n_maher Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 That has nothing to do with the motorcycle skills test, which takes place at 10mph in a parking lot. That test says NOTHING about real world riding. Can you weave in and out of cones, can you turn around, can you stop. True, but if some chucklehead can't even do that do you really want them out on the road pointing a 185mph missile at your car/truck/whatever? I don't really say any of this in the interest of protecting others, I'm guarding my own ass here. If all accidents only involved the dipshit that caused them I probably wouldn't care, it's the collateral damage that pisses me off the most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 True, but if some chucklehead can't even do that do you really want them out on the road pointing a 185mph missile at your car/truck/whatever?Exactly.I don't really say any of this in the interest of protecting others, I'm guarding my own ass here. If all accidents only involved the dipshit that caused them I probably wouldn't care, it's the collateral damage that pisses me off the most.Exactly.Was the unlicensed driver driving YOUR car?No, my car was parked in front of my house -- not even on the main road, but an access road. The dipshit just happened to live a couple houses down from me. I wasn't even in it at the time. This is the sort of dipshit I'm worried about. The person couldn't even keep the car from going under 10 mph. I somehow doubt that they would have been able to weave in and around cones, either. So yes, I am all for that test. Too bad it's such an inconvenience for you, but since you're driving a lethal weapon, I think I'll allow it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Judging from the people who were taking the riding test the day I was, there are plenty of assholes on rice rockets with licenses. The license doesn't change a thing. In fact, I think people who buy the new bikes are MORE likely to have a license than guys like me who buy used cruisers and just like to ride. I understand you don't want to get hit by a motorcycle going 180. Most motorcycle accidents aren't caused by the guys on the bikes, so you're probably safe. I'm not really sure what a story about how one car hit another car has to do with motorcycle licensing requirements... I'm very glad you'll allow me to take my motorcycle test. Didn't impact me much either way. Perhaps you should stalk the guy that ran into your car? Might have more impact on him and you. Maybe then your self inflicted wedgy will get better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 I'm not really sure what a story about how one car hit another car has to do with motorcycle licensing requirements...I already explained how the situations were analogous, you're so attuned to turning a blind eye to actual logical arguments that I will probably never get through to you -- perhaps you do not deserve that license... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Oh no, miss bunchy panties thinks I don't deserve my license. *pout* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yikes Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 As to riding for years without a license goes, some people are just ass holes. Were you afraid that you?d fail the test? You?re right that having a license does not make you a good rider, but it does guarantee that you have learned a little about the basics of riding. Why get a license? First off your insurance isn?t valid if you don?t have a valid operators license. If you?ve ridden for years without having an accident you are lucky. In the event of a major accident an insurance investigator could easily discover that a rider doesn?t have a license, and then deny all claims. I?m a big proponent of personal freedom, but you are deluding yourself if you believe that you only affect yourself if you have an accident. When you crash and scramble your brains and end up on a ventilator for years who is going to pay? Society ends up footing the bill; therefore society has the right to dictate whether or not helmets are required. I feel that it?s a personal choice to wear a helmet, but if you decide to go helmetless you should be required to have much higher medical insurance limits. Helmetless riders should also be charged higher insurance premiums. It is an established fact that wearing a helmet reduces the likelihood of major injury in the event of an accident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 When I got my insurance, one of the questions is "Do you have your motorcycle endorsement", prior to getting mine, I answered this "no". Not a big deal. My rates were the same after I got my endorsement. As to riding for years without a license goes, some people are just ass holes. Were you afraid that you’d fail the test? You’re right that having a license does not make you a good rider, but it does guarantee that you have learned a little about the basics of riding. wtf about riding without a motorcycle endorsement makes me an asshole? Who does THAT impact but me? I didn't take it because I didn't feel like spending 4 hrs jumping through the hoops it took to get it. When I finally decided to do it, I did it. Big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Are motorcyclists who ride without helmets really a burden to society? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yikes Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Most of the so-called information stated in that post have no basis in fact. Example: ?Contrary to popular Government lore, "the cost of injuries caused by unhelmeted riders" are not borne by the Taxpayers. First of all, even the Government admits that helmets are only effective in a narrow band of accident situations. In most accidents, helmets do not affect the survivability outcome at all.? Inaccurate and misleading. The fact is that most accident are fairly minor and don?t involve head injury, but a large percentage of fatal accidents do involve head injury. The use of a helmet significantly reduces the chance of serious head injury. The authors? proof that helmets cause accidents is wearing one in a car. WTF! Severely faulty logic. It?s a totally different environment, you know enclosed, with limited space. The author uses such faulty logic throughout his nonsensical diatribe. As far as the argument that taxpayers don?t end up paying additional monies for the care of people who have been injured. That?s nonsense as well. A major head injury can cost millions of dollars when including the long-term care, and we mustn?t forget Social Security disability payments for people who have become disabled. Insurance runs out very quickly when major injuries are involved. The author states that helmets ?cause? many accidents, and yet provides no basis for this statement. Many studies have shown that helmets do NOT adversely affect vision and hearing. If this is the best info that you can find supporting your anti-helmet stance your actual data is severely lacking. Check out http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~john/vfr/hurt.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 wtf about riding without a motorcycle endorsement makes me an asshole? Who does THAT impact but me? I don't think it makes you an asshole but in my head it goes like this: you either believe in the rule of law or you do not. It is law that in order to operate a motorcycle you must carry the proper endorsement. If you want the benefits that our laws afford you then you should be willing to abide those that inconvenience you. I'm not perfect, far from it, and I'm sure I don't abide 100% by the laws of the land but I try to deal with simple shit like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 i consider that a bit of a false dichotomoy. one can believe in the rule of law without agreeing with or endorsing all laws. Sure, you don't have to agree with all of the laws but wouldn't you still be bound to obey the laws and take the prescribed action set forth to try and get them changed? Once you start picking and choosing which laws to self-enforce you're sort of circumventing the whole point of having laws, aren't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yikes Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Playing a devils advocate: So you always obey the Speed Limit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 I'm not perfect, far from it No I don't, I'm generally a "5-over" speeder. If I'm just cruising and the road is clear I'll often ride close the speed limit but given today's traffic habits I find it to be more dangerous going the speed limit that to be going the speed of traffic, especially on a bike. As with everything there is a degree of grey area that most people would consider reasonable, in this case I don't see that operating a vehicle without the proper license is in my personal grey area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 I'm pragmatic. I obey laws that I agree with, or I agree that I will deal with the consequences of my actions when I disobey laws. Some laws I disobey because I disagree with their validity, and some I disobey because I don't feel like obeying them. Regardless, if put in a position where I suffer consequences from my actions, I don't whine about it, I either fihgt it in court or I accept my punishment. Thus far in my life, that has worked out reasonably well for me. Philopsophically, I'm somewhere between a libertarian and an anarchist. My ideal government would be a loose confederation of city/states. So I feel that most laws are overstepping the job of government. For the money I pay in government protection, I could find much better providers of the services. That wasn't the "best I could find", just as I'm sure you could do better than a debunked report from the 70s. It was what was posted on another forum at about the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 not necessarily. in fact, you would be acting in a time honored tradition. Again, I would just say it is completely dependent on the law you choose to break. I'm pragmatic. I obey laws that I agree with, or I agree that I will deal with the consequences of my actions when I disobey laws. Some laws I disobey because I disagree with their validity, and some I disobey because I don't feel like obeying them. Regardless, if put in a position where I suffer consequences from my actions, I don't whine about it, I either fihgt it in court or I accept my punishment. Thus far in my life, that has worked out reasonably well for me. Well, based on that paragraph I'd guess you and I are pretty similar, we just happen to be at odds on this issue. Enough serious talk for one day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted June 15, 2006 Report Share Posted June 15, 2006 http://www.bikersrights.com/statistics/goldstein/goldstein2.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkam Posted June 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2006 In case anyone didn't see it: PITTSBURGH -- On Thursday, Ben Roethlisberger released a statement regarding his motorcycle accident: "In the past few days, I have gained a new perspective on life. By the grace of God, I am fortunate to be alive, surrounded by loved ones and lifted by the prayers and support of so many. I am sorry for any anxiety and concern my actions have caused others, specifically my family, the Steelers organization, my teammates and our fans. I recognize that I have a responsibility to safeguard my health in the off-season so I can continue to lead our team effectively. I never meant any harm to others nor to break any laws. I was confident in my ability to ride a motorcycle and simply believed such an accident would not happen to me. If I ever ride again, it certainly will be with a helmet. My deepest appreciation goes out to the Steelers organization and my teammates for the compassion they have shown me. The physicians and support staff at Mercy Hospital were simply amazing, and I will forever be grateful for their caring treatment. I want to assure everyone I am committed to a complete and timely recovery. I look forward to being at training camp in Latrobe and to winning football games this season." Looks like he'll only miss 2-3 weeks of training camp, you should now be able to hear the collective sigh of relief from Steeler fans across the country Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.