You gotta take a driving test anyway. Why not make it a real one? The cost of training doesn't imply the state's total responsibility.
Kid's are gonna be kids on MC or cars but you can maybe help the situation with better training.
We Have A Chance To Make A Difference. Input Needed
- Thread starter schlep1967
- Start date
Kid's are gonna be kids on MC or cars but you can maybe help the situation with better training.
Many have posted cagers not being aware of or seeing motorcyclists, I'd agree this is an issue. Here in CA they are using fwy signs to remind all of us to watch for motorcycles "look twice".
better lighting - for visibility and to help depth perception
tiered licensing for motorcyclists - tied to both time/miles riding and training (beyond the basic MSF class)
regular Retesting of driving skills for both cagers and bikers
better lighting - for visibility and to help depth perception
tiered licensing for motorcyclists - tied to both time/miles riding and training (beyond the basic MSF class)
regular Retesting of driving skills for both cagers and bikers
st11ray
2006 ST1300
If they changed to a "real" test or went with a tiered system, it would take more time and manpower for the DMV to administer them. How much do you think the public is going to scream over increased fees to accomplish this? How much will they scream if the state covers all the costs?
I'm all for better education and training and I'm willing to pay more for it, whether it's increased fees or higher taxes. But I don't see it happening anytime soon.
FJRHank
"Scooter Pimp"
but we do have a stat for "not being seen", and headlight modulators are our only option.
FJRHank
"Scooter Pimp"
Well this is something I'd like to see statistics for, because I don't believe it's true. The reason, as you go on to talk about with "threat recognition", is simply that "motorcyclists are not seen" ... for whatever the reason...
what other options are there besides Headlight modulators? reasonably speaking?
st11ray
2006 ST1300
People pull out in front of emergency vehicles with full lights and siren going all the time. I think our best defenses are between our ears?
P.S.- Of course, we could all put straight pipes on our ST's? I've heard that they save lives?
P.S.- Of course, we could all put straight pipes on our ST's? I've heard that they save lives?
I tend to disagree with modulators are the only option. I added PIAA 1100X's under the mirrors. They are BRIGHT! I have never even had a close call with a car turning infront of me. I like to think its the additonal lighting, but then I again, I have no stats to back that up. I may never of had a close call even without the lighting. To each their own, but I don't think either should be mandated because some people think they work. I ran a modulator on a previous bike, in my opinion it cause more dangerous situations than it prevented. I could not tell you the number of times a vehicle pulled over, must have thought I was an emergency vehicle. They did not know what to do and I was always leary as to what they would do once the noticed I was not an emergency vehicle. This also creates a bad effect for actual emergency vehicles and people have to figure out if its an emergency vehicle or not. Remember the day when cars did not have daytime running lights? Manufactures started using daytime running lights on cars for safety as people would "notice" you because your lights were on. Do you even think twice these days when a car has its lights on? If anything, this hurt motorcycles as they used to be the only vehicles with lights on in the daytime. I think it might be a better rule to make cars have their lights off during daylight hours so motorcycle will be more noticeable. Anyway...theres my 2 cents.
FJRHank
"Scooter Pimp"
And that's fine if you disagree. It's also fine for me to have my opinion right? And we do have studies that have shown that headlight modulators absolutely do get the attention of drivers.
As far as your experience goes, keep in mind, if HM's became mandatory, it wouldn't be long before every car / truck driver knew what they were and why they were being used. It would completely change the perception of their use. There would be National announcements about when they were going to become mandatory, there would be videos of their use, there would be explanations about them, etc etc etc.
my opinion, if they were mandatory, that 42% of 2 vehicle moto (left hand turner) accidents would decrease dramatically.
Blrfl
Natural Rider Enhancement
Except for the loud pipes save lives option. Just about as much science behind it. I think loud pipes get you noticed as much as a modulating headlamp and from more angles.
Is there any proof that running a headlight all the time make a difference? Not modulating. Just running the headlamp full time? I remember when we could run without a headlight durring daylight. I had a couple bikes you could turn it off. (Had one I couldn't run it. LOL) Still people don't see us. Now it's a law the lamp runs full time. Now we need to modulate it because that requirement didn't work?
There is a big push here for tiered licences. Is it really safer where they have this? I saw plenty of stupid riding in the UK when I was there. Guys must have had higher tiered licences with the bikes I saw being "stupid". Do only the noobs crash? I'm not convinced. Also what would we test for? A few minutes on a range or road course doesn't really mean much. IMO.
We also get all upset about cell phones but many motorcyclist listen to tunes or use GPS while riding. Is there really a difference? Where do we stop "distracted" driving legislation? Or is it just for the cages? Be careful what you vote for. IMO.
I think we should nix this whole thread then, because every bit of what is being discussed is addressed in "another thread"
We could outlaw all motorcycles. Quit giving out registrations. This would do away with all motorcycle related accidents. Not the most practical? It would work though, unless your riding illegally.
David Hough in "Proficient Motorcycling" actually calls it "The I didn't see you myth"
It's his belief that "I didn't see you" is an excuse motorists use in place of "I was in a hurry" or "I wasn't paying attention" He goes on to say that "veteran (riders) know that avoiding collisions depends on being prepared to get out of the way of the other guy, whether he sees you or not."
I'm all for being noticed - that's why I have HID lights on the front and a strobe light coupled to my brakes on the rear. But the bottom line is we're responsible for our own safety and there's very little in the way of regulation that's going to make us appreciably safer.
Just some opinions here-
1. First and foremost, require mandatory REAL rider training. It doesn't have to be state funded...require a certificate from a private school at the rider's expense. In NH all you have to do to pass is drive around a few cones in a parking lot. You can pay to take a MC safety course...where you ride around on 125 and 250cc cruisers in a parking lot at 5mph. Hardly realistic.
2. I like the idea of better forward lighting requirements. Require multiple headlamps, not only for better vision, but redundancy if a bulb goes out.
3. Better rear lighting requirements. Require rear turn signals that double as running lights AND brake lights. And don't allow the sport bike and cruiser crowds to put smaller, dimmer aftermarket lights on. Require the rear turn signals and running lights be a certain distance apart. One thing I'm shocked at with my ST1300 is that the rear turn signals are actually closer together than my dual sports were!
4. I don't agree with helmet laws. Sorry. I'm ATGATT myself, but someone who chooses to splat their brains on the road isn't hurting anyone but themselves. If you start with helmet laws, you better progress to ATGATT laws. Where do we stop? If you really want to encourage use, somehow make it financially rewarding to ride ATGATT, either by insurance or registration discounts. Then be able to fine the rider if he got the ATGATT discount, but is stopped while not wearing it.
5. If you want improved motorcycle safety, outlaw cages. They are our prime enemy, and the biggest single danger to a rider. I posted a link to a rider in NH who was intentionally hit by a cage driver. I just found out today that a local rider I distantly know was hit from behind while stopped to turn into where he worked. He now has a broken back, among other injuries.
6. Since #5 isn't practical, hit drivers where it hurts- classify any accident involving a motorcycle rider the same as an accident involving a pedestrian. Cage drivers get the book thrown at them if they hit a pedestrian, yet they can kill a motorcyclist and be allowed to drive home from the accident.
7. I like the horn decibel idea. While it is already a requirement, the current levels are way too low.
8. Someone mentioned requiring a certain level of performance. I really like that idea. How many cruisers have we all seen laying in a ditch because they couldn't navigate an easy corner? I witnessed one personally, and came to another right after it happened. Cages have to meet certain handling requirements, bikes should have to as well.
I'm sure I'll think of more, that is just what I came up with quickly.
Jim
1. First and foremost, require mandatory REAL rider training. It doesn't have to be state funded...require a certificate from a private school at the rider's expense. In NH all you have to do to pass is drive around a few cones in a parking lot. You can pay to take a MC safety course...where you ride around on 125 and 250cc cruisers in a parking lot at 5mph. Hardly realistic.
2. I like the idea of better forward lighting requirements. Require multiple headlamps, not only for better vision, but redundancy if a bulb goes out.
3. Better rear lighting requirements. Require rear turn signals that double as running lights AND brake lights. And don't allow the sport bike and cruiser crowds to put smaller, dimmer aftermarket lights on. Require the rear turn signals and running lights be a certain distance apart. One thing I'm shocked at with my ST1300 is that the rear turn signals are actually closer together than my dual sports were!
4. I don't agree with helmet laws. Sorry. I'm ATGATT myself, but someone who chooses to splat their brains on the road isn't hurting anyone but themselves. If you start with helmet laws, you better progress to ATGATT laws. Where do we stop? If you really want to encourage use, somehow make it financially rewarding to ride ATGATT, either by insurance or registration discounts. Then be able to fine the rider if he got the ATGATT discount, but is stopped while not wearing it.
5. If you want improved motorcycle safety, outlaw cages. They are our prime enemy, and the biggest single danger to a rider. I posted a link to a rider in NH who was intentionally hit by a cage driver. I just found out today that a local rider I distantly know was hit from behind while stopped to turn into where he worked. He now has a broken back, among other injuries.
6. Since #5 isn't practical, hit drivers where it hurts- classify any accident involving a motorcycle rider the same as an accident involving a pedestrian. Cage drivers get the book thrown at them if they hit a pedestrian, yet they can kill a motorcyclist and be allowed to drive home from the accident.
7. I like the horn decibel idea. While it is already a requirement, the current levels are way too low.
8. Someone mentioned requiring a certain level of performance. I really like that idea. How many cruisers have we all seen laying in a ditch because they couldn't navigate an easy corner? I witnessed one personally, and came to another right after it happened. Cages have to meet certain handling requirements, bikes should have to as well.
I'm sure I'll think of more, that is just what I came up with quickly.
Jim
THIS is by far the most accurate statement I've seen. I've had several times when cages have pulled out, while looking directly at me. We all know what eye contact is, and can tell when it happens...when someone makes direct eye contact and still pulls out, its not because they didn't see you, its because THEY DIDN'T CARE. My wife and I were going through town a couple weeks ago and a woman was waiting at the side road at an intersection. We were on a single lane (one way section) of road. The woman in the cage looked directly at us, then pulled out into our lane while STILL watching us...and I mean, she had to turn her head to continue making eye contact with us. I braked and moved left, because we were now sharing 1 lane of road.
You can affect a small percentage of people with proper education. But those people have to WANT to be educated. Unfortunately there is a much larger percentage that simply won't care, and no amount of education will cure them. You have to hit them other places- such as financially, for example, or threat of loss of license, jail, etc.
Jim
I Really like that idea! Make it MATTER when a biker gets run over. See how many people say "I didn't see you" when carelessly or negligently hitting a motorcyclist results in 5 or 10 Years in jail.
Well, so far I've only seen a very few suggestions that don't involve gov't getting it's fingers deeper into motorcycling. Y'all can make your own assessments of whether the liberty / security tradeoff is worth it, but do be aware that is exactly what most of the proposals amount to.
So which proposals don't infringe on our liberty?
First and foremost, those relating to highway/roadway design, engineering, and maintenance. Require all highway engineers to actually personally experience the challenges we face that they ignore, and require solutions to those challenges be implemented. Slick road markings, longitudanal cracks that can trap or divert a front tire, metal grates, ARMCO barriers, etc.
Second, lane splitting. Allow it, promote it, legally protect it.
Third, put legal protection of motorcyclists closer to those of with pedestrians and bicyclists, rather than inferior to all other road users except commercial vehicles.
Non gov't promotion of ATGATT, encouraging user training, etc are fine and dandy. Regulating/mandating/criminalizing motorcyclists and manufacturers even more than already, not so much.
So which proposals don't infringe on our liberty?
First and foremost, those relating to highway/roadway design, engineering, and maintenance. Require all highway engineers to actually personally experience the challenges we face that they ignore, and require solutions to those challenges be implemented. Slick road markings, longitudanal cracks that can trap or divert a front tire, metal grates, ARMCO barriers, etc.
Second, lane splitting. Allow it, promote it, legally protect it.
Third, put legal protection of motorcyclists closer to those of with pedestrians and bicyclists, rather than inferior to all other road users except commercial vehicles.
Non gov't promotion of ATGATT, encouraging user training, etc are fine and dandy. Regulating/mandating/criminalizing motorcyclists and manufacturers even more than already, not so much.
Last edited:
I haven't noticed any mention of the public awareness commercials that were linked to somewhere here. I believe they were Canadian and showed just how easy it was for the bike and rider to be overlooked.
I agree with the status of accident severity to be on a similar level with pedestrians and have been looking into (overkill) 28 watt LED lighting to add to my forks on my electrically challenged 93. It's hard to blind people in the daytime and you don't really need to use them at night.
I believe in ATGATT and think everyone should, but if they don't, I would prefer they are required to have their own catastrophic insurance to cover their long term needs instead of my tax dollars.
I agree with the status of accident severity to be on a similar level with pedestrians and have been looking into (overkill) 28 watt LED lighting to add to my forks on my electrically challenged 93. It's hard to blind people in the daytime and you don't really need to use them at night.
I believe in ATGATT and think everyone should, but if they don't, I would prefer they are required to have their own catastrophic insurance to cover their long term needs instead of my tax dollars.
st11ray
2006 ST1300
I would bet that the non riding public would say this about ALL motorcyclists, ATGATT or not?
What about other activities? Should skiers, skydivers, bungee jumpers, etc. be required to have this insurance too?
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,537
- Age
- 77
- Location
- Kingman, Arizona
- Bike
- 2000 ST1100 ABS TCS
- STOC #
- 004
First, all gotta realize it's not JUST motocyclists. From pedestrians all the way to train and buildings, car drivers will hit'em.
Equipment changes may mitigate some accidents but it's the people who need to change/progress.
So, to FIX the problems requires a multi-pronged approach:
Better cars (no blind spots would be good);
Better bikes (lots of suggestions in this thread);
Better motocyclists (move'em thru edumication and practice, up from just riders);
Better drivers (good luck with that, car drivers been running into each other since there were two cars).
Incremental improvments are the best we can hope for.
License Requirements:
In school or 18 to get a license, don't license young drop outs (already happening some places.)
Tiered license for motorcycle and car. For instance, no passengers (bikes or cars) 'til 18.
Loss of license until 18 for any infraction.
(I would like to see)
...Mandatory motorcycle training for all new DRIVERS!
...Mandatory retesting behind the wheel at, say, 10 year intervals. (Currently, in AZ yur first license is good 'til age 65!!)
Education:
(Presume everyone with a license is an adult or should be.)
Adult education happens in four levels, so...
1. Awareness - Ya gotta put the facts in front of'em. Little learning happens at this level, it's all, like, "Yeah, whatever". It's what people get now on pretty much every subject.
2. Knowledge - Actually being able to talk intelligently about a subject. These are the folks who can actually pass a written test. Doesn't mean they can GET IT tho.
3. Transfer - Where the real learning happens: Why Is This Important To ME!!!! This is where the real learning happens. For motocyclists, it's when they realize it can be fun, when learning counter-steering really works, when realizing good maintenance can make the riding better. In other words, when "they" realize they wanna be better. (Same holds true for any subject, music being a great example. Can ya imagine Jimmy Hendrix saying, "Yeah, whatever" about his guitar??
4. Practice, practice, practice - Thing is, all the practice in the world won't make IT happen without the transfer. Also, for practice to help, ya need effective coaching. (Keith Code style.) And this is where the campaign with cage drivers will fail. They will never "get it" unless they, too, are riders. Or know a rider. Or recognize a famous rider. There's no "transfer" unless they care. And for the most part, they don't care. How to make'em care becomes the issue.
(If you've read this far, sorry. JUST education won't help. Fact is, most folks can do it properly already if ya hold a gun to their head. They KNOW how to drive safely, just too lazy to do it.)
With all that, I've had an idea for a long time for a national campaign to link famous riders with local riders. "Who do you know who rides?" With a pic of, say, Jay Leno, plus a locally recognized celebrity/politician/teacher/etc. I have no idea to make anything like that happen.
One of the best ways to make Joe/Jane Average aware is if someone in their family rides. Problem with that, often the family rider is also not aware, never made the transfer from rider to motocyclist. So the awareness Joe has is, "Yeah, my mother/father/son/daughter/cousin/uncle/aunt got a killed on a bike, I think we should ban them completely."
Some of the ads which have been linked here, from Europe or Canada or Australia won't be effective here, again because of awareness. Folks who already don't care can't be made to care by sticking facts in front of their face. See #1 above. I like the ads, but I'm already a motocyclist.
Never ending battle.
Equipment changes may mitigate some accidents but it's the people who need to change/progress.
So, to FIX the problems requires a multi-pronged approach:
Better cars (no blind spots would be good);
Better bikes (lots of suggestions in this thread);
Better motocyclists (move'em thru edumication and practice, up from just riders);
Better drivers (good luck with that, car drivers been running into each other since there were two cars).
Incremental improvments are the best we can hope for.
License Requirements:
In school or 18 to get a license, don't license young drop outs (already happening some places.)
Tiered license for motorcycle and car. For instance, no passengers (bikes or cars) 'til 18.
Loss of license until 18 for any infraction.
(I would like to see)
...Mandatory motorcycle training for all new DRIVERS!
...Mandatory retesting behind the wheel at, say, 10 year intervals. (Currently, in AZ yur first license is good 'til age 65!!)
Education:
(Presume everyone with a license is an adult or should be.)
Adult education happens in four levels, so...
1. Awareness - Ya gotta put the facts in front of'em. Little learning happens at this level, it's all, like, "Yeah, whatever". It's what people get now on pretty much every subject.
2. Knowledge - Actually being able to talk intelligently about a subject. These are the folks who can actually pass a written test. Doesn't mean they can GET IT tho.
3. Transfer - Where the real learning happens: Why Is This Important To ME!!!! This is where the real learning happens. For motocyclists, it's when they realize it can be fun, when learning counter-steering really works, when realizing good maintenance can make the riding better. In other words, when "they" realize they wanna be better. (Same holds true for any subject, music being a great example. Can ya imagine Jimmy Hendrix saying, "Yeah, whatever" about his guitar??
4. Practice, practice, practice - Thing is, all the practice in the world won't make IT happen without the transfer. Also, for practice to help, ya need effective coaching. (Keith Code style.) And this is where the campaign with cage drivers will fail. They will never "get it" unless they, too, are riders. Or know a rider. Or recognize a famous rider. There's no "transfer" unless they care. And for the most part, they don't care. How to make'em care becomes the issue.
(If you've read this far, sorry. JUST education won't help. Fact is, most folks can do it properly already if ya hold a gun to their head. They KNOW how to drive safely, just too lazy to do it.)
With all that, I've had an idea for a long time for a national campaign to link famous riders with local riders. "Who do you know who rides?" With a pic of, say, Jay Leno, plus a locally recognized celebrity/politician/teacher/etc. I have no idea to make anything like that happen.
One of the best ways to make Joe/Jane Average aware is if someone in their family rides. Problem with that, often the family rider is also not aware, never made the transfer from rider to motocyclist. So the awareness Joe has is, "Yeah, my mother/father/son/daughter/cousin/uncle/aunt got a killed on a bike, I think we should ban them completely."
Some of the ads which have been linked here, from Europe or Canada or Australia won't be effective here, again because of awareness. Folks who already don't care can't be made to care by sticking facts in front of their face. See #1 above. I like the ads, but I'm already a motocyclist.
Never ending battle.