Motorcycle Enthusiasts-Horrible Accident

[68Wooley]

now, that said, time your normal drives through specific areas. you will find that that 45 second red light generally adds up to somewhere in the ballpark of 5 minutes. each one...
...i still don't condone running the lights, but i had timed some of these because a good friend of mine was argueing with me about this, years ago. 

Until you said you measured it, I was going to call BS. I'm still skeptical but unfortunately I have nothing to back my skepticism up with.

[moot]

FWIW there are more folks killed in automobiles than on motorcycles. Pedestrians also don't fare well when hit by cars running a red light either. I suppose we should also ban crossing the roadway on foot in a crosswalk so no one gets hurt there. 

There's way more people driving cars than riding bikes.  The stats can't be weighed like that.  And then no on in the thread is asking for bikes to be banned.  I did say that if enough sheeple keep seeing idiots stunting across lanes on highways and doing other reckless stuff, they will flex their sheer outweighing riders and deminish riders' rights just by whining.

Second point. You can train all you want, demand mandatory performance re certifications annually if you wish. That will not stop someone getting STUPID in traffic between testing and re testing. Training is not proof against negligence only the person's desire to drive properly does that. The person will drive just like they are supposed to while being evaluated or observed then proceed to get stupid again when they think no one is watching them. Ever notice folks driving slower and more carefully when a Police car in near by? 

There's no way anyone can argue that drivers in america aren't way more sluggish and less responsive, and (a little more arguably) that they know how to drive a car on the nervous edge as well.  Whether that's consequent to culture or the much stricter and thorough license (knowledge and practical) requirements, or some combination of the two, is anyone's guess.  I reckon it's the major factor in the US/EU difference though.  There's probably an equal amount of idiots behind the wheel and handlebars in both populations, but the idiots in the EU are largely sharper.
Upping the license criteria would force people to better know how to drive, and whether they drive like crap after that is all up to them.  It's just like with guns.

Thirdly saying that this is a US problem is also disingenuous. Having seen footage from the many cameras in GB it's obvious that there are PLENTY of idiots there even given the reduced number of licensed drivers. This is a situation endemic to all locations that have folks driving on the roadway not just the US.

Like I said, there's the same idiots everywhere.  But people in the US definitely aren't as responsive.  I might be biased, I've only driven in the SW (AZ, CA, NM, TX, NV, and some of CO, UT, and OK) of the US, but it's definitely a trend.  It's like everyone is on sleeping pills.  Add that to the above discussed very lax license requirements and you have an obvious result.

Repoman, it looks like you haven't read my posts either.  I never said anything about regulating people. I don't like the idea of forcing or nannyizing anything...  I do see that it's way too easy to get a license in the US without being proficient enough at driving.  I also see trends in driving habits that sort of favor accidents.  If this conversation were about guns, I'd be arguing the same thing:  not regulating gun ownership, but ensuring proper minimum criteria to initialy earn a license.  I wouldn't be arguing for gun free zones but for anything that favors safe gun handling habits as widely as possible.  I wouldn't be making people pay for merely owning a potentialy dangerous tool, but I'd provide people the best opportunities to learn to be as proficient in using those tools correctly, and make stiff penalties for misusing them.  Whether they use or misuse them is all up to them.. That's safest and least nanny thing to do.

I can't read the rest of the thread.. My arguments are above.. pretty clear and simple ones.

[Choocha]

I got an Update today:

1) The guy who had no pulse never made it.  He was declared DOA but I'm sure he was dead while we were doing CPR.  The doctor didn't want to give up on him.
2) The girl who broke her back arrived alive but passed Sun. morning. 
3) The other two are listed as critical but will live.  State troop said they face "a long road back."

All four were college students at a major University here.  No word on the driver...they aren't speaking about her just yet. 

Let me say a couple things here.  It is just wrong to see such young people on the pavement begging for their lives.  Its not right.  That hurt me the most.  So undignified and cruel.

I was told to be prepared for serious court time.  Criminal, civil ...etc.. may go on for years. 

P.S. They were all wearing helmet's..didn't help a bit.

[TwentyFo]

For me its just the opposite.  Of course this may change with time, but I'd like to take up riding a Harley when I get older.  Like 50+ (not even half way there yet).  I'm aware of the risks.  But when I'm older and have done most of the things I want to do, then I wouldn't be so dismayed if I get taken out.

I know as I have driven that I've almost taken out bike riders.  Even though I check mirrors and especially make sure to look myself, I almost hit one that I never even saw.

On May 11th my roomate was killed on a motorcycle (gsxr 1000....it was way too fast). He had been riding competitively since he was 9 or 10 years old. He was probably the best rider I have ever seen. Unfortunately, when riding those things you have to be on top of things 100% of the time. Making one mistake can cost you your life. The past few months have been really rough on his family, but they seem to be getting better every day. Just be careful and responsible on those things.

[Maverick]

Moot,

You may have read and even quoted my post but you didn't understand most of it that's for sure. You lost the point of most everything I put into it.

I've driven about 40+ of the lower 48. I've also driven in Canada, Mexico and Panama. It is not a US only problem by a large margin. You may wish to consider it that way but it's not that way in my experiance.

[Yeager]

I got an Update today:

2) The girl who broke her back arrived alive but passed Sun. morning. 

My heart and love goes out to them.  Life is a crazy thing, a wonderful thing, a tragic thing. 
 

[Gh0stFT]

i'm with lazs2 on this,
you are what you are doing and you do things because what you are,
and not what you would do in 10 or 20 years.

This horrible-accident will mostly affect the elder ones IMHO, the one with alot expirience
and LUCK still survived today doing such a risky sport for years. Like Ripsnort said,
with age priorities change and i'm getting 40 this Sept., hey alot changed in my mind,
but mostly because of our 2 years old daughter.

My prayers for those souls who lost there life in this horrible accident.



 

[CAP1]

Until you said you measured it, I was going to call BS. I'm still skeptical but unfortunately I have nothing to back my skepticism up with.

well, to be honest, i only timed it because the shop i used to work at had a nitpicker of a manager. i tend to cut things close as i'm not really a morning person. i caught 2 lights on this particular morning, that i had usually managed to miss...i was 15 minutes late that day. he gave me such a rash of chit, that i started timing my drives and which lights i got caught at.

 i showed him on paper that the lights caused that much delay. it's not really an excuse for being late, but he pissed me off with his attitude, and i just HAD to prove him wrong when he said he couldn't believe me about it.

[Maverick]

So you blame the traffic signals for your inability to get out the door on time to go to work.....

 

[CAP1]

Second point. You can train all you want, demand mandatory performance re certifications annually if you wish. That will not stop someone getting STUPID in traffic between testing and re testing. Training is not proof against negligence only the person's desire to drive properly does that. The person will drive just like they are supposed to while being evaluated or observed then proceed to get stupid again when they think no one is watching them. Ever notice folks driving slower and more carefully when a Police car in near by? 

i kind of think this part may be aimed at one of my comments. when i stated that there should be re-teting every 2 years, think about it before you say it won't work.  right this second, if an instructor got into your car with you, and you drove as you normally do, would you pass? be honest. 99% would not. because they/we all know that once we get our lisence, we keep it unles we accumulate toooo many points. we let bad habits form. we get complacent. we decide that ""it"" can never happen to us.

 now imagine that you KNOW that if you fail that test in a year, that you lose your lisence till you manage to pass it. now you're gonna be more ""on the ball"" about not letting bad habits develop. you're gonna pay much much more attention to what's going on around ya. just look at most private pilots. we don't let bad habits develop. i think the worst one i'vd gotten, is that i fly my pattern a little sloppy. my CFI generally corrects this with the engine failure routine when he's with me.

 i know this wouldn't stop the drunk drivers, it wouldn't stop the guy tht just shot a needle full of some watermelon into his arm, or the gal that just snorted  god knows how much watermelon up her nose........but it WILL stop the stupid drivers. it will stop the complacent ones, the guys shaving or reading their newspaper while they shave at 75mph. it will stop the girl doing her mascare or eyeliner in stop and go traffic. it will stop the assssholes that think the amber light means to floor it so they don't have to stop.

 it's not the end all/cure all, but i think it wold greatly help.


apologies for the long post

<<S>>

[CAP1]

I got an Update today:

1) The guy who had no pulse never made it.  He was declared DOA but I'm sure he was dead while we were doing CPR.  The doctor didn't want to give up on him.
2) The girl who broke her back arrived alive but passed Sun. morning. 
3) The other two are listed as critical but will live.  State troop said they face "a long road back."

All four were college students at a major University here.  No word on the driver...they aren't speaking about her just yet. 

Let me say a couple things here.  It is just wrong to see such young people on the pavement begging for their lives.  Its not right.  That hurt me the most.  So undignified and cruel.

I was told to be prepared for serious court time.  Criminal, civil ...etc.. may go on for years. 

P.S. They were all wearing helmet's..didn't help a bit.

the helmets did help. two of them are alive.

just as in your car, there are some foreseeable things that all of its safety measures cannot fully protect you from, the helmets have limits too.

seriously.........talk to someone at the hospital, or to the police......get some CISM.......what you saw, and then what you did had to have been as hard as all hell. seek some help. if you don't, this is just gonna eat away at ya. you're not being less "manly" if you go for help. trust me. i've seen how much it can help. like i said before, we use it in CAP. we used it big time when a SAR mission i was on found a downed helicopter.....with both occupants dead.......

<<S>> you did more than most would have sir

[CAP1]

So you blame the traffic signals for your inability to get out the door on time to go to work.....

 

welllllll...you know......it's that old ""blame anyone or anything except yourself thing"""

hey..i never said i was perfect

like i said, even though it was no excuse, once this guy called me a liar, i HAD to do it........

[Sundowner]

In the previous 5 pages of posts I noticed a few opinions that (to me) indicated a belief that a death or injury could have occurred just as easily had this involved 2 automobiles.

Of course each individual accident's factors will vary, but overall the figures show a fairly predictive pattern when comparing motorcycle fatalities verses automobile fatalities.

Unfortunately, the figures compiled by the US DOT show that the risks to life and limb are MUCH greater to a motorcycle operator/occupant than to an auto/truck occupant:

OCCUPANT FATALITY RATES BY VEHICLE TYPE, 1996 AND 2006


Fatality rate    
                                                 Motorcycles    Passenger cars  Light trucks 
                                                              

1996           
  Per 100,000 registered vehicles           55.82      18.06               15.18
  Per 100 million vehicle miles traveled  21.78      1.50                 1.26
2006           
  Per 100,000 registered vehicles          71.94       13.01              12.95
  Per 100 million vehicle miles traveled  38.79      1.10                1.10
Percent Change, 1996-2006           
  Per 100,000 registered vehicles          28.9%   -28.0%            -14.7%
  Per 100 million vehicle miles traveled 78.1      -26.7               -12.7
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Notice the % of change 1996-2006 category:
Fatalities/100k vehicles increased by nearly 30% for motorcycles and dropped nearly 30% for autos!

Fatalities per 100M vehicle miles traveled  increased 78% for motorcycles and decreased 26% for autos!

Not only is it risky to ride a bike but it's getting way riskier as time goes by!

A couple more key statements from the site:

Motorcycles are by their nature far less crashworthy than closed vehicles. They are also less visible to other drivers and pedestrians and less stable than four-wheel vehicles. Operating a motorcycle requires a different combination of physical and mental skills than those used in driving four-wheel vehicles. Motorcyclists and their passengers are more vulnerable to the hazards of weather and road conditions than drivers in closed vehicles.

Motorcyclists were 35 times more likely than passenger car occupants to die in a crash in 2006, per vehicle mile traveled, and eight times more likely to be injured,according to NHTSA.

The fatality rate for motorcyclists in 2006 was 5.5 times the fatality rate for passenger car occupants per registered vehicle, according to the latest data from NHTSA.

http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/motorcycle/

I know most riders realize riding a bike involves risk, and of course it's up to each individual to do his own personal risk assessment.

When considering that risk please realize that the bike rider is taking on MUCH more risk than the car driver.

Btw,years ago I was involved in a bike/truck (I was a passenger in the truck) accident.
Bike driven by male with female passenger crossed the double yellow line and struck the truck I was riding in head-on. Estimated combined impact speed 90mph.
(Truck)45mph + (bike)45mph=90mph impact speed.

Both bike riders died at the hospital. The occupants of the truck (3) suffered zero injuries. (If you don't count the mental anguish of witnessing the carnage wrought on those two young people that day.)

Needless to say I'm somewhat biased regarding the risk of bike riding after seeing what it can produce.

Be considerate of the high risk when deciding whether or not you choose to ride..if not for yourself then for someone that loves you and doesn't want to lose you.

Regards,
Sun

[Getback]

Pesonally, I've broken my leg 2x on a motorcylce. That's enough for me. By the way both times were my fault.
The only reason I haven't been hurt worse is because of good drivers. Thank Goodness.

However, I hold no grudge against those who like the open road and bugs in their teeth. There's a lot of freedom in that.

[CAP1]

In the previous 5 pages of posts I noticed a few opinions that (to me) indicated a belief that a death or injury could have occurred just as easily had this involved 2 automobiles.

Of course each individual accident's factors will vary, but overall the figures show a fairly predictive pattern when comparing motorcycle fatalities verses automobile fatalities.

Unfortunately, the figures compiled by the US DOT show that the risks to life and limb are MUCH greater to a motorcycle operator/occupant than to an auto/truck occupant:

OCCUPANT FATALITY RATES BY VEHICLE TYPE, 1996 AND 2006


Fatality rate    
                                                 Motorcycles    Passenger cars  Light trucks 
                                                              

1996           
  Per 100,000 registered vehicles           55.82      18.06               15.18
  Per 100 million vehicle miles traveled  21.78      1.50                 1.26
2006           
  Per 100,000 registered vehicles          71.94       13.01              12.95
  Per 100 million vehicle miles traveled  38.79      1.10                1.10
Percent Change, 1996-2006           
  Per 100,000 registered vehicles          28.9%   -28.0%            -14.7%
  Per 100 million vehicle miles traveled 78.1      -26.7               -12.7
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Notice the % of change 1996-2006 category:
Fatalities/100k vehicles increased by nearly 30% for motorcycles and dropped nearly 30% for autos!

Fatalities per 100M vehicle miles traveled  increased 78% for motorcycles and decreased 26% for autos!

Not only is it risky to ride a bike but it's getting way riskier as time goes by!

A couple more key statements from the site:

Motorcycles are by their nature far less crashworthy than closed vehicles. They are also less visible to other drivers and pedestrians and less stable than four-wheel vehicles. Operating a motorcycle requires a different combination of physical and mental skills than those used in driving four-wheel vehicles. Motorcyclists and their passengers are more vulnerable to the hazards of weather and road conditions than drivers in closed vehicles.

Motorcyclists were 35 times more likely than passenger car occupants to die in a crash in 2006, per vehicle mile traveled, and eight times more likely to be injured,according to NHTSA.

The fatality rate for motorcyclists in 2006 was 5.5 times the fatality rate for passenger car occupants per registered vehicle, according to the latest data from NHTSA.

http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/motorcycle/

I know most riders realize riding a bike involves risk, and of course it's up to each individual to do his own personal risk assessment.

When considering that risk please realize that the bike rider is taking on MUCH more risk than the car driver.

Btw,years ago I was involved in a bike/truck (I was a passenger in the truck) accident.
Bike driven by male with female passenger crossed the double yellow line and struck the truck I was riding in head-on. Estimated combined impact speed 90mph.
(Truck)45mph + (bike)45mph=90mph impact speed.

Both bike riders died at the hospital. The occupants of the truck (3) suffered zero injuries. (If you don't count the mental anguish of witnessing the carnage wrought on those two young people that day.)

Needless to say I'm somewhat biased regarding the risk of bike riding after seeing what it can produce.

Be considerate of the high risk when deciding whether or not you choose to ride..if not for yourself then for someone that loves you and doesn't want to lose you.

Regards,
Sun

WHAT you're missing though, is that we know the risks we're taking when we ride. we also know it's not the fault of the biker in most cases.
 it's usually a car driver that ""didn't see the bike"", or they just don't think about the limitations we have on bikes.

it was not the bikers fault in the post that started this thread. i truely hope they hang the car driver out to dry.....