 2006, and culled out the ones in which (1) a cager was at fault, (2) the rider was drinking, (3) the rider was unlicensed, and (4) the rider was riding a small-displacement bike, how many remain that could conceivably be blamed on a sober, licensed rider riding a bike that was too much for him? Because until we have that number, we've got nothing to talk about." When I read the WA state report again (look at the conclusions again and all of the charts) and look at other studies. I don't reach the same conclusions My B.S. meter is starting to flash Please site your data or is this fictitious/hypothetical study that just happens to match your opinion. some us aren't as clever as you two to get it.
[*] There is data to compare the effectiveness of tiered licensing programs just not in the U.S.
[*] Basically your opinion is that tiered licensing has marginal effects at best even with proper training.. Again I think you are ignoring the law of physics, the data in countries such as the U.K. and Australia.and of course common sense. The data is out there you just haven't seen it compiled yet.
1- Increase (through public and private) training programs
2- make the rider's test harder than the lame parking lot test that are currently used in most states
3- restrict the cc size base on how the individial scored on the training program and the rider's test- 500 cc max for anyone for the first 6 months and likewise restricting the power output of said motorcycle
4- issue "newbie" tags for those riders with the ability to trade out of the tag at no or little cost when you have completed the first 6 months
5- allow experienced riders (those with at least 5 years of riding history and no at fault accidents for those 5 years) to volunteer (with proper state training) to give on road riding test for those that have performed well enough in the theory or written test and the training courses to try for exempt status on the 500 cc rule- there will be a need for communication devices like in England for this to work/ newbie tag still applies
there are other ideas on this swirling around but those goals can be accomplished without creating great strain because private industry will make up for anything the gov't can't afford to do.
like I said before- if you try this and the insurance industry backs it there will be a stablization in premiums and better riders on the road.
you're investing in your safety.
btw, I'd charge a uniformed (country wide) mc licesing fee that is at a minimum $100 for a 10 year m/c licese. that will keep the posers out. get busted without a bike license and do 2 weeks and $500 fine manditory for your stupidity.
Gabe- I completely understand where you are coming from. Problem is that there is no way to find an actual study on such things because it doesn't exsist, yet.
Point 2 what data are you and Schizuki looking at to say "After we've compiled reports of all motorcycle accidents in 2006, and culled out the ones in which.................
I believe that WAS the point, KPaul. The fact that nobody has YET done so; and if they did indeed collate the data, the results would show such a small number of affected individuals as to be absolutely not even worth the time to "Legislate Out" said behaviour.
I'm just wondering when the insurance companies are going to start coming down on 8000lb SUV driving compulsive cell phone users?
I think that many Insurance company decisions are based on political correctness and what is visible in the eyes of Joe Q. Public. I presume you saw the local Fox News "expose" on crazy bikers in N.GA, however I'm still waiting for the "Inattentive, SUV driving soccer mom" piece.
I get your point but it is not fair that the onus of responsibility is always placed squarely on the shoulders of us riders, any comments?
Ok thanks for making it clear to me il.e. giving me a clue. That is then his hypothesis. I disagree with it.. When I had a Google alert reader that looked for news about motorcycle accidents I would read many stories about inexperienced older riders losing control of their heavy cruisers. In fact I have posted several articles to MO in the last year...from different states that have proposed that thesis. My business training says its probably not worth it to legislate it out as you say but the engineer in me says we should strive for the safest reasonable approach. To me a tiered system is reasonable.. i.e. A middle aged man with no experience should not start out on a 700 lb cruiser and a squid shouldn't start out on a 150 hp sportbike..
I'm on your side on this. But as riders we are hughly out numbered so when spit hit the fan in the insurance industry we suffer first. Like I said to one of my customer just moments before "I don't make the rules. I just force you to play by them."
Red Sts on the floor- calling you're name. Coming by and get it on Saturday- It's raining tomorrow but 70 on Sat.
Touche He must of been bought off, brain washed or maybe Bush has pictures of him doing something he shouldn't be.. I don't think the people of the U.K. were for the war in the beginning though..unlike the U.S. where Faux News led the cheer leading for war.
1 - 20 of 85 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.