 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The article you submit should be on issues related to motorcycling. Every attempt should be made to keep the articles as brief and concise as possible. We reserve the right to edit the articles for style and brevity. All articles submitted become the property of ABATE of the Garden State.
When submitting your articles, please include your full name, address and telephone number so that we can verify the source of the submitted article. The only personal information about the submitters that will be published will be your name and city. If you wish to have your email address published as well, please include that request with your submission.
Articles should be submitted by email to . The article should be in the body of the submission. No attachments will be accepted.
The published articles will represent the views of the submitters and not necessarily those of ABATE.
WHY ATGATTERS COULD CARE LESS ABOUT LID LAWS And Why Some MROs Must Either Evolve or Face Extinction
April 2009
The American Motorcyclist Association ("AMA") is the world's largest and most influential motorcyclists' rights organization ("MRO"). With nearly 300,000 members, their base far exceeds that of the Motorcycle Riders Foundation ("MRF") and all of its ABATE confederates combined. In the Sunshine State, for example, the AMA has five times the membership of ABATE of Florida, an ailing SMRO whose ranks have been thinning for some time now.
One reason the AMA thrives as other MROs struggle to survive is its independence and inclusiveness: It is neither a front for nor subverted by ambulance-chasing attorneys, and it represents all American motorcyclists. The AMA does not discriminate based on age, gender, race, creed, religion, ride or political affiliation. One could say they have lesser tolerance for intolerance than some of their diminutive and declining counterparts. The focus of the AMA is strictly our "Right to Ride". Gold- and yes even Silver-Wingers are welcome, but left- and right-wingers check their non-riding agendas at the door.
That is not to say, however, that the AMA is a single-issue organization. Far from it! Preserving and protecting our "Right to Ride" requires that we address a lengthy list of problems and challenges, including but not limited to our freedom to choose not only what we ride and where we ride, but what we wear when we ride as well. Here is what the AMA recommends:
"The AMA, as part of a comprehensive motorcycle safety program to help reduce injuries and fatalities in the event of a motorcycle crash, strongly encourages the use of personal protective equipment, including gloves, sturdy footwear and a properly fitted motorcycle helmet certified by its manufacturer to meet the DOT standard."
And because the AMA is "pro-helmet", many freedom fighters (and forum posers) accuse them of being "pro-helmet law", but NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. Here is what the AMA says about mandatory motorcycle helmet laws:
"[W]hile we strongly encourage helmet use, we also firmly believe there are already too many intrusive laws, too much regulation, too many hands in your pocket and not enough legislative thought given to the importance of personal responsibility. That's why we believe that adults, by right and by accumulated experience, should maintain their ability to choose whatever equipment is appropriate for them. They don't need the government to decide."
The AMA stands ready to fight for our freedom of choice, as well as the rest of the "Right to Ride" agenda. And I don't mean just with web postings, either. I mean challenging federal Nannycrats, lobbying state legislators, confronting city councils, and motivating their massive membership through action alerts like those you'll find regularly updated here:
http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/
Having encouraged the AMA to issue some of these alerts, I can assure you they are more interested in results than recognition. Just ask Robert "RC" Conroy of Florida about their support for FTY/ROWV Stiffer Penalties Bills HB1161/SB968 ... Rich Paukner of Connecticut about their assistance with the City of Hartford's new noise ordinance ... or John Bland of Nevada about their endorsement of Motorcyclists' Freedom of Choice Bill AB300.
My position on helmets and helmet laws is the same as that of the AMA:
http://www.amadirectlink.com/legisltn/positions/helmet.asp
In short, LIDS YES ... LID LAWS NO. That seems simple enough, but with some it just doesn't sink in. Some seem funda-mentally incapable of differentiating the utility of helmets from the futility of helmet mandates. Instead, they continue attacking "the lid" rather than "the law" by spewing spurious statements like this:
"This is a group with a core premise that helmets are detrimental to safety."
THAT is one reason why those who espouse ATGATT (wearing 'A'll 'T'he 'G'ear 'A'll 'T'he 'T'ime) eschew what they call the "anti-helmet fanatics", and steer clear of any helmet law debates where they might be seen as siding with them. Sure, they know that cases of helmet-related injury have been documented. But they also know those cases to be contrary to the norm, and few and far between. Yes, ATGATTers know the claim that "helmets are detrimental to safety" is false. But what they fail to appreciate is that adding one small word makes it true:
Helmet LAWS are detrimental to safety.
That's right, ATGATTers. Helmet LAWS are detrimental to the safety of motorcyclists. The AMA hints at the reason why:
"Being safe requires more than a helmet, and that's why we maintain that using a helmet is only one part of a comprehensive approach to rider safety. The AMA has long been a strong advocate of things like motorcycle rider education, improved licensing and testing, riding unimpaired by alcohol, drugs or distraction, and increased public awareness--all of which contribute to preventing crashes in the first place (something a helmet does not do). And we can all agree that avoiding a crash is far better than crashing more safely."
And I paraphrase here one of my many prior attempts to get the point across:
"The Law of Unintended Consequences tells us almost all human actions will have at least one unexpected result. Nowhere do we see this axiom substantiated more than in social legislation and public policy in general, and mandatory motorcycle helmet laws in particular. Helmet laws are the quintessence of "feel good" legislation. They are aggressively promoted by Haddonistic safetycrats as the cure-all for motorcycle safety, when the truth is that statistics provided by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") indicate that in 2006 if we had strapped a helmet on the head of every American motorcyclist for every mile they road for the entire year, no more than 747 lives would have been saved. I am not saying that those 747 lives are not important, but the sad fact is that they represent less than 16% of the 4,810 motorcycle fatalities that occurred in 2006 (2,792--58%--of which were wearing helmets and died anyway). What I am saying is that by focusing on a !
policy that impacts only 16% of the problem, we take attention, awareness and resources away from initiatives that would have a far better chance of reducing human suffering and saving lives by addressing the other 84 percent."
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS:
Unless and until the well-intended but ill-informed "anti-lidders" in their base stop attacking helmets for the wrong reasons and start attacking helmet LAWS for the right ones, our MROs in decline will never convince ATGATTers to join their aging and thinning ranks. And without fresh blood and diverse DNA for evolution, their destiny will certainly be extinction.
Speaking strictly for myself and no other individuals or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-RC's Biker Forum Mile Eater Gold Member, Iron Butt Association (IBA) Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF)
2009 Chairman's Circle, American Motorcyclist Association (AMA)
WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENING IN MYRTLE BEACH What's Really at Stake is Your Right to Ride!
March 2009
"The world is not perishing for the want of clever or talented or well-meaning men. It is perishing for the want of men of courage and resolution."--Robert J. McCracken
***
On Saturday, 28 February 2009, I had the privilege and honor to join a courageous and resolute group of true Freedom Fighters on the front lines of the battle for bikers' rights in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. The event was billed as the "Myrtle Beach Helmet Freedom Ride", but that was an unfortunate misnomer. Neither helmets nor helmet laws nor anything having to do with motorcycle safety was the real issue. The issue was that on that date the City of Myrtle Beach began enforcement of a series of new motorcycle helmet, noise, parking and other ordinances the openly stated intent of which is NOT that bikers be safe, but that bikers be GONE:
By promoting this event as a protest against lid laws rather than outright discrimination against motorcyclists, I have no doubt that its well-intended organizers hoped to energize their base, i.e. the gray-bearded "Freedom of Choice" old guard of the bikers' rights movement. In so doing, however, they may have sacrificed a much broader base of political support from riders who would have responded had they known that what was really at risk was their "Right to Ride".
Another costly decision was the inclusion of an alternate "rain date". Rain dates are fine for local poker runs, but including one in a nationwide call-to-action guarantees diminished returns: Few are those who will ride several hundred miles for an event that might be canceled by rain ... while many are those who will use any chance of precipitation as an excuse to stay home.
A third strategic error was issuing a call-to-action with no point-of-contact, online or otherwise. Potential participants had no one to field their questions, and the event's "anonymous organizers" had no place to post or effectively broadcast their last-minute decision to hold the event "come rain or shine":
THAT SAID, let me also declare that I have nothing but respect and admiration for those who promoted and staged what I'd prefer to call the "Myrtle Beach Freedom Ride":
You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, and what they served up last Saturday will prove to be far more valuable to the bikers' rights movement than any Monday morning quarterbacking. As one of their supporters and a protest participant, here's how it went for me:
Early Friday morning, we loaded up the bike and rode the 650 miles from Miami Beach FL to Georgetown SC, checking in to the Quality Inn around 4:00pm that afternoon. From there, we cruised down to the Rebar to wet our whistles and see what the local buzz was. Only one of the bikers at the bar seemed to know anything about the protest just up the road scheduled for the next day, and he had no plans to be part of it. As he put it, "If the golfers who control the Myrtle Beach City Council don't want my f**kin' money, then they ain't getting' my f**kin' money. Not a dime in '09!" I asked him how taking away revenues they were already willing to forego would compel them to restore our rights, and he replied with a blank stare... Anyway, from there we made the short hop to the Cerro Grande for some enchiladas and fishbowl margaritas, then called it an early night.
Our plan for Saturday was to ride the remaining 30 miles to the Beaver Bar (staging point for the Myrtle Beach Freedom Ride) in Murrells Inlet, then participate in the protest, deal with the consequences, and hopefully head back to Florida by the end of the day. We began that misty morning by loading up with biscuits and gravy from the buffet, and then loading up the bike, donning our raingear, and heading north up the Grand Strand's Ocean Highway. Our first stop along the way was to accept a blue-light invitation from a forgiving and supportive South Carolina trooper who just wanted to remind me that the speed limit was 45mph. After that we pulled over twice more for photos, and in both cases a friendly local stopped to make sure we weren't broke down. The second was Georgetown biker and freedom fighter "Captain Ahab", who we would later park beside and ride behind.
When we arrived at the Beaver Bar around 10:00am, the parking lot had far more empty spaces than smiling faces. I hoped it was because we were two hours early, but I feared it might reflect the result of the "rain date". We helped ourselves to some coffee, took some pictures, shook some hands, told some tales, and purchased our Freedom Ride t-shirts. Then Lorena Anderson, a reporter who has been objectively covering Myrtle Beach's biker bashing for The Sun News, turned up at our table with notepad in hand:
As is not often the case, this reporter quoted me accurately and in context, except for the seatbelt analogy, which was twisted a bit in transcription. That's understandable, given that she may have been distracted by the passerby who saw the interview in process as an opportunity to interject some hackneyed commentary on presidential politics and the failings of our federal government, which accurate or not contributed nothing relevant to our exchange.
Shortly thereafter, our anonymous organizers turned on their microphone to give all of us "common adventurers" our route and rules of engagement. Then shortly after noon, I strapped my lid to my luggage rack, and we saddled up to take our place in formation and head for the Myrtle Beach city limits ... to make a statement ... to take our stand:
There were 20 or so bikes in front of us, but we lost the leaders at the first red light. Minutes later, we saw the new city limits "Helmet Required" sign ahead on our right, and caught our first glimpse of the blue-light gauntlet we'd be riding into beyond it. Many supporters were scattered along the roadside, braving the rain and cold to cheer us on, and I just couldn't keep myself from revving up and giving them a couple of "thank you" blasts from my straight drag pipes. And as if on cue, a fresh set of blue lights appeared in my mirrors. Two bikes behind us pulled over and lured the cruiser, so the rest of us closed ranks and kept going. I pulled up to the left of "Fast Fred" and gave him a shout to see if he knew the rest of the route. But once again blue lights came up behind us. Fred and the biker behind him pulled over and took the cruiser with them, so I opened it up a bit to join the remaining few riders still advancing ahead of us. Continuing north alone for this !
short stretch, I met another squad car coming south. I watched him slow to make a U as I passed him, and figured sure that this was the LEO who had my number. Instead though, out of nowhere a guardian angel driving an H-D emblazoned Dodge Ram pickup zoomed up and blocked the cruiser, refusing to let him pull in behind me. (I owe ya one!)
At the next light, I caught up with a concerned crotch-rocketeer, two lidless kids on a hardtail chopper, another member of the old guard, and a guy riding the same model CB360 that I rode as a kid in the '70s. The sportbiker flipped open his brain bucket to congratulate me on making it to the center of town without a helmet. His praise was premature, though, as seconds before the light changed a police pickup and city cruiser rolled in from a side street to block the intersection and take out the lot of us (excusing, of course, the lidded sportbiker)...
Having made our stand and said our say, the worsening weather prompted me to reverse course and head back home to the Sunshine State. And as we headed south on 17, I saw my guardian angel's pickup in a strip center parking lot with more than one cruiser keeping it company. Yes, he or she may have crossed a line. But then again, so did the City of Myrtle Beach!
And why did they do it? Here's the official explanation from Myrtle Beach Mayor John Rhodes:
But others hint this is merely whitewash to cover racial undertones, and that in order for the city leaders to silence the NAACP while they axed the predominantly black Atlantic Beach Memorial Day Bikefest, they chose to sacrifice the predominantly white Harley-Davidson Dealers Association Spring Rally along with it. Consider this forum posting, for example...
...or this quote from another:
"The Harley [read WHITE] riders who were in town early in the week weren't a problem though the loud pipes were a bit much at times. The problem was with rude sport bike [read BLACK] riders who arrived later in the week. They completely shut down Ocean Blvd with their lane splitting, swarming tactics. When the traffic light turned green, cars couldn't move and were forced to sit thru light after light. Too bad if you had young children in the car. You got to hear some of the crudest foulest language shouted from one bike to another along with viewing string bikini clad girls perched on the pillion pad directly in front of you with their asses jacked up."
I guess seeing sites like these must offend certain people's tender sensibilities:
Well not mine, Brother! I do concede, though, that pulling up behind bootie like that might certainly be a distraction for even the safest of drivers...
But I digress. To get back on point, I restate my contention that what's happening in Myrtle Beach is no more about helmets than what happened in Delray Beach was about noise. The issue in both cases was and is discrimination against bikers. Black bikers, white bikers, sport bikers or cruiser riders, it makes no difference. If they come for one of us and win, they will come for us all in the end. Remember what happened in Hitler's Germany:
***
When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Source: http://tinyurl.com/3dqoso
***
MYRTLE BEACH IS TELLING AMERICAN MOTORCYCLISTS THERE IS A PART OF AMERICA WHERE THEY ARE NO LONGER WELCOME TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHT TO RIDE. The organizers of the Myrtle Beach Freedom Ride are doing something about that... The Freedom Fighters who rode through the rain in protest last Saturday are doing something about that...
WHAT ARE ***YOU*** GOING TO DO ABOUT THAT?
Speaking strictly for myself and no other individuals or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com Mile Eater Gold Member, Iron Butt Association (IBA) Member, Bikers of Lesser Tolerance (BOLT of Florida) Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF)
2009 Chairman's Circle, American Motorcyclist Association (AMA)
Here is a wake up call to all New Jersey residents, not just motorcyclists!!
How often have you heard, why should I join A.B.A.T.E.? Or, how about, I don’t own a motorcycle, why should I spend $20.00 to join your organization? Well, read the excerpts of only PART of the recommended MVC changes below, then remember-
American Bikers Advocating Training & Education has a mission to fight for legislative justice and fairness, not only for bikers, but FOR EVERYONE!
Shortly, we will be taking up the standard to fights these below,
WILL YOU HELP?
Last week the NJ State Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) announced certain rate increases. These increases, in my opinion, were aimed primarily at certain groups of people. First, from a biased view, was motorcyclist. Second were the holders of commercial driver license CDL Licenses (Bus drivers, truck drivers, etc.). The last significant group that I noticed was ALL VEHICLE owners in the State, they just didn’t notice!
Now, let me explain what I think they are doing.
RECOMMENDATION: They told us that they haven’t raised the motorcycle registration fee since 1968. Then they explained how they took the CPI (yearly rate increase schedule), computed the change, and it came to $75.04. So, being magnanimous, they only decided to raise the fee to $65.00 from the current $10.00.
RESPONSE: First of all, according the MVC Office, the States WEB site and MY LAST CHECK FOR REGISTRATION, I paid $31.50.
Code 53 Motorcycle (pleasure) $31.50
Also, why would a motorcycle cost more than a car? They mention IT cost (computerization), but don’t address how much that has saved? If, by chance, using IT has raised the cost, then why are they still doing it? Why is the CPI the only governing factor? Have they done any actual efficiency studies to support these increases? Have they reviewed what the “contractors” (who now run the MVC offices) costs are?
REASON: Smallest group of people, least likely to complain and easiest to fend off. After all, were “bikers”, and everyone knows they don’t have to take us serious!
RECOMMENDATION: Raise the cost of the CDL License from $35.00 to $125.00. This was based on the CPI showing an increase that should really be $144.31. They claim that the actual cost to process a CDL, permits, exams, etc. is $436.65!
RESPONSE: Interesting, I checked the State WEB site and found that they may have made an error, again.
Commercial 42 + 2.00 per CDL endorsement 42 + 2.00 per CDL endorsement 11
Why is the CPI the only governing factor? Have they done any actual efficiency studies to support these increases? Have they reviewed what the “contractors” (who now run the MVC offices) costs are? Did anyone bother to get upset that it’s costing $436.65 to process the paperwork?
REASON: Small group of people, less likely to complain, since without the license they DON’T WORK!
RECOMMENDATION: Raise the rates on Titles, Certificates of Ownership, etc. from $20.00 - $30.00 to $60.00.
RESPONSE: What is their intention? Do they really know the cost involved, or was this a reach into the barrel and pull out something to raise?
REASON: This has the potential for being the must underrated raise in costs. Most of the time your dealer takes care of these transactions, and just pass the cost to the consumer. Usually, you never pay attention that the cost of your new car, boat, RV, motorcycles, etc. increased, because it in the financing! This is the only one that affects people in cars, and they hid it deep in the rate changes so you wouldn’t notice it.
Well, are you going to remain complacent while the State of New Jersey takes a huge bite out of your butt? Remember, every problem in history started with the leaders going after the little guys first. You may only own and drive a car, but if they get away with attacking motorcycle registrations and bus/truck driver licenses, how long do you think it will be before they come after you? I can’t think of a better time, or a better way to have your voice heard than to join us.
Contact me so that I can help you sign-up now. no1deuce@jandillc.com
ATTENTION WARRIORS' WATCH RIDERS PENNSYLVANIA/NEW
JERSEY/DELAWARE/MARYLAND/NEW YORK: AFTER-RIDE REPORT, FUNERAL
SERVICES FOR PHILADELPHIA HIGHWAY PATROL OFFICER (NOW SGT.) PATRICK
MCDONALD
A couple of small things first:
1. If you forwarded the mission email about yesterday's ride for Pat McDonald to another
email list, or if you posted it to some other internet forum, please post/forward this email as
well. (Or you can link to it - I will post this email on the front of the Warriors Watch website
as well - http://www.warriorswatch.org ).
2. Who I am: This mailing list has grown considerably in just the very recent past, so before
reporting on yesterday's sad event, I want to help you know who it is who is writing here. My
name is Wayne Lutz, and I am (among other things) the founder of the Warriors' Watch
riders.
3.What the WWR is: As many of you had the opportunity to observe for yourself, the
Warriors' Watch Riders is not a motorcycle club, rather it is a national coalition of clubs,
individuals and organizations from (currently) 18 states who band together for a common
purpose - to combine our forces and numbers to honor our troops. In our philosophy, the
definition of "troops"includes our police, firefighters, and other first responders. These men
and women put their lives on the line daily for our welfare, just as our military troops do.
Warriors' Watch has a forum and a website and patches and pins and other identifying
items, but we are for all of that a coalition, as was made clear by the huge variety of vest
patches in evidence at yesterday's mission. For that day in that time and for that common
purpose, we were ALL "Warriors' Watch Riders." Leathernecks MC, Vietnam Vets MC,
Second Brigade MC, Christian Riders, Blue Knights, Red Knights, and many others
including Patriot Guard and individual independent riders - we were all Warriors' Watch
Riders yesterday, a "brotherhood of riding wheels" as my friend Joe Hanson (PHP) put it,
brought together to "watch the back" of warrior Patrick McDonald. That is our purpose, that
is our mission, that is what we accomplished. Pat's father called him a "warrior," and thought
it was very appropriate that a coalition of riders called "Warrior's Watch" should band
together to honor him. So that's what we did.
It was Joe's idea, not mine. He rode up to Hulmeville Road in Bensalem and looked at the
route that the funeral procession was to take. Pat McDonald was a brother biker, and we felt
that a fitting tribute would be to line that route with a corridor of "wheels" through which
Patrick's last ride could pass. Joe calculated that to line the road on both sides would take
one thousand wheels.
Joe needed to be sure that this was all approved by the police brass. It was already
Saturday night when we discussed this on the phone. He contacted the funeral planner, who
contacted his Captain, who called me back later that evening. "How many bikes do you think
you can get?" he asked. "Well, I'm going to shoot for the one thousand. I think I can do it,
but I have to start now." We had two days, and the Captain says, "even if it's two or three
hundred, that would be great."
Right.
Most of you already know how this story ends, because it was YOU WHO WROTE IT. This
mailing list, every club mailing list, every internet forum was called upon and called upon
again. I sent out posters electronically for you to print. "1,000 Wheels for Pat." And print you
did, the posters wet up in dealerships, bike shops, club houses, bars, anywhere that
ANYONE on a bike might see it. Word of mouth. Radio station blurbs. Police stations and
radio calls - IF YOU HAVE A BIKE, WE NEED YOU! Take the day off, call in sick, close
your office or shop, take a loooong lunch break, but BE THERE. And YOU answered that
call, man oh man, did you answer that call. IN TWO DAYS WE RAISED ONE THOUSAND
RIDERS -
WE GOT OUR "1,000 WHEELS FOR PAT."
I arrived at Bensalem High School, the announced staging area (chosen by consensus
between me, the Philly PD and Bensalem PD) at 1000. A short time later T arrived, Kat
riding copilot. T, an "officer" and experienced Road Captain of Warriors' Watch, was to be in
charge of on-site logistics. Other officers and Road Captains had set up secondary rally
points surrounding Bensalem to gather together riders from all compass points - six
secondary rally points in all, each one led by an experience Road Captain of the Warriors'
Watch organization. Other clubs had set their own rally points for the ride to Bensalem, so
we were expecting the arrival of many riders in groups. Anticipating this, we had men and
women on side with radio communication for identification, staging and lining the groups up
so as not to slight anyone. With everyone in place, YOU began to arrive, and what a sight
you were! After a while a rider here, a group there, turned in to a steady stream of V-twin
and other engines all converging on Bensalem. Into the school lot you came, and came and
came and came, until the lot turned in to a sea of chrome, painted steel, black leather and
denim. A true Biker Brotherhood in action!
At about noon a Bensalem Police Lt. came and took T to recon the street and cemetery
area. On that ride they decided on the staging plan. The road was still open to traffic, so in
order to ensure that we would have time to place everyone along the road, we would take
the riders out in groups of 50 and place those groups in strategic locations so that when the
road was closed they could simply spread out from there.
At 1230 the Philadelphia Police Brass arrived, as they had informed us that they would, and
we called all the riders together to hear them. They were there to thank you for your gesture
of respect to a fallen brother police officer. NO ONE took what you did for granted, it was
marked and noted by ALL of the police brass, to the very highest level.
We began. Counting off riders in groups of 50, our WWR Road Captains took first one then
another then another group out and put them into position. It takes awhile to place a
thousand riders, even in groups of 50, but as it turns out we had time. At 1300 the road was
closed by the Bensalem Police, and we rode out to spread the riders out. In the end we
were not spaced as far apart as we had intended, but it all worked for the good. After
everyone was in place, the WWR officers rode the entire 1.5 mile length of bikes, giving
final briefings in preparation for the arrival of the procession. I have to tell you; riding from
one end of our lineup to the other, it was a truly AWESOME presentation. A presentation
fitting for a biker-cop-hero. (For an ariel view of the bikes, see this video, and remember that
the bikes you see lining the road are only about half of the total distance we covered.)
http://video.nbc10.com/player/?id=713102
I won't drag out the rest of your story, I have an important point to make and I haven't even
gotten to it yet. Suffice it to say that when the procession finally arrived, it seemed to be
endless. It seemed like a full hour is what it took for the procession to pass by us. Every
police department in the region was represented. Car after car after car. Entire tour buses
full of police officers. Police motorcycles as far as the eye could see. It was amazing, truly
amazing.
BUT: More amazing was the tribute that YOU showed, and the reasons that it took only
TWO days to rally one thousand riders to a cause, on a weekday. You did it out of a sense
of outrage and deep anger and sadness over the violent death of yet another brother
rider/cop. That respect, that honor that you showed, was reflected in the faces of the men
and women inside the hundreds of police cars that passed us by. Those passengers
LOOKED US IN THE EYES as they passed, and a sense of respect and understanding
passed between them and you, in just a slight nod and in some cases a "thumbs up."
In order to get one thousand riders together in the same place on only two days notice, it
would mean that almost every one of you who HEARD the call also HEEDED the call. You
came, in my opinion, because you are bikers, and to me, the "brotherhood of riding wheels"
is a group of people who understand the meaning of honor, freedom, respect and of risk
more than the average citizen. It touches a biker's heart to know that a fellow biker not only
lost his life far before his time, BUT THAT HE LOST HIS LIFE BECAUSE HE WAS
ENGAGED IN DEFENDING THE FREEDOM THAT WE HOLD MORE DEAR THAN
ANYTHING ELSE.
Without the men and women in blue to defend us, ANARCHY WOULD REIGN. "Anarchy" is
not "freedom." Anarchy is anathema to true freedom, the two cannot coexist. True Individual
Freedom, the most important thing to any biker, can ONLY exist within the framework of the
Rule of Law. Anarchists would take your freedom from you by force. Sgt. McDonald died
when he took bullets which, had he not taken that risk, would eventually have found their
way to an innocent, possibly even you.
I am writing this long "report" because I am humbled by what you have done. You, every
one of you, committed an act of honor and decency that those who chronicle our
popular culture would have you believe does not happen in America any more. You
put aside your own comfort, your own safety, you spent your own meager pocket money and
rode, in many cases for hours, all for the privilege of standing on the side of a road for hours
to honor an honorable man. For THAT, I honor YOU, more than you can perhaps grasp.
I am deeply, intensely proud to be a "biker" tonight. I am proud because of the manner in
which you conduct yourselves when it really counts. You know the meaning of respect. You
know the meaning of honor. You know that the display of respect to one like Sgt. Patrick
McDonald.
I am proud to be one of you because YOU came together to make a powerful statement to
the friends and family and colleagues of Sgt. McDonald that you give a damn about him and
about ALL of our uniformed protectors who go out each day with full knowledge that their
lives are in danger.
To the family of Sgt. McDonald, we bikers are sorry, so very very sorry, for your loss. We
bleed and grieve with you. To the Philadelphia Police, we may not show it when you pull us
over for speeding, but when the chips are down we honor and respect the lives that you live
and the risks that you take in defence of our liberty. To the citizens of our city, THIS MUST
STOP. We will no longer tolerate you using our policemen and women for target practice.
The no-snitch culture of violence has to come to an end.
To all of you who came out yesterday, or would have if you could have, I won't say "thank
you" because you didn't do it for me. You did it for Sgt. McDonald, and even more, you did it
because it was right, because it was your act of honor for a fallen hero.
- lutz
--
Wayne "Rock" (of the Marne) Lutz
Founder, Warrior's Watch Riders
http://www.warriorswatch.org
Lane Splitting in New Jersey?
By
I did a cross country bike trip to California a few years back. A lot of fun and an interesting study in traffic patterns if you're into that sort of thing. For instance, one could tell when they crossed the border from AZ to CA by the sudden appearance of cops on the sides of the road running radar. I remember riding near San Diego on I-5, with full side luggage, and getting stalled in one of the frequent logjams there. While I'd read about lane-splitting and how it could be done in CA, I also read that it was very restricted (such as only being allowed when traffic was stopped) and I really had no desire to try it. Being from NJ I figured it was enough of a struggle just to keep my wheels up in crazy rush hour traffic with trucks and SUVs whizzing all about. I didn't want to start squeezing in between lanes now. But, shoot, the car drivers had other ideas.
While I waddled along on I-5, with everyone else, I noticed the car in front of me pull a little to the left. I didn't think much of it. Then a few moments later he pulls a little more to the left. Now I'm catching on. He's trying to give me room to split, only he doesn't know I really don't want to. I mean we're moving, just real slowly. Well, the third time this guy got dramatic. He pulled about 5 ft to the left. So, I thought, well if they're going to be so nice about it, let me try. And there I went, full luggage and all, right between the lanes, no problem whatsoever. Actually had other drivers open up more space as they saw me approaching. This type of cooperation was just unbelievable to an east coaster like me but it was real heartening, too. Made me feel like me and my bike were wanted and respected, a real good feeling.
To ever have a system similar to California's in NJ is not impossible. Not going to happen overnight, but not impossible. It would take time and the cooperation of all road users. People would have to see that it can work, that it's not inherently dangerous, and that car drivers actually will benefit, too. Lane-splitting is a tough sell even to many riders. It appears on the face of it to be more risky squeezing between cars than to just stop-n-go it in your lane. Seems like it but it's not. Things to consider when putting along at 2 mph are that you and your bike will heat up quickly which may be dangerous, you'll fatigue pretty quickly from holding up the bike and extensive clutching, might even drop it if you lose your footing or hit a slick, and you can easily be sandwiched in by an inattentive driver. Doing the splitting, one wouldn't have the heat or fatigue problems but there is a danger from inattentive drivers cutting you off or sticking their hand out the window or such. That's why we need "official" cooperation.
There is a bill in the NJ Assembly at this time, A1684, that, if enacted, would establish a 3-yr panel to study the feasibility of lane-splitting in NJ. This is the second time around for this bill. The first bill failed for lack of support. Please write to your NJ Assemblyman and ask them to support or cosponsor this bill. You can find your Assemblyman by following the links on <http://www.gardenstateabate.org/_chapters.htm>. We can also write to the Chairman of the Assembly Transportation Committee, Assemblyman John Wisniewski, at <AsmWisniewski@njleg.org>. The bill will remain in his committee until there is enough interest to call for an Assembly vote. If it passes the house, then the Senate will be encouraged to present a similar bill. If that goes, then the governor needs to ok it. All that just to set up a study with no guarantees. Still, I think it's a real, real big step forward in the recognition and appreciation of people who choose to go Green and ride to work.
I know it can work here. It's true we have some bad rush-hour and beach traffic jams in NJ but it's nothing compared to the everyday nightmare of traffic in CA.
Ron Aponte, ABATE of NJ, District 5
Comments to
Kill a Biker, Go to Jail
By Dave Dwyer
In May, ABATE got a letter from a Kathy Paddack who lost her son Timothy Bennett, in a left turn motorcycle crash and was looking for someone to help her persuade the judge in the case to pass a meaningful sentence in the case. The crash happened at 5 p.m. on Nov. 1, 2005. Tim was traveling west on Hwy 82 and the defendant, traveling east on 82 turned her pick-up truck left into a tavern parking lot directly into his path. She went into the tavern to call for help and then returned outside, where another person was already rendering aid to Tim, so she helped direct traffic until emergency personal arrived on the scene.
When the Marquette County officer interviewed her, both she and her husband claimed that he was the driver at the time of the crash, not her. That being the case there were no tests performed on her to see if she had been drinking. (She has since had an OWI conviction for another incident.) When the Sheriff’s office finally determined that she was in fact the driver they forwarded that information to the District Attorney who then filed “hit and run resulting in a death” charges, against both her and her husband. The judge dismissed the case because the defendants did not flee the scene, they had “only obstructed justice” by not identifying her as the driver and he did not believe hit and run was the right charge. The DA followed up by taking the case to the Appeals Court. The Appeals Court decided the charges were appropriate because in their opinion it is the duty of the driver to identify himself or herself as the driver. The Appeals Court ordered the judge to hear the case. The defendant’s lawyer then appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, which refused to hear it, so the Appeals Court decision stood.
The case did not have to go to trial because the defendant (her husband had died of cancer) came to a plea agreement with the DA. This was about the time that Kathy found out about ABATE from a Share the Road placemat and sent in her letter requesting help. I spoke with Kathy and we decided that we would do what we could to help influence the judge. Having never worked with the courts before, Greg Rodd, Chubby and I put together a plan of attack. Wanting a professional opinion, I sent our plan to Attorney Mike Hupy for his opinion and suggestions on how to proceed.
Mike reviewed our plan with me in several phone calls and then sent it to the Public Relations firm he works with and requested they start looking at this. Several days later they replied with a plan very close to what we had drafted and included a price of $1,000 to $1200 for the work. I replied to Mike that I would need to get BOD approval for that expenditure. In a return email, Mike said that “Hupy and Abraham S. C. would pay for the PR involvement.” This was completely unexpected, but much appreciated. This started a flurry of emails between the PR firm, Chubby, Mike and I reviewing opinion pieces and possible releases and alerts to the local media.
Kathy provided the contact information for me to talk with the Victim’s Advocate in the DA’s office to get her take on what was happening. She suggested that it would be helpful if several ABATE Officers would be able to speak at the sentencing. With the sentencing being July 9th there was time for a discussion with some of the members of 2J, Adams and Marquette Counties at the Hummer. Bruce Hall, Region Rep for 2J, agreed to speak along with Chubby and myself. Arrangements were made with the DA for the three of us to make statements and we were set to go.
The day before the sentencing we received word that the Portage paper was sending a reporter and wanted to talk to someone from ABATE and that the Marquette County paper had published the opinion piece with Mike Hupy’s name on it. This was a result of the work of the PR firm. The morning of the hearing there were 13 ABATE members in the hall outside the courtroom along with Tim’s parents and the Victim’s Advocate from the DA’s office. The local Sheriff and two of his deputies joined us. He introduced himself and thanked us for showing up to help make a difference. He went over the rules of the court, no weapons or outbursts of emotion. He offered to hold any weapons we may have and told to contact one if his deputies if we needed anything.
At the appointed time, we filed into the small Marquette County courtroom. Between those of us from ABATE and Tim’s family we took up most of the seats. We got to see the judge in action as he sentenced defendants in several other cases before ours was called. When our case was called he started by berating the DA for not bringing the right charges. When it came time for me to speak on behalf of the victim, the judge erupted again because “there was no victim here”. The DA argued that the victim was not in court because he had been killed. When the judge finally settled down, I was allowed to proceed. That is until one of our members (“thanks” Mary) took a picture and set him off about that. At least he seemed to take an interest in my statement when I got to the part about personal responsibility and how it applied to his case. He even had several comments and questions when I was done.
Chubby was next and he focused on the toll Right-of-Way violations took statewide last year and the need to do something about them. Bruce got to play clean-up and fill in where we had missed. When the judge asked him what ABATE stood for and Bruce told him A Brotherhood Against Totalitarian Enactments he kicked back in his chair an gave us a “thumbs up”. We were followed by Tim’s mother; she gave a very powerful statement that made many eyes in the court wet. Then it was time for the DA to give his final speech, along with his recommendation for a sentence, 12 years in prison, with the last 5 to 7 being parole. The defense attorney got the last chance to speak. To the judge’s credit when he tried to bring up the fact that Tim may have had intoxicants in his system at the time of the crash, the judge cut him off, as that had not bearing on the defendant turning in front of him. He asked that the sentence be no more than one year in the Adams County jail with work release. He wanted Adams County instead of Marquette County because that would make it easier for the defendant to find a ride to work.
When the judge was ready to pass sentence he again admonished the DA because all he felt he could sentence the defendant on was the obstruction part of the charge. He did quote some of the responsibility statements I had made so I know he was paying attention. The final outcome was one year in the Marquette County jail with work release privileges, including credit for time already served.
I would like to thank everyone who helped with this effort, Mike Hupy for being a sounding board and for hiring the PR firm, Chubby for shutting his business down for the day and coming up from the Milwaukee area, Bruce, and the folks for 2J for taking a day off from work, and Bill Roberge and Rick Mellon for traveling from the west side of the state to just be there. This was a learning experience for all of us and we intend to pull this knowledge together and spread the knowledge to the Regions for all of ABATE to use. As long as drivers keep violating our right-of-way, we need more headlines that read, “Woman to serve jail time in Motorcycle fatality”.
Stage Road is hazard to traffic
There's a stretch of "no man's land" called Stage Road in the South Jersey Pinelands. It extends from Chatsworth Rd. [CR 679] in a generally southeasterly direction to NJ Rt. 9. Apparently the State, County and local governments are engaged in an ongoing dispute in which each disavows responsibility for maintenance of the road surface. Between the Bass River Ranger Station and the GS Parkway it's really bad. That's where I hit a pothole which caused a bent rear rim and flat tire. [There may be additional, as yet undiscovered damage.] It is, in fact, so bad that there is a sign posted advising "Caution: Hazardous Road Conditions." Unfortunately, it was right in front of me when I came to a stop AFTER the incident, not soon enough to have done any good.
Many thanks must be extended to several local folks and the NJ State Police who stopped to see if I was okay and offer assistance. Being a drizzly evening, one gentleman offered me a rain slicker, then another offered to wait with me for the tow truck so I could sit in a dry truck cab. One couple interrupted their drive to a viewing to wait with me quite a while and provided much appreciated mosquito spray. She, being an employee of a shore area police department, put in a backup call to the road service on my behalf. He offered to return with his bike trailer and provide storage in their garage. They also called me later to be sure the tow had been accomplished and that I was okay. I'm sure I've made new friends and I expect them to soon become ABATE members, proving that any circumstance can become an opportunity to represent our organization.
The State Police continue to be helpful in providing an incident report to substantiate my insurance claim. Looks like Foremost Insurance will be co-operative. South Shore Towing supplied a box trailer well equipped for mc transport and a driver experienced in securing a bike for travel.
Everyone who stopped offered uniformly critical commentary on the deplorable condition of the road surface and the shameful inaction by the several levels of government while innocent citizens suffer property damage and personal injury. I don't know why, in my case, it wasn't worse. I was able to ride to a safe stop, though I don't know how. The tow driver related that he had to remove a Sportster after a pothole incident earlier this year. That lady and her son [who was a passenger] both were taken to the hospital.
Where is the responsible government, so eager to belabor us with restrictions and overload us with mandates aimed at increased safety, but which cannot even provide a safe road on which to ride?
Biff CrossleyABATE of the Garden State
Subject: URGENT NATIONWIDE CALL-TO-ACTION!
A.B.A.T.E. of Louisiana, Inc.
P.O. Box 541
St. Amant, LA 70774
Yesterday our Bills suffered a tough time on the House Floor.
HB 864...
http://tinyurl.com/5wdlhg
...the Bill to move the Riders Education course out of BESE and into the DPS, didn't get the 2/3rd's majority vote required to pass on the floor. This was reportedly due to the fact that the fiscal note tied to it was over $900,000.00. This Bill would have secured our training funds that are paid for by motorcyclists’ endorsement fees, funds that BESE has raided every time the schools were in trouble (which was often) and it would have also created new course sites that are sorely needed. The Representatives decided that our safety wasn't worth the price tag.
HB 1295...
http://tinyurl.com/5gvy4f
...our Modified Helmet Bill, was withdrawn from the calendar temporarily when it became apparent that it was going to be attacked with amendments that would have rendered the Bill unpalatable to members of the motorcycling community. The amendments are as follows:
1. $50,000.00 personal health insurance policy that motorcyclists would have to carry to go lidless. Offered by Representative Neil C. Abramson (Democrat Dist. 98). This amendment would have been discriminatory due to the fact that it wouldn’t apply equally to all segments of the motoring public.
2. Denial of a lidless rider the right to sue for injuries suffered in an accident Offered by Representative Neil C. Abramson (Democrat Dist. 98). This amendment would have essentially allowed the guilty party to go unpunished while the victim would have had to either use their own insurance to pay for medical treatment or seek free (public burden?) medical care if their insurance was insufficient.
3. An amendment to require motorcyclists who choose to go lidless to sign an organ donor card (donor cyclists?) Offered by Representative Jean-Paul "JP" Morrell Democrat - District 97. This amendment is not only discriminatory but could be construed as unconstitutional.
You have to wonder what these people are thinking, how that got elected, and if they are even from the same planet as the rest of us. We have until next Wednesday, 5/21/08, to set these Representatives straight and get our Bill back on the calendar or it will die on the House floor. While we are attempting to bring Freedom of Choice in a responsible manner the powers that be are being totally irresponsible in telling us how this should be implemented.
[***FOR BIKERS IN LOUISIANA***]
Now more than ever we need to contact our Representatives and let them know how we feel about this Bill and the amendments being offered on it and we are requesting a nationwide call to action to accomplish this task. Without a massive ROAR this Bill is doomed to failure and we will continue to be burdened with wearing a piece of safety equipment that has done nothing to enhance safety and stop our Brothers and Sisters from dying on the highways of this great state.
To find your Representative go to this link:
http://tinyurl.com/6jl3da
For continuous updates on the status of Bills affecting motorcyclists go to this link:
http://tinyurl.com/5sp9lg
[***FOR BIKERS NATIONWIDE***]
We need [BIKERS NATIONWIDE] to contact as many of Representatives as they can to vote for our Bill [HB 1295] without the offered amendments. [SEE LOUISIANA REPS EMAIL ADDRESSES BELOW] Since Louisiana relies on tourism as one of its main industries the loss of tourist dollars will have an impact on their decision. Also the discriminatory nature of the amendments being offered should be addressed. The authors of these amendments are in the body of this press release.
Remember: One voice is but a whisper, but a thousand voices are a ROAR!
Ride Safe, Ride FREE
Poet
State Executive President
Abate Of La., Inc.
***
PLEASE SEND EMAILS TO:
abramson@legis.state.la.us
larep021@legis.state.la.us
armesj@legis.state.la.us
larep102@legis.state.la.us
auberte@legis.state.la.us
larep100@legis.state.la.us
badonb@legis.state.la.us
larep053@legis.state.la.us
barrast@legis.state.la.us
larep029@legis.state.la.us
billiotr@legis.state.la.us
burfordr@legis.state.la.us
burnsh@legis.state.la.us
larep089@legis.state.la.us
larep002@legis.state.la.us
carmodyt@legis.state.la.us
carters@legis.state.la.us
champags@legis.state.la.us
larep022@legis.state.la.us
chaneyb@legis.state.la.us
connickp@legis.state.la.us
cortezp@legis.state.la.us
cromerg@legis.state.la.us
danahaym@legis.state.la.us
dixonh@legis.state.la.us
larep010@legis.state.la.us
larep052@legis.state.la.us
larep012@legis.state.la.us
edwardsj@legis.state.la.us
ellingtn@legis.state.la.us
larep013@legis.state.la.us
foilf@legis.state.la.us
franklina@legis.state.la.us
larep011@legis.state.la.us
larep035@legis.state.la.us
gisclait@legis.state.la.us
larep066@legis.state.la.us
larep040@legis.state.la.us
larep041@legis.state.la.us
guinnj@legis.state.la.us
hardyr@legis.state.la.us
harrisoj@legis.state.la.us
hazelc@legis.state.la.us
hendersr@legis.state.la.us
henryc@legis.state.la.us
hilld@legis.state.la.us
hinesw@legis.state.la.us
hoffmanf@legis.state.la.us
ahoney@legis.state.la.us
howardf@legis.state.la.us
larep104@legis.state.la.us
jacksong@legis.state.la.us
larep061@legis.state.la.us
johnsoro@legis.state.la.us
jonesr@legis.state.la.us
joness@legis.state.la.us
larep016@legis.state.la.us
larep036@legis.state.la.us
larep081@legis.state.la.us
larep096@legis.state.la.us
larep059@legis.state.la.us
lebasb@legis.state.la.us
legerw@legis.state.la.us
ligit@legis.state.la.us
littles@legis.state.la.us
lopintoj@legis.state.la.us
larep094@legis.state.la.us
larep099@legis.state.la.us
larep062@legis.state.la.us
larep046@legis.state.la.us
monican@legis.state.la.us
montoucj@legis.state.la.us
larep097@legis.state.la.us
larep001@legis.state.la.us
nortonb@legis.state.la.us
nowlinr@legis.state.la.us
pearsonk@legis.state.la.us
perryj@legis.state.la.us
larep093@legis.state.la.us
pontie@legis.state.la.us
poper@legis.state.la.us
pughs@legis.state.la.us
richardj@legis.state.la.us
richardc@legis.state.la.us
larep101@legis.state.la.us
larep075@legis.state.la.us
larep045@legis.state.la.us
royc@legis.state.la.us
schrodej@legis.state.la.us
simons@legis.state.la.us
larep088@legis.state.la.us
larep008@legis.state.la.us
larep56@legis.state.la.us
smithp@legis.state.la.us
larep060@legis.state.la.us
talbotk@legis.state.la.us
templetr@legis.state.la.us
larep031@legis.state.la.us
larep086@legis.state.la.us
larep18@legis.state.la.us
larep005@legis.state.la.us
larep064@legis.state.la.us
larep004@legis.state.la.us
willmott@legis.state.la.us
larep105@legis.state.la.us
***
"The battle for bikers' rights is not about patches, parties or poker runs. We fight to protect the freedom and promote the interests of American motorcyclists ... to defend our right to choose our own modes of transportation, attire and lifestyle ... to deter and defy discrimination against us ... and to vanquish those who violate our rights or right-of-way."--Bruce Arnold
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/bikers_rights.php
ABATE distributes Motorcycle Awareness Banners across NJ towns
ABATE of the Garden State recently worked our legislators to have May declared as Motorcycle Awareness Month. On May 4, we held a rally to the Trenton State House to thank our legislators for passing this legislation to make the roads safer for all motorists. ABATE has worked hard to obtain a grant from Rider Insurance to purchase hundreds of motorcycle safety banners and had these mailed out to townships and municipalities across the state. These banners are now flying all over New Jersey towns.
It is our hope that even more townships will display these banners in the future. It is virtually impossible to determine how many lives may be saved by these banners, but they save even 1 life, the entire effort was worth it.
MAY IS MOTORCYCLE AWARENESS MONTH ... BUT NOT FOR SUV DRIVERS
The message conveyed by the following excerpts from 26 recent news reports requires no interpretation:
1. "Noble man killed when motorcycle strikes SUV [OK] ... A Noble man, Charles David Perrin, 63, was killed Thursday, when the motorcycle he was driving collided with a sports utility vehicle ... [T]he sport utility vehicle pulled into his path from a private parking lot."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6n5es4
2. "Motorcyclist injured in crash [CA] ... A man was flown to the hospital Thursday after his motorcycle collided with an SUV on Washington Boulevard, authorities said."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6lnbjw
3. "Collinsville man dies in accident [OK] ... The driver ... failed to yield at a stop sign where the roads intersect, the patrol reported. The pickup [LTV] struck Forbes' motorcycle, throwing him about 20 feet."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6pjx6o
4. "Motorcyclist strikes SUV, is killed [MD] ... A motorcyclist was killed yesterday evening in Laurel when he struck a sport utility vehicle that turned in front of him, Howard County police said."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/5ays5v
5. "Man hospitalized after motorcycle/car [SUV] crash [OH] ... Fawn M. Love, 18, was leaving the Glenview Way Apartments on County Road 16 eastbound toward West Lafayette when Kirker on a motorcycle clipped the rear quarter of her vehicle while going westbound."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/62fnw2
6. "Motorcycle, SUV collide [CA] ... A motorcycle and a sport utility vehicle collided Thursday, sending the motorcyclist to the hospital with major injuries ... According to witnesses, a Honda Pilot driven by Lucy Ann Busalacchi, 46, also of Escondido, was exiting a driveway and turning left to head north on North Escondido Boulevard."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/59k8oe
7. "Man Sought in Macon Hit-and-Run [GA] ... Rodney Corbin was driving his motorcycle west on Mercer University Drive around 9:30 p.m. when a gray Hyundai Santa Fe SUV pulled into his path from Albert's Lane, according to a police release ... The motorcycle hit the drivers side of the SUV ..."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6eeadn
8. "Motorcyclist Hurt In Crash [with SUV] (CT) ... Police said Joseph K. Keaveny, 17, of Cambridge Drive, the driver of the SUV, was turning left into a private driveway off Sullivan Avenue about 4:45 p.m. Friday when the SUV and motorcycle collided."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/5gum25
9. "Portland motorcycle cop struck by SUV, hurt [OR] ... According to police, Cass was heading east on Southeast Washington Street over the Interstate 205 overpass when a 1980s Chevy Blazer heading the same direction turned left into the motorcycle ..."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6cwto9
10. "Motorcyclist killed in accident [OH] ... Shanklin struck the passenger side of a northbound SUV and was ejected from the 1990 Harley Davidson."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/5plqgj
11. "Motorcyclist injured in crash with SUV in Windham [MA] ... Morrissette was riding his 1975 Harley-Davidson FX 1200 north on Rockingham Road when the driver of a gray 2002 Ford Explorer pulled out from Seavey Road and into Morrissette's path, police said."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6jsyyp
12. "Motorcyclist, injured in funeral-procession crash, dies [MO] ... A 51-year-old Blue Springs man, injured last week when he was struck by a sport utility vehicle while escorting a funeral procession has died, police said today."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6qy96w
13. "Brighton husband, wife die in Macoupin County motorcycle crash [IL] ... Police say a husband and wife from Brighton were killed when an SUV rear-ended a pickup truck that crossed into the path of their motorcycle."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6zh8o7
14. "One killed, another hurt in scooter, motorcycle accidents [ID] ... [P]olice say a motorcyclist is recovering after being hit by an SUV in Boise. Officials say at about 11:45 p.m. Sunday a motorcyclist was hit and then became trapped under the vehicle and police had to lift up the car to get him out."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6rcyhh
15. "Man remembers friend killed in hit and run [NM] ... Souther was killed Sunday evening when he was struck by a hit-and-run driver in a SUV at Menaul and University while on his Harley Davidson."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6qfslg
16. "Biker Dies in Collision with SUV [IL] ... Steven J. Kunkel died when the motorcycle he was riding collided with an SUV ... A 2001 Toyota Sequoia was north on Route 14. It collided head-on with a southbound 1975 Harley Davidson in the northbound lane."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/5zw4nu
17. "Motorcyclist injured in accident [PA] ... An unidentified man was injured when his motorcycle and a sports utility vehicle collided in Bensalem Sunday night. The motorcyclist ... was traveling northbound on Knights Road north of Street Road at 7:30 p.m. when the SUV pulled out onto the street, police said."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/682jnm
18. "Motorcyclist injured in West Bridgewater crash [MA] ... Keith Wyzard was airlifted to a Boston hospital after his motorcycle collided with an SUV on Route 28. [The SUV driver] was leaving a shopping plaza across the street and taking a left turn to head south when the vehicles collided, police said."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/5bxhql
19. "Motorcyclist collides with trailer on I-80 [UT] ... A trailer came off an SUV traveling west on I-80 about 4:30 p.m., said Agent Cori Start of the Utah Highway Patrol. A motorcyclist behind the SUV wasn't able to avoid the trailer and collided with it, Start said."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6pazsp
20. "An accident involving an SUV and a motorcycle in New Oxford resulted in minor injuries. [PA]"
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/68h656
21. "Motorcyclist killed by motor home [CA] ... Donald Pali, 37, was riding his Suzuki motorcycle southbound on Union Road at 5 p.m. when he was struck by a 31-foot motor home making a left turn from Daniels onto Union."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/5zhz9d
22. "Wolcott motorcyclist killed [CT] ... Michael Christiano, of 367 Todd Road, was riding a 2005 Suzuki northbound on Wolcott Street about 5:15 p.m. when he collided with a 1989 Jeep Cherokee. Police said the Jeep, driven by 46-year-old William Rutka of 72 Macauley Ave., was attempting to turn left..."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6fcafm
23. "Motorcycle vs. SUV [OK] ... A Quapaw man is rushed to the hospital with severe leg trauma after the motorcycle he was riding became lodged under an S-U-V. Around 4:30 this afternoon, 46 year old Shawn Moore was riding westbound on route NN in Newton County when the driver of a sport utility vehicle attempted to make a U-turn on Route P."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6o738w
24. "SUV driver charged in motorcycle accident [SC] ... Highway Patrol said the SUV driver was pulling out of a private driveway near Postal Way when he collided with a man on his motorcycle."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/59xtar
25. "Motorcyclist Hurt in Accident [HI] ... A collision between a motorcycle and an SUV, sends a man to the hospital."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/6npgrf
26. "Motorcyclist killed in hit & run crash in Albuquerque [NM] ... A Tijeras man has died when his motorcycle and a sports utility vehicle collided at a busy Albuquerque intersection."
Open this link to read more: http://tinyurl.com/5v4baj
***
ATTENTION AMERICAN MOTORCYCLISTS
If you are not a member of a motorcyclists' rights organization (MRO) ... I have just given you 26 reasons to join.
If you belong to a state MRO (SMRO) ... and do little more than show up for parties and show off your patches ... I have just given you 26 reasons to get informed and involved.
If you are a leader of a local SMRO chapter where bikers have been (or will be) maimed or killed by negligent, care-less, distracted or impaired cagers ... I have just given you 26 reasons to shift your resources away from the next charity poker run and towards the support of downed riders and their families.
If you are the leader of a state or national MRO ... I have just given you 26 reasons to stop playing pattycake with the nannycrats, and start getting aggressive about MOTORCYCLE AWARENESS policies, programs and ploys focusing ALL motorists' attention on CRASH PREVENTION.
Speaking strictly for myself and no other individuals or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray's Biker Forum Mile Eater Gold Member, Iron Butt Association Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation
2007 Chairman's Circle, American Motorcyclist Association
Big Brother's right to seize your motorcycle has come one step closer to becoming a reality in Florida and a nightmarish precedent for statehouses nationwide. Yesterday, HB-137's companion bill SB-802 passed unanimously through the Florida State Senate Transportation Committee. Here is a verbatim report from Dara "Sam" McLain, who along with fellow bikers' rights advocate Robert "RC" Conroy attended the meeting and spoke out against the bill:
Below is the summary, as I saw it, at the Hearing for SB 802, companion bill to HB 137. This comes late because I was busy doing work (ya, I have a day job) this afternoon that I should have been doing this morning while I was at the Senate building with RC attending the hearing.
In a room about 3/4 full, there were THREE bikers present to support our position opposing this bill. THREE BIKERS; Florida Abate President, RC and myself. The Abate President arrives with a companion, but it is not known if she is a biker or not. Either way, not one Sport Biker stepped forward to state his or her position. There were none in the room that I could see. From my perspective, it appears Sport Bikers are just not concerned about having their bikes confiscated, and their licenses taken from them for ten years. As a rider of 30+ years, I find that very distasteful. My bike has two wheels, so does yours. How dare you diminish my right to ride free by your apathy.
As most of you know, this bill started out discriminatory against all bikers, outlined a severe penalty for infractions, and is largely redundant, given the laws on the books already for reckless driving.
And as things progressed, amendments were made to HB 137 and text was changed to include all drivers. However, HB 137 still called out motorcycles specifically, and defines somewhat specifically what constitutes non-stunt riding; i.e. two wheels on the ground at all times, one leg on both sides of the bike, etc.
Legislators are adamant that those who pull wheelies at high speeds, weave in and out of traffic at high speeds, or simply ride their bikes at high speed, will pay the consequences. Even if they didn't add the text to [lamely] exclude those of us who ride motorcycles that won't perform these types of stunts, I'd still know they meant Sport Bike riders. Legislators were VERY specific about who is targeted by this bill. My fear, and that of others, is law enforcement won't bother to distinguish between the two.
At the first hearing, I and others, protested that, among other things, this bill is one-sided. Their aim, they said, is to prevent senseless death of these Sport Bike riders. While we pointed out they were ignoring the senseless death of many more riders that happen daily at the hands of distracted drivers who go unpunished.
So, late last night, an amendment was added to SB 802, to stiffen the penalties of drivers who cause death or injury to another through a traffic violation. For whatever reason - a dangling carrot, an honest concern, whatever - it was added to this bill. However, and far more importantly, SEIZURE is still very much alive in this bill. Fine me $1000, give me jail time, take away my endorsement for a period of time, but the government does not have the right to confiscate my motorcycle. Period. The Forfeiture law was enacted to prevent the continuation of drug manufacture and sale after the dealer was convicted. Confiscating cars and/or motorcycles for driving violations is out of those bounds and unconstitutional.
Sadly, many Senators who are fairly new to this bill, are so focused on the Sport Bike issue that they immediately shot down this amendment that might have done some good. So once again, we are back at square one, and this bill is still very much alive! And again, where the hell was the support?? Where are all the Sport Bike riders who oppose this bill? I can almost understand the biker community who does not ride the sport bikes not having a concern, but this bill seriously targets Sport bikers. Do you not care? Or are you merely waiting for those of us who are willing to fight for our freedom to do it for you?
Once the new amendment was read, the only opposing comment from the Transportation Committee was how much of a fiscal "burden" it might be for the state to fork up room and board (jail time) for a driver who kills in the process of a traffic violation! This was Senator Paula Dockery I believe. (Without a seating chart and "name tags" I can't be sure.) From my point of view, she didn't care one iota whether bikers died on the road at the hands of incompetent drivers. She couldn't get this amendment killed fast enough. In fact, I didn't get the impression that she, or several others, cared one bit about any death of a motorcyclist. (Senator Dockery goes up on the political candidate do-not-vote-for Wall-of-Shame). And this leads me to believe that the motive for this bill and HB 137, from the beginning, is not to stop any deaths, but to catch the culprits and make some money from it. I'll be writing to Senator Dockery to express my distaste over her obvious lack of concern for!
those who die at the hands of distracted and incompetent drivers.
It should be noted that Senator Baker spoke very much in favor of the stiffer penalty amendment, as did Senator Garcia. They both seem to "get it" about ROWV causing so many motorcycle deaths. The Florida Abate President spoke in support of the amendment and expressed disappointment in this action to strike. RC and I declined to speak on behalf of the amendment, stating we would speak on the bill itself.
The bill was brought to the table and Senator Garcia, the sponsor of the bill, declined to speak until all were heard. Again, the Florida Abate president informed the committee that his organization opposed the bill in it's entirety. He testified that confiscation of property costs the state money.
Next was RC, who covered several points; penalties covered in this bill for stunt riding far exceed those of incompetent auto drivers who kill and maim riders, the redundancy of the bill to existing laws, and discrimination of motorcyclists.
I was last to speak, as no others stepped forward. I expressed extreme disappointment in the attitude of the committee of placing a fiscal value on the death of another and refusing to entertain the amendment put forth by Senator Garcia. I also spoke of the unconstitutionality of property seizure, and that civil seizure does not provide for Due Process; that 80% of forfeitures are seized from those who are never charged with a crime.
Senator Alex Villalobos challenged my comments on forfeiture, and I pointed out that the bill is littered with text that says the officer "shall arrest the perpetrator, throw him in jail, and seize the property", and that a court "official" shall determine the outcome. That sounded to me like the officer can make the decision of guilt on the fly, and your property seized without proof of the crime. Only one line in the bill said that forfeiture would occur "if" convicted.
For those who are unaware of what Civil Forfeiture might mean to you, here's a few highlights. You are NOT entitled to a trial by jury. You are NOT entitled to an Attorney (except if you want to pay a $10k retainer yourself to regain $4000 worth of personal property). You are guilty until proven innocent and the burden of proving your innocence is on YOU, at your expense. Even if you are acquitted or found not guilty of any charges, THEY CAN STILL KEEP YOUR MOTORCYCLE.
It goes without saying that once motorcycles are targeted in any way for confiscation, by law, law enforcement will add that to their list of revenue generation. This happens daily already. Bikers are pulled over and cited for minor infractions, such as handlebar height, and their bikes are confiscated. Even if the citation is invalid and proven so, the owner must still pay very high fees to release his/her property from impoundment. If the process takes too long, the property may be sold, and the owner will never recover the property at all, or the money it was sold for.
John L. Worrall, Department of Criminal Justice, California State University at San Bernardino, said it very aptly, "A conflict of interest between effective crime control and creative fiscal management will persist so long as law enforcement agencies remain dependent on civil asset forfeiture."
Furthermore, 80% of property forfeited to US government agencies in the last decade was seized from owners who were never charged with a crime! Over $7 Billion has been forfeited to the government since 1985. Florida is about to add motorcycles to that equation.
Senator Garcia presented the same video that was shown at the first hearing on HB 137. And again, it elicited gasps and outrage from the committee members, and many in the audience.
Following the video, Senator Larcenia Bullard spoke on the attributes of motorcyclists. She said she used to think we were all bad people. Then she discovered that we are people just like anyone else, and she learned of the charities we contribute to, and the selfless acts of kindness bikers are known for.
But hard on the heels of these very kind words, she stated that those who ride Sport Bikes in the manner depicted on the video deserve this severe punishment and she supported this bill 100%.
The committee vote was unanimous. To those of you who didn't show up to oppose this bill, at any of the three hearings so far, thank you very much for helping to push through one of the most damaging and nebulous bills I've ever seen.
I want to thank all of you who put forth so much effort in sending your views through mail, email and phone calls. I know it has helped to get text changes in this bill. Please continue to write to the committee members and express your extreme opposition to forfeiture.
However, Sport Bike riders be forewarned, if and when this law goes into effect in October, you WILL be targeted by law enforcement, profiled, and falsely accused even if you ride safe and sane, and never do any of these stunts. I am sure that law enforcement will make it a priority to help you rack up your offences so they can confiscate your bike. And since you have made no effort whatsoever to represent yourselves at these hearings, you will have no one to blame but the man/woman in the mirror. I wish you luck, you'll need it. This bill is well on its way to becoming law in October, in spite of our best efforts.
Respectfully,
Dara McLain
aka Sam
***
Committee Info:
------------------
Senate Bill 802 Sponsor:
Senator Rudy Garcia (R)
District Office:
7475 West Fourth Ave.
Hialeah, FL
33014-4327
(305) 364-3191
Senate VOIP 44000
Legislative Assistants: Susie Martin, David Marin and Ana Pereira
Tallahassee Office:
Room 416
Senate Office Building
404 South Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL
32399-1100
(850) 487-5106
Senate VOIP 5106
Email: garcia.rudy.web@flsenate.gov
------------------
Transportation Committee:
------------------
Chair:
Senator Carey Baker (R)
District Offices:
301 West Ward Avenue
Eustis, FL 32726-4024
(352) 742-6490
Senate VOIP 42000
FAX (352)742-6492
Outside Lake County:
1-888-567-5577
Legislative Assistants:
Gale Bass, Renee Strong, Vilma Tucker and Thomas Hammons
Lady Lake, FL
(352) 360-6739
Senate VOIP 42010
DeLand, FL
(386) 736-5048
Senate VOIP 42020
Tallahassee Office:
Room 316
Senate Office Building
404 South Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL
32399-1100
(850) 487-5014
Senate VOIP 5014
Email: baker.carey.web@flsenate.gov
--------------------
Vice Chair:
Senator Larcenia J. Bullard (D)
District Office:
8603 S. Dixie Highway,
Suite 304
Miami, FL 33143
(305) 668-7344
Senate VOIP 43900
FAX: (305) 668-7346
Statewide:
1-866-234-3734
Legislative Assistants:
Merdochey LaFrance, Ryan Hawkins, Jennifer Alexandre and Linda Dallas
Tallahassee Office:
Room 218
Senate Office Building
404 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL
32399-1100
(850) 487-5127
Senate VOIP 5127
Email: bullard.larcenia.web@flsenate.gov
-----------------------
Senator Lee Constantine (R)
District Office:
378 Centerpointe Circle,
Suite 1268
Altamonte Springs, FL
32701-3442
(407) 331-9675
Senate VOIP 42200
Legislative Assistants: Abigail Souders, Micelle Emery and Christopher Hudson
Tallahassee Office:
Room 413
Senate Office Building
404 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL
32399-1100
(850) 487-5050
Senate VOIP 5050
Email: constantine.lee.web@flsenate.gov
-----------------------
Senator Paula Dockery (R)
District Office:
P.O. Drawer 2395
Lakeland, FL 33806-2395
(863) 413-2900
Senate VOIP 41500
FAX: (863) 413-2902
Statewide:
1-866-248-6487
Legislative Assistants:
April Mucci, Laura Rodriguez, Matthew Hinton and Sarah Hardy
Tallahassee Office:
Room 314
Senate Office Building
404 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL
32399-1100
(850) 487-5040
Senate VOIP 5040
Email: dockery.paula.web@flsenate.gov
------------------------
Senator Arthenia L. Joyner (D)
District Office:
508 W. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard Suite C Tampa, FL 33603-3415
(813) 233-4277
Senate VOIP 41800
FAX (813) 233-4280
Legislative Assistants: Rosalie Smith, Charlie Anderson and Michele Rayner
Tallahassee Office:
Room 224
Senate Office Building
404 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL
32399-1100
(850) 487-5059
Senate VOIP 5059
FAX (888) 263-7871
Email: joyner.arthenia.web@flsenate.gov
------------------------
Senator Gwen Margolis (D)
District Office:
1005 Kane Concourse
Suite 205
Bay Harbor Island, FL
33154
(305) 993-3632
Senate VOIP 43500
FAX (305) 993-3635
Legislative Assistants:
Zachary Kobrin, Sharon West James and Cameron Sisser
Tallahassee Office:
Room 214
Senate Office Building
404 South Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL
32399-1100
(850) 487-5121
Senate VOIP 5121
Email: margolis.gwen.web@flsenate.gov
------------------------
Senator J. Alex Villalobos (R)
District Office:
9766 S.W. 24th Street,
Suite 18
Miami, FL
33165
(305) 222-4160
Senate VOIP 43800
Legislative Assistants: Vicky Romaguera-Garcia, Norma Ledesma, Nanea Marcial and Sonia Castro
Tallahassee Office:
Room 306
Senate Office Building
404 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL
32399-1100
(850) 487-5130
Senate VOIP 5130
Email: villalobos.alex.web@flsenate.gov
------------------------
Senator Daniel Webster (R)
District Office:
315 South Dillard Street
Winter Garden, FL 34787
(407) 656-0066
Senate VOIP 40900
FAX (407) 297-2064
Legislative Assistants: Ann Drawdy and Cindy Brown
Tallahassee Office:
Room 330
Senate Office Building
404 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL
32399-1100
(850) 487-5047
Senate VOIP 5047
Legislative Assistant: Jaryn Emhof
Email: No email listed
Helmetless
Riders are Less Likely to Die in Motorcycle Crashes on Florida Roads
The 2004 Crash Statistics for Florida wipe away NHTSA's prediction of a blood bath.
According to the recently released, Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles annual Traffic Crash Statistics Report for 2004, motorcycle riders wearing helmets were more likely to sustain an injury or suffer a fatality than their non-helmeted counterparts. The huge increase in death and injury to non-helmeted motorcycle riders, predicted by NHTSA (National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration) in a report released this summer, has not been substantiated. The numbers are going to disappoint the proponents of helmet laws while simultaneously confi rming the facts presented to the public by ABATE of Florida, Inc. (American Bikers Aimed Toward Education). ABATE is a non-profi t motorcycle rights organization in Florida and has spent years focusing on motorcycle related issues,including crash prevention and stiffer penalties for negligent vehicle operators who kill and injure motorcycle riders.
Of the 388 motorcycle riders killed in crashes on Florida roads during 2004, over 51% were wearing safety helmets. The crash facts also demonstrate that riders wearing safety helmets were more likely to sustain injuries than non-helmeted riders. In each of the statistical focus topics presented in the study, the percentage numbers were very close between helmeted and non-helmeted riders, except for non-injury crashes. The study stated that non-helmeted riders were 20% more likely to walk away from a crash uninjured than helmeted riders. The absence of visual and physical limitations, imposed by a helmet, could account for this disparity. Wearing a motorcycle helmet cannot keep a crash from occurring, however, riding without a helmet could allow a rider to respond more quickly or to visually recognize a potential hazard, decreasing the severity of the injury sustained or avoiding all injury.
There are no statistics available for crashes which riders were able to completely avoid due to training or equipment use. According to the crash statistics, the top three contributing causes of all motor vehicle crashes include careless driving, failure to yield the rightof-way and driving under the influence of alcohol. None of the three include equipment failure, environmental or weather related issues.
Each of the top three causes for crashes are directly linked to driver error or negligent action by the motor vehicle operator. Therefore, in stands to reason that a significant number of crashes could be avoided if motor vehicle drivers took personal responsibility for operating a deadly weapon prior to engaging their engines. People can only control two things in their lives; what they think and what they do. Personal responsibility cannot be legislated. Political and governmental entities cannot mandate ethical and honorable actions. It is society, which dictates acceptable public behavior. Rehabilitation programs rely on education and a series of problem identifi cation and behavior modifi cation systems to alter behaviors that are harmful to a group or individual. Reeducating the public on safe operation of their motor vehicles or rehabilitating vehicle operators that habitually drive impaired or recklessly is an enormous job, however, ABATE of Florida, Inc. is taking on one piece of that task. The group is getting information out to the public on motorcycle safety and awareness through high school drivers education programs, posters, flyers, the presentation of a free Motorcycle Safety and Awareness Program, along with a series of annual safety seminars for the motorcycle riding and non-riding public.
In conjunction with the Florida legislature, ABATE is putting Billboards throughout the state to encourage drivers to be aware of motorcycles and to drive alertly. In other words, to take personal responsibility for their driving actions and to think about the way they operate their vehicles. James "Doc" Reichenbach, president of ABATE of Florida, Inc. who's group lobbied strongly for motorcycle helmet reform in 2000, said, "The numbers from the crash report for 2004 may favor our point of view, but even one death is too many. We… (motorcycle riders)… have to ride defensively and we have to educate everyone we meet." To help educate the driving public, four billboards with motorcycle safety messages have already been installed on major Florida highways. Within the next few months, Mr. Reichenbach expects approximately ten more billboards to be in place in areas where high motorcycle injury rates have been reported.
Motorcycle shop owner, Dan Fish of Doc's Southern Cycles in Pace, Florida, said, "I've had five times as many people in the shop in the past week looking for bikes under 600 cc's." He said people are worried about getting around and are looking for economical transportation. The motorcycle population has more than doubled in the past fi ve years with over 700,000 endorsed riders. With the marked increase in gasoline prices and concern over fuel availability, the number of motorcycle riders on Florida highways could easily reach 1.5 million in the next five years.
Motor vehicle operators will be encountering an ever- increasing number of two wheeled travelers in the future. Motorcycles are smaller and can easily be lost in blind spots of larger vehicles. Drivers need to be aware of the presence of all vehicles in their vicinity and give motorcycles their full lane of travel. Perception of the speed that a motorcycle is traveling is often misjudged and failure to yield the right-of-way is sighted as the cause in a significant number of motorcycle versus automobile crashes. Statistical reports, no matter how reliable the source, will not stop the motorcycle helmet usage debate, however, the real issue is crash prevention. To get involved in motorcycle crash prevention or to find out more about the Motorcycle Safety and Awareness Programs being offered, contact
ABATE of Florida, Inc.
P.O. Box 2520,
De Land, Florida, 32721
We have the Right to travel these roads of the USA as Bikers, Motorcyclist, that is our Risk every time we mount our motorcycle. But it has become a bigger Risk to protect our freedom to do so...
Drivers don't think that multi-tasking should be banned by the law. Can we force driver training for drivers? In fact, no training is dangerous.
Well doesn't this sound familiar. Everyone is thinking of their Freedom and Rights too.
Distracted drivers who are busy communicating or dining are being aggressive because they are willfully imposing their own level of risk on others. Distracted drivers are not only a danger to themselves but to motorcyclist. Forcing higher risk on others is aggressive. Maybe the distracted/aggressive driver thinks, Oh, I can handle it, but can others? I consider distracted driving as a form of aggressive driving. Drivers who use communication devices and drive distracted as a result are being aggressive drivers. A large danger to motorcyclist.
Internet access from a moving vehicle is a reality today, and getting bigger each month. Research on cell phone use by drivers shows that some drivers become dangerous due to distraction. But other drivers maintain their focus and safety level. What is the difference? First, some people are naturally more excitable and distractible while driving, whether they communicate with a passenger or through a communication device. They are especially at risk and dangerous--unless they train themselves. We don't know of any training programs for Internet access in cars, or for other multi-tasking activities. We recommend that these be put in place by the industry and government. But in the meantime, drivers can train themselves.
Can the distracted driver be trained? Attitude dictates the answer.
First, drivers must acknowledge that they need to train themselves, and if they don't, they become a danger to others. So until they go through the training, they ought not to allow themselves to use the equipment while the car is moving. Second, they need to practice the equipment over and over again while the car is not moving, until they can do it with closed yes and while talking to a passenger. Third, they cautiously begin to use features, one at a time while the car is moving in the right lane without too much traffic, thus gradually increasing the times and places of use. We also recommend monitoring yourself and keeping a Driving Log or Diary where you record the errors you've seen yourself make. Finally, ask a passenger to monitor you to see if you're making mistakes or distraction. Leon James, Ph.D. and Diane Nahl, Ph.D. ROAD RAGE AND AGGRESSIVE DRIVING: Steering Clear of Highway Warfare (Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2000) ISBN 1-57392-846-1
Unless drivers voluntarily train themselves, it's likely that government regulations and restrictions will be the reaction.
Like Band-Aid mandatory helmet laws for motorcyclist. A very poor solution in any stance.
Joseph Tessmer, a NHTSA statistician, estimated 20% to 30% of fatal accidents are due to distractions, but said it's impossible to know for sure because only a few states document distractions in accident reports. But the correct argument is that multi-tasking can lead to driver distraction when drivers haven't properly trained themselves to use the new car gadgets. This is true for older devices like the familiar radio and CD as well as the new, like GPS, phones, and e-mail. So it's true that multi-tasking becomes the occasion for drivers to make more mistakes, when they fail to train themselves properly. This increased training is a joint responsibility of the individual driver and the government? ..How about common sense!
NHTSA surveyed 4,010 drivers in spring 2002 and asked about a variety of potentially distracting behaviors (Royal, 2003, p. 1). The vast majority reported these behaviors on some trips, often on many or most trips. The most common were:
- 81 percent talked to other passengers on some trips;
- 66 percent changed radio stations or looked for CDs or tapes;
- 49 percent ate or drank;
- 26 percent took incoming calls on a cell phone and 25 percent made outgoing calls;
- 24 percent dealt with children in the back seat;
- 12 percent read a map or directions.
Cell phones are one of the most common distractions, a study released by NHTSA and Virginia Tech's Transportation Institute showed. However, according to AAA and NHTSA, it is the intellectual activity of talking on a cell phone, rather than the phone itself, that impairs ability to concentrate and retain control of one's vehicle. http://www.vtti.vt.edu/PDF/100-Car_Fact-Sheet.pdf A recent study that monitored 100 drivers for a year, using specialized instrumentation, reported that nearly 80 percent of the 72 recorded crashes and 65 percent of the 761 near-crashes involved driver inattention just prior to the incident (VTTI, 2005).
In crashes where distractions were reported, the most common distractions were similar in NHTSA's driver survey and crash investigations.
- 37 percent in survey, 29 percent in crashes: something outside the car - street sign, another driver;
- 19 percent in survey, 11 percent in crashes: other passengers, including children;
- 16 percent in survey, 21 percent in crashes: object or controls inside the car;
- 2 percent in survey, 2 percent in crashes: dialing or using a cell phone.
Other distractions, such as eating, tending to children, talking with others in the car, reading maps and applying makeup also can be problematic. A study funded by AAA's Foundation for Traffic Safety found that using a hands-free cell phone and tuning a car radio are equally distracting. Anything that takes drivers' eyes and minds off the road or hands off the wheel is distracting, cautions the NHTSA.
Frequency of the distraction and multi-tasking further increase risk. Looking away from the road for two seconds or longer makes a driver's odds of being involved in a crash nearly twice as high, found a study released by by AAA's Foundation for Traffic Safety and Virginia Tech.
Clearly, anything that takes drivers' minds and hands off the wheel puts them and others at risk. A survey conducted by AAA Colorado last year showed that 51 percent of teens surveyed around the state admitted to sending or receiving text messages while driving, and 66 percent said they talked on their cell phones while driving. Thirty eight percent of the respondents acknowledged taking their eyes off the road when texting while driving. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), Colorado State Patrol (CSP) and the Rocky Mountain Insurance Information Association (RMIIA) partnered with AAA Colorado to support the survey planning and publicity. http://denver.yourhub.com/Conifer/Stories/News/General-News/Story~394607.aspx
AAA and its partners hope the study will create more awareness of the need for new driver safety and education. Colorado law prohibits drivers of any age from operating cell phones while holding learners' permits.
Distracted driving and Aggressive driving, whatever the cause, is an issue for drivers of all ages. The bottom line is, pay attention when you're behind the wheel. Bikers, Motorcyclist Lives depend on it.
Garry Van Kirk
Bikers Accident Survivor Forum
bikeraccsurvivor@bacsuv.com
B.O.L.T.
Bullhead City, Arizona
MRF Strongly Opposes US DOT Attack on [Motorcycle] Training Funds
The Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) has learned that United States Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters sent letters to Capitol Hill with draft legislation outlining her intention to raid the 2010 motorcycle training and awareness funds set aside by Congress in the last Highway Bill (PL 109-59). Peters announced on Thursday, February 14 that she would like to see the earmarked training and awareness funds made available to promote the use of helmets in individual states.
"The MRF is extremely disappointed that Mrs. Peters would choose this small, yet critical, grant program to raid. We understand her desire to encourage helmet use, but couldn't the Secretary of Transportation find a more suitable program to fund her personal helmet hunt?" said Jeff Hennie, Vice President of Government Relations for the MRF.
The 2010 funds were a direct result of years of intense lobbying by state motorcyclists' rights organizations (SMROs) and individual motorcyclists from across this country, and were intended for two very specific aspects of motorcycle safety -- motorcycle rider education and motorist awareness of motorcycles. These two aspects of motorcycle safety have been grossly under-funded at the state level for years, often solely at the direct expense of motorcyclists themselves through licensing and registration fees.
The 2010 funding program, in its second year, is a way for the motorcyclists of this country to get a little help from the feds to save lives. The fact is that helmet use has always been a major plank in the platform at the US Department of Transportation (DOT). So why now take away funds desperately needed for other areas of motorcycle safety? The training and awareness programs in statewide operation now are in jeopardy of reduced or zero funding every year. This federal program was designed to allow a trickle of cash to the states to at least keep current programs running. Should Peters get her way, that trickle becomes nothing but a drip. In addition, the current 2010 grant program is not funding failing programs. In order to qualify for the grant, each state has to demonstrate success in its programs by reducing fatalities.
Secretary Peters narrowly skates around an existing law that bans the federal government from lobbying states to enact statewide legislation. She does this by not asking that the money be used for helmet LAW advocacy, but by asking the money be used for helmet USE advocacy.
What's actually happened and how concerned do we need to be? You may be asking yourself that very question about now. Here is the real world
scenario: Mary Peters has sent two letters to Congress - one to Speaker Pelosi and the other to Senate President Cheney. The letters include draft legislation that would amend section 2010 to allow funds to be used for the promotion of helmet use.
[
Here is the letter sent by Mary Peters to Nancy Pelosi:
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/MaryPeters080213.pdf
]
At this point there is no actual legislation - just an idea. If and when legislation results, the MRF will be issuing a call to action strongly opposing Peters' proposal, and will work tirelessly to convince every Senator and Member of Congress not to support this raid on the 2010 funds. At this point, however, the funds appropriated for your state are safe.
***
"The battle for bikers' rights is not about patches, parties or poker runs. We fight to protect the freedom and promote the interests of American motorcyclists ... to defend our right to choose our own modes of transportation, attire and lifestyle ... to deter and defy discrimination against us ... and to vanquish those who violate our rights or right-of-way."--Bruce Arnold
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/bikers_rights.php
***
Please post your comments and replies here:
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/forum.php
| 1. | a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts. |
| 2. | a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument. |
| 3. | the antecedent of a conditional proposition. |
| 4. | a mere assumption or guess. |
Garry Van Kirk
Bikers Accident Survivor Forum
bikeraccsurvivor@bacsuv.com
B.O.L.T.
California is asking for YOUR help!
It's been a long time coming, due in part to the holidays and the recent elections for new officers in ABATE of California, but finally a formal request for help with their Judicial Fund has been issued.
I've expressed my feelings about this fund to various ABATE chapters and to the MRF and AMA. I think some if not all of the questions posed to me have been answered in this letter from ABATE of California.
There have been many individual donations to the fund as well as ABATE of Delaware donating a very generous $8,500, and issuing a challenge to other ABATE chapters. Mark Infield, of The Carolinas Full Throttle Magazine has donated $1,000. My boss, Mike Hupy, has pledged $5,000 and issued a challenge to other attorneys. These groups and individuals have determined the court challenges in California to be an important step in hopefully garnering a decision and precedent that other states could use to challenge the compliance to the FMVSS 218 Standard.
I hope those of you who have issued a call to support the Judicial Fund will continue to promote this worthy cause. Those of you who have not yet supported this effort, I urge you to reconsider. ABATE of California has now formally requested assistance in this matter and I think this is a valid endeavor. A win in court in May will have positive ramifications throughout the land. Even a loss, which we are not considering at this time, will have at least brought a lot of attention to this issue and the plaintiffs intend on appealing any loss to the California Supreme Court. To not continue these challenges would be a travesty to the riders of California and the memory of Richard Quigley, who devoted over 17 years of his life and fortune to defeating the mandatory helmet law in California.
Litigation such as this is very costly. The plaintiffs have retained a very reputable and experienced attorney, whose firm was involved in the Buhl v. Hannigan case, another important case which helped lay the groundwork for the current litigation along with the Bianco v CHP and the Easyriders F.I.G.H.T. case. Feel free to contact me, Mike Osborn, Judicial Fund Officer (mwosborn@mindspring.com) or Don Blanscet, ABATE of California's Director (donb51@earthlink.net) if you have any questions.
In brotherhood,
Tony "Pan" Sanfelipo
Founder, ABATE of Wisconsin
BOLT National Director
Sturgis Freedom Fighter Hall of Fame, 2002
<<JUD Fund Ltr to SMRO.pdf>>
Draconian Law being proposed to confiscate motorcycles
COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE - HEARING FOR HOUSE BILL 137 JANUARY 10, 2008 HOUSE BUILDING, RM 404 TALLAHASSEE, FL
Here's a recap from this morning's hearing on HB 137. All quotes are as I remember them, as I did not have a tape recorder with me. All internet links and email addresses are listed at the bottom of this message.
I arrived at 8:30AM for the hearing, which was to begin at 9:00AM. The room was empty except for the committee secretary, who was more than happy to accept my request to speak. Out of perhaps 75 seats, only 25 were filled by the time the meeting started.
Representative Carlos Lopez-Cantera
carlos.lopez-cantera@myfloridahouse.gov
District Office:
Suite 111
2300 Coral Way
Miami, FL 33145-3511
Phone: (305) 442-6877
the author of this bill, gave his intro to the bill and stated that he had issued a "strike-through", meaning he had changed the wording, and the initial submission was no longer valid.
However, all he changed was the speed limit offense to more than 50 miles per hour over the speed limit, up from 30mph. I was unaware of this change and therefore did not have a copy of this revised bill.
Mr. Lopez-Cantera then played a video created by a news team in Miami, on Sportbike riders pulling wheelies at high speed on public roadways. In the video, two tickets were given out. Riders were interviewed. Statements like, "it's like a drug to me, the need for speed," and, "I just pay the ticket, no big deal."
After the video, an officer from Miami spoke to the committee. Mostly he provided testimony on accident history. One in particular was about a woman who was killed in her SUV when a Sportbike rider slammed into her at a high rate of speed. His bike went through the driver's compartment. There was no mention of whether the woman violated his right-of-way. He spoke of how the woman's infant was not in the car seat, but underneath the passenger seat on the floor, gaining a considerable amount of sympathy from the committee.
Questions for him from the committee members presented the first indication of where this hearing would lead.
Representative Susan Bucher felt the drag racing laws already covered this issue and wanted to know if this current law excluded motorcycles. Mr.
Lopez-Cantera did not know the answer and stated he had not researched that law. She clearly thought the bill was redundant with respect to speeding.
She also wanted to know why they couldn't put a helmet law repeal into the whole package, as she feels helmets will save more lives, and is needed. She later stated that motorcyclists who did not wear helmets were just organ donors. Though she didn't like this bill, I didn't get any warm and fuzzies from her either.
Another Representative, Greg Evers, testified that he was dead set against this bill. He had received an email where the author described a scenario by which a motorcyclist could be arrested for erroneous reasons (by harassment or profiling). The author then stated at the end of the email, "I know all this, because I'm a cop". It struck a cord with him, Mr. Evers said. He seemed to grasp the entire concept of why this bill is so discriminating.
I was first up from the audience to speak in opposition to the bill. I presented my case from the standpoint that the bill was discriminatory, and that confiscation of private property was unconstitutional, and from a fairness standpoint as well (motorcyclists vs. all drivers). The bill, I said, should be written to include all drivers because, yes, I agreed, stiffer penalties are needed for reckless driving.
The first question I was asked was, do I think permanently confiscating a motorcycle is too harsh of a punishment. To which I said, yes, without a doubt, not when right-of-way violators, DUI offenders and other reckless driving, kills without equal punishment.
The second question asked was how would I propose stopping these stunt riders from violating speed laws. To which I replied, our tax money would be better spent finding a way to catch them. One suggestion made by Mr. Lopez-Cantera was to make it a high fine punishment for not having your license plate permanently affixed, so Sportbike riders could not take them off. This is how they get away; they can't later be identified by video.
I also said, I don't like it when they do this either, but it happens much less often than reckless driving of auto drivers, and shouldn't we work on making stiffer punishment for all reckless drivers, instead of singling out motorcycles?
I was also asked if I thought more graduated punishment would be acceptable, and I said yes it would, but only if the bill is written to include all motor vehicles, not just motorcycles.
Next up to speak was a representative from ABATE, who basically repeated all of the same points.
Last to speak was Winn Peeples, who represents motorcycle dealers in Florida. He also said that most of what he wanted to say, had already been covered, but added that dealers are also 100% opposed to this bill. He sited the revenue netted in Florida by the sale of motorcycles. Financing institutions would not finance a motorcycle in Florida if this bill passes.
I believe that Greg Evers approached Mr. Lopez-Cantera privately and offered to defer the bill, rather than kill it, if Lopez-Cantera would agree. I could not hear what was said, so this is purely speculation, but shortly after that private conversation, Evers approached the Chairman on the side, and the motion to vote on a deferment was issued. The committee favorably voted to defer the bill to a later date.
Final note: At first I was discouraged that I saw no local support from area Bikers. But Winn Peeples and I agreed that those of us who were there, was enough to work constructively in the time alotted, and push HB 137 back to the drawing board. That and Representative Greg Evers. Winn was there on behalf of Florida's dealers. I was there for myself, and for all of Florida's freedom fighters who couldn't be there.
SO WHAT NOW? IT'S ALL GOOD RIGHT?
Sorry. Let's be clear. This bill is NOT dead. And it *could* come up on the agenda again, though it is less likely to now than before, not without a rewrite. Below is a summary of each Representative and my perceived
*opinion* of their position, based on what was heard today.
Representatives Richard Glorioso, Gary Aubuchon, Jimmy Patronis, Greg Evers and Nick Thomspon were all in favor of rewriting this bill to a broader degree; to include ALL motorists, and for stiffer penalties for reckless driving, but with graduated punishments employed. Nick Thompson initially wanted to kill the bill, as did Greg Evers. They all need to hear we support them and appreciate their proposed vision.
Representative Ed Hooper wants to see offending Sportbike riders punished severely but conceded that a graduated punishment was better than none. He could be pushed over to our side, maybe. He also had a personal "story" to tell about a death on a motorcycle.
Representative Scott Randolph was sympathetic to our position, but felt there was a need and agreed with a rewrite. He seems to be "on the fence".
He needs to hear from us also.
Representative Susan Bucher I believe would have voted no, as she seemed to feel this bill was redundant, though she is no biker advocate. And though she bears watching, I believe she will not be a contender.
Representative Steve Precourt would have voted in favor of the bill as it stands. He needs to be inundated with emails and letters of opposition. He needs to see just how many of us vote here in Florida, and how many supporters there for our cause in this country.
Representative Michael Scionti was not present due to a recall back to active military duty.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
First order of business - send a thank you letter or email to Representative Greg Evers. What he did today was show 100% support in our favor. Let him know you were watching and waiting, and you appreciate his position. He was against "motorcycles only" and against the confiscation of personal property.
Second order of business - email or call the rest.
The opportunity to rewrite this bill to be a huge benefit to all motorcyclists and include all drivers is an enormous boon to come out of this. I have been asked to help draft the bill in the right way, for all.
There is a lot of work left to be done here before anyone can breathe a sigh of relief.
There will be NO COMPROMISE on discriminatory wording, or confiscation. The bill will include all motorists or face strong opposition. Those on the committee who want to see this happen have stated their position clearly in favor of this. Still, don't let your guard down, don't fall back, hold the line.
COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE - All relevant documents are listed here:
http://tinyurl.com/2aqomf
Representative Richard "Rich" Glorioso - Chair rich.glorioso@myfloridahouse.gov District Office:
Suite 204
110 W. Reynolds Street
Plant City, FL 33563-3379
Phone: (813) 757-9110
Representative Gary Aubuchon
gary.aubuchon@myfloridahouse.gov
District Office:
Suite 305
3501 Del Prado Boulevard
Cape Coral, FL 33904-7223
Phone: (239) 344-4900
Representative Susan Bucher
susan.bucher@myfloridahouse.gov
District Office:
Suite 102
2240 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard
West Palm Beach, FL 33409-3403
Phone: (561) 682-0156
Representative Greg Evers
greg.evers@myfloridahouse.gov
District Office:
5224 Willing Street
Milton, FL 32570-4971
Phone: (850) 983-5550
Representative Ed Hooper
ed.hooper@myfloridahouse.gov
District Office:
Suite 206
2963 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
Clearwater, FL 33759-4259
Phone: (727) 724-3000
Representative Jimmy Patronis
jimmy.patronis@myfloridahouse.gov
District Office:
Suite A
455 Harrison Avenue
Panama City, FL 32401-2775
Phone: (850) 914-6300
Representative Stephen L. Precourt
steve.precourt@myfloridahouse.gov
District Office:
310 South Dillard Street
Suite 400
Winter Garden, FL 34787-3515
Phone: (407) 814-6138
Representative Scott Randolph
scott.randolph@myfloridahouse.gov
District Office:
Suite 100
701 East South Street
Orlando, FL 32801-2953
Phone: (407) 893-3084
Representative Nicholas R. "Nick" Thompson nick.thompson@myfloridahouse.gov District Office:
Suite 208
2120 Main Street
Fort Myers, FL 33901-3010
Phone: (239) 533-2411
Representative Michael Scionti (not present at the hearing and will probably not be involved with this bill in the future) michael.scionti@myfloridahouse.gov
District Office:
Suite 102
4221 North Himes Avenue
Tampa, FL 33607-6228
Phone: (813) 673-4674
Updates to follow as they occur.
Respectfully Submitted,
Dara McLain
***
EXPRESS YOUR OPINION IN THIS ONLINE POLL:
http://www.wkyt.com/news/headlines/13570122.html
***
"The battle for bikers' rights is not about patches, parties or poker runs. We fight to protect the freedom and promote the interests of American motorcyclists ... to defend our right to choose our own modes of transportation, attire and lifestyle ... to deter and defy discrimination against us ... and to vanquish those who violate our rights or right-of-way."--Bruce Arnold
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/bikers_rights.php
***
Please post your comments and replies here:
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/forum.php
...I have some very bad news:
Once again, the American Bikers' Rights Movement has been shot in the foot by its own hired guns. According to their press releases appended below, on 28 November 2007 Jeff Hennie (jeff@mrf.org) and James "Doc" Reichenbach II (abatefl@worldnet.att.net)--respectively the paid professional lobbyists for the Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) and ABATE of Florida--not only attended but apparently requested what turned out to be a three-hour meeting with Rosenker and some of his NTSB cronies. The meeting was behind closed doors, so the only indications we have as to what transpired are the contents of the press releases.
"So," you may be thinking, "a couple of our lobbyists met with a few meddling Nannycrats, and issued a couple of press releases touting the meeting. What could be wrong with that?"
In this case ... JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING.
This meeting should never have happened. Just by scheduling and attending it, our lobbyists ingratiated Rosenker and cast an air of legitimacy on the out-of-bounds activity of his band of bureaucratic bunglers at the NTSB. Combine that with press release statements from Hennie calling Rosenker a "likeable gentleman" ... and those of Reichenbach indicating a willingness to submit to a quarterly NTSB "meeting of the minds" ... and what these two misguided mouthpieces have done is effectively undermine all of our recent and extensive efforts to keep yet another Nannycratic federal agency from making it their business to help motorcyclists crash safer.
Do you think the U.S. Senators and Congressmen we have been petitioning to clip the NTSB's financial wings and can Mark Rosenker are going to take us seriously when they see our hired guns kowtow so willingly to "The Creepster"? And with Hennie's press release reading like Rosenker's nomination for Motorcycle Safety Czar ... and Reichenbach's written like he already holds the post ... do you think Rosenker loses any sleep worrying about bikers seeking to take his job before he takes any more of our rights?
It does not matter what was said in this meeting, or by whom. The only political agenda our paid lobbyists advanced by attending it was Rosenker's.
Bruce Arnold
Cell phone use while driving is not primary offense.
Cell Phone Law The State of New Jersey has just made driving while using a cell phone a primary offense. This means that a police officer can now pull you over solely because you were talking on the phone. This also includes text messaging.
A conviction (or guilty plea) to this offense will be considered as a conviction/plea for "unsafe driving". While this is a no-point violation, it carries a $250.00 surcharge meaning that this ticket can cost anywhere from $380.00 - $439.00 for a first offense!!
Also, you should all note that this first use of "unsafe driving" has a secondary effect. When you get a speeding ticket or some other moving violation and you go to court to try and get it reduced, the prosecutor may offer a no point reduction to the "unsafe driving"provision.
However, if you previously used on a cell phone charge, your no point fine will now cost well over $500.00. And, once you use this provision for the 2nd time, you must wait 5 years before you use it again. This means that if you burn a no point reduction on a cell phone you will be facing the likelihood of full points on all tickets you get in the 5 year waiting period.
Makes those $40.00 blue tooth headsets seem kind of cheap huh?
If I were you guys, I would expect a cell phone crackdown for a while now that this has gone into effect. With the NJ deficit you can b et they will want all of those $250.00 surcharges they can get their hands on.
ABATE supports this law since it will tend to discourage auto drivers from texting and talking on their cell phones and therefore decreases the chances of an accident with a motorcycle. Motorcyclists do not use cell phones when driving!~
You are a MURDERER. One of many who cloak their crimes under the false vestment of "professional journalist".
Every time one of you myopic media morons publishes a "news" article assuring the public that motorcycle helmets or mandatory helmet laws are the cure-all for motorcycle safety, you increase the risk of injury or death for millions of responsible motorcyclists by reinforcing the failed public policy focus on crash survival rather than crash prevention. This is supported with facts and logic in this recent letter to some misguided do-gooders:
http://tinyurl.com/yuyrht
Do you know what a "fact" is, Ms. Adelus? Or do you only know how to carelessly or capriciously bastardize them, as you do in your article below? Motorcycle fatality numbers from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") you erroneously attribute to their USDOT parent. And I'll correct your unsupported "45 percent" claim with this:
Last year there may have been 4,810 motorcycle fatalities that accounted for more than ten percent of all traffic deaths. But by NHTSA's own numbers, of those 4,810 motorcyclists, 2,792 were helmeted, and only 2,018 were not helmeted. In other words, 58% WERE WEARING HELMETS AND DIED ANYWAY. For the remaining 2,018, apply the 37% factor supplied by NHTSA through their illegal lobbying partner, the National Transportation Safety Board ("NTSB")...
http://tinyurl.com/2xjqc6
...and the actual number of lives that might have been saved if ALL riders had been helmeted in ALL 50 states ALL year is only 747. I am not saying that those 747 lives are not important, but the sad fact is that they represent less than 16% of all motorcycle fatalities for 2006. And that being the case, Ms. Adelus, would you please tell me how in the hell you arrived at your ridiculous conclusion that the "...leading cause of those fatalities is the absence of a helmet"?!?
The leading cause of motorcycle fatalities, Ms. Adelus, is NOT the "...absence of a helmet". The leading cause is the absence of motorcycle safety policies focused on crash prevention (aimed at motorists) rather than crash survival (aimed at motorcyclists) ... a condition not likely to be remedied so long as incompetent journalists like you continue to parrot spurious statistics and bureaucratic spin that serve no purpose other than to blame the victims for the crime ... so as to absolve the guilt of negligent, care-less, distracted and impaired motorists who maim and kill motorcyclists by violating our right-of-way. Hopefully, you will hear more about this in the Motorcycle Riders Foundation ("MRF") press conference scheduled for this Thursday in Washington DC (9:15 AM EST November 15th 2007):
http://tinyurl.com/2wjlfx
You may not be holding the gun, Ms. Adelus, but your mis-reporting is helping pull the trigger. And by law, that makes you a MURDERER.
Speaking strictly for myself and no other individuals or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray's Biker Forum Premier Member, Iron Butt Association Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation
2007 Chairman's Circle, American Motorcyclist Association
Open Letter to NHTSA Administrator Nicole R. Nason ("That's My Money You Are Misusing, Ms. Nason.")
Ms. Nason:
CBS News has quoted you as saying that, in your role as NHTSA Administrator, "I love knowing that at the end of the day, what we are try[ing] to do--what I am trying to do--is make a vehicle safer for my children..."
http://tinyurl.com/2csv5g
...and one need only glance at the "Quick Clicks" section of the new "NHTSA.dot.gov" web pages for evidence of your pursuit of that personal agenda.
If your mission in life is to make automobiles "safer for your children", Ms. Nason, that is admirable. But if that has skewed your focus as to what you are supposed to be doing as the administrator of a 750-employee federal bureacracy spending millions of taxpayer dollars annually, that is unacceptable. Here is what your commitment SHOULD be:
"NHTSA is committed to providing the most accurate and complete information available to its customers, the American traveling public, in a helpful and courteous fashion."
http://tinyurl.com/25bumo
YOU ARE NOT HONORING THAT COMMITMENT, MS. NASON. Since you assumed the position of NHTSA Administrator in May 2006, you have effectively closed off all agency communications with the public or press except through you. As Christopher Jensen of the New York Times reported in "What's Off the Record at N.H.T.S.A.? Almost Everything":
"The agency's new policy effectively means that some of the world's top safety researchers are no longer allowed to talk to reporters or to be freely quoted about automotive safety issues that affect pretty much everybody.... 'My God,' said Joan Claybrook, who was N.H.T.S.A. administrator from 1977 to 1981 and is now president of Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group. Given that N.H.T.S.A. is the leading source of automotive safety information in the United States, its researchers are public officials and people are entitled to 'know what information they have, whether it is on paper or in their heads,' Ms. Claybrook said."
http://tinyurl.com/2xysdz
Given your attempt to avoid public scrutiny by restricting agency-to-media communications, access to information through your NHTSA website becomes all the more crucial. And what has happened there since you took over? A major "upgrade" ... one unnecessary casualty of which was many resource references which are now "broken links" like this one:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/ncsa/tsf2005/motorcyclestsf05.pdf
SO MUCH FOR "HELPFUL AND COURTEOUS", MS. NASON. Let's now take a look at how you're doing in the "accurate and complete information" department, specifically with respect to this recent report:
DOT HS 810 834 September 2007
Fatal Two-Vehicle Motorcycle Crashes
http://tinyurl.com/273y2f
The stated purpose of this report is to "...analyze fatal two-vehicle motorcycle crashes for trends and crash characteristics using FARS (Fatality Analysis Reporting System) data [and to] identify possible factors relating to the drivers/operators in these crashes [so as to] understand possible causes for these crashes." And what were the findings?
Many of your "findings" in this report are obvious to anyone with a basic knowledge of motorcycling and a little common sense. Of course, "the role of the motorcycle was recorded as the striking vehicle" in most cases! That is what happens when a negligent, care-less, distracted or cellphone conversation-impaired motorist turns left or pulls out in front of a motorcyclist! And of course, "more than 90 percent of the two-vehicle motorcycle crashes involving passenger vehicles occurred on non-interstate roadways"! Roads without median barriers make it easier for irresponsible drivers to violate a motorcyclist's right-of-way!
What wasn't so obvious was the implication of this conclusion on page 7:
"For the passenger vehicle drivers involved in [fatal] two-vehicle motorcycle crashes, 35 percent of the driver-related factor was failure to yield right-of-way compared to only 4 percent for motorcycle operators."
Any cub reporter (wait and see) will interpret that to mean that the automobile driver was at fault in these accidents only 35 percent of the time, which would conversely mean that "it was the biker's fault" 65 percent of the time. Is that what this conclusion was intended to convey, Ms. Nason? Well, you and I know that is neither accurate nor complete information, is it?
The truth can be found, well obfuscated, in Table 22 on page 30. The obfuscation begins with your selection of a data presentation format in which the "...sums of the numbers and percents are greater than the total drivers as each driver may be coded with more than one factor." The obfuscation is perfected by using a doubletalk category breakdown in which driver offenses like making improper turns, failure to keep in proper lane, failure to obey traffic signs or signals, and even driving on the wrong side of road are reported separately and thereby partially or entirely EXCLUDED FROM THE 35 PERCENT RIGHT-OF-WAY VIOLATION STATISTIC. The truth can be found, Ms. Nason, by applying this formula:
1 - ((711 + 26) / 1792) = 0.588727679
Logic precludes any double counting in the "None reported" or "Unknown" categories, and for all other categories, the automobile driver either caused or contributed to the death of the motorcyclist. So the truth is, Ms. Nason, that AUTOMOBILE DRIVERS WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR EITHER CAUSING OR CONTRIBUTING TO THE DEATHS OF AT LEAST 58.87% OF ALL BIKERS KILLED IN TW0-VEHICLE CRASHES IN 2005.
THAT is "accurate and complete information", Ms. Nason. So why isn't THAT statistic included in your report? And how much other "accurate and complete information" that conflicts with your misguided, Haddonistic view of the world...
http://tinyurl.com/2ttq9v
...are you spinning, obfuscating or just outright excluding from all the other "traffic safety information" reports you are fabricating at the taxpayers' expense?
That's MY money you are misusing, Ms. Nason.
Speaking strictly for myself and no other entities or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray's Biker Forum
Premier Member, Iron Butt Association
Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation
2007 Chairman's Circle, American Motorcyclist Association
***
"The battle for bikers' rights is not about patches, parties or poker runs. We fight to protect the freedom and promote the interests of American motorcyclists ... to defend our right to choose our own modes of transportation, attire and lifestyle ... to deter and defy discrimination against us ... and to vanquish those who violate our rights or right-of-way."--Bruce Arnold
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/bikers_rights.php
***
Please post your comments and replies here:
NCOM NEWS BYTES
Compiled & Edited by Bill Bish
National Coalition of Motorcyclists
NTSB MISSES THE MARK The National Coalition of Motorcyclists (NCOM) joins the growing chorus of Motorcyclists Rights Organizations nationwide that take issue with recent recommendations by the National Transportation Safety Board that States enact mandatory helmet laws, and has released the following statement from James D. “Doc” Reichenbach II, Chairman of the NCOM Board of Directors:
“Motorcycle deaths in this country are certainly reaching epidemic proportions. But without conducting a thorough investigation, the NTSB’s claim seems to be it is the motorcyclists’ fault. Is it the motorcyclist’s fault that they choose not to wear helmets and that larger vehicles run over them?
In 2004 Louisiana reinstated their mandatory helmet law. In 2006 the deaths jumped almost 20%. The projection this year is it will jump more than 10% again, reaching record numbers. In Florida since the helmet law was amended the fatality rate for helmet-wearing riders has far exceeded that of non-helmet riders. In fact, in every injury category helmeted riders are suffering more injuries and deaths than helmetless riders. In 2005 more than 59% of the motorcyclist deaths in Florida were helmeted riders. Since 2000 the motorcycle registrations have increased more than 160%. To believe there is no correlation between the increase of registrations and the increase in deaths is just sticking your head in the sand. In other words the NTSB thinks motorcyclists should be forced by law to wear a helmet even though helmeted riders represent 3 out of 5 fatalities.
As far as the motorcycle riders costing the taxpayers money, NCOM certainly does not agree with the statement to CNN about our children’s health, nor do our more than 1,000 NCOM Member Groups across the country. What we are concerned with is the idea that motorcyclists are being neglected as taxpayers and citizens. We are Fathers, Mothers, Sons and Daughters. We are your next-door neighbors and the Veterans who risked their lives to protect this country in time of war. Are we to lose our rights because the NTSB has not done their job of gathering information and instead just makes blanket statements? The NTSB should encourage motorcycle training and educate the non-riding public that motorcycles are out there sharing the road.”
NTSB: Newcomers to Motorcycle Safety
The National Transportation Safety Board has issued some recommendations to the federal government as well as some selected states in an effort to address the rising crash numbers of motorcycles.
The NTSB has engaged motorcycle safety; after only forty years of silence.
The NTSB opened its doors on April 1, 1967. Although independent, it relied on the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) for funding and administrative support. In 1975, under the Independent Safety Board Act, all organizational ties to DOT were severed. The NTSB is not part of DOT, or affiliated with any of its agencies.
The NTSB has investigated 124,000 aviation crashes, 10,000 surface transportation crashes (including rail, pipeline and mass transit) and, get ready for this, a whopping six motorcycle crashes. That's a half dozen motorcycle investigations over the past 40 years or just .15 motorcycle crashes a year to put it in government statistic speak.
As the self described "premier safety agency" one would think that they would have a concrete set of instruction when it comes to issuing safety recommendations and they do, for every type of tragic accident except motorcycles. When issuing safety recommendations for most modes of transportation the NTSB relies on it's field investigators, PhD researchers and professional staff to carefully gather information and decipher what is fact from fiction. However, for this set of recommendations the NTSB relied on the tired, antiquated, already existing research on motorcycle safety, which isn't much.
At the September 11, 2007 board meeting they admitted that they had come to the recommendations in a way that was outside of normal operating procedures. Motorcyclists should be deeply disturbed by this lack of consideration and attention. We at the MRF believe that motorcyclists deserve as much consideration as planes, trains, cars and pipelines.
It is fact, the only new findings this lengthy but flimsy set of recommendations are based on were developed after a two day NTSB organized symposium just one year ago and the findings from investigating a paltry six crashes over the past forty years.
One curious omission in the recommendations was in the area of education.
There wasn't even as much as a whisper of education or training, which was a very big part of the two day super symposium last fall. One of the cornerstones of bettering anything is education. To leave out those two important components shows the true depth of these recommendations from the NTSB members and researchers on this matter. So are we to believe that driver's education should be scrapped? What about all the teenagers waiting to drive or the new immigrant who doesn't know the first thing about the rules of the road?
One almost highpoint was when the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety and it's implementation guide were brought up. These documents have been the best comprehensive guide on motorcycle safety and perhaps the first of its kind to be endorsed by NHTSA, MSF, MRF, AMA and a host of others. The NTSB ordered NHTSA to "re-organize the priorities" in the original document. This is an exercise akin to moving the deck chairs around on the Titanic as she was sinking. NHTSA already gave this their best shot. They signed off on NAMS seven years ago. Why would NHTSA want to re-do a product that they have been standing behind for almost a decade?
In stark contrast to this issue, the NTSB has school bus safety improvements listed on their "most wanted" (read: most needed) list. To date, six states have laws requiring school buses to have safety belts but none have laws requiring them to be worn. Shouldn't child safety be paramount to adult safety? Seems not, according to the NTSB. There isn't even a mention of motorcycle on the "most wanted" list, but you can bet there will be now. Why give so much attention to an issue that wasn't even on the "most wanted" list and operate in a backwards fashion? In this case it is more than likely they rushed into motorcycle safety to cover their proverbial butts. The fact is, it just does not reflect well politically or financially for the premier safety agency - mandated by Congress to investigate motorcycles (as they are airplanes) or not - to sit idly by while motorcycle crashes increase.
The disappointing part is that most of the government agencies and the at-large motorcycle community had been in agreement working together on motorcycle safety. There was a general consensus with the Congress and the Administration that we would work on crash avoidance not injury reduction.
The fact is that fatalities do need to slow down and calling for helmet laws just is not the silver bullet the NTSB believes it to be. The MRF will always focus on crash avoidance before injury reduction.
Most of the other government agencies in Washington DC, the MRF, AMA and many others have come to the realization that crash avoidance is always better than safer crashing. Everyone should all at least agree that avoiding a crash altogether is the best for all involved parties.
The NTSB had an opportunity to engage the motorcycle community in a positive way and build on the work that has already happened. They chose to ignore the history, states rights and any and all motorcycle education possibilities.
For the record the MRF has the utmost respect for the NTSB as an institution and it's staff when it comes to what they do best, planes, trains, bridge and tunnel collapses and mass transit tragedies. However, they are the very last federal safety agency to engage motorcycle safety and as with most late comers, are just trying to catch up and bring too little, too late. The MRF does not doubt the sincerity of the NTSB and it's desire to avoid tragedy and save life. However, it may be best to leave motorcycle safety to those who have a vested interest for the past 80 years; the motorcyclists of America.
The NTSB also pointed out the United States of America is an anomaly when compared to rest of world concerning universal helmet laws. This may be the one thing they got right. The USA is one of, if not the only, country in the developed world with out a universal helmet law. What NTSB fails to recognize is - that is a symbol of so many other things where we are alone in the world. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness come to mind as well as freedom of speech, religion, and press. Maybe its alright to be the only country that does things its own way, after all its what this country was founded on and it is what has gotten us through the past few hundred years just fine.
The NTSB will be sending their hired gun lobbyists and professional staff to the states that were mentioned in the recommendations. Unlike NHTSA, the NTSB is not subject to a lobby ban, meaning they can lobby your state as they wish for what they wish, all the while using taxpayer money. Make your governors and governor highway safety representatives aware of this.
Let them also know how the NTSB reached it's recommendations with little or no input from the motorcycle community. Let them know that your state doesn't need to take half baked advice from an agency in Washington DC.
This is just another incident of bureaucrats in Washington DC trying to ram regulation down the throats of all 50 states. More of the same from a big government agency in a big government town. Just try to chew slowly.
The MRF will continue to dialogue with the NTSB just as it does with all Federal Agencies that effect motorcycling.
These recommendations do not carry the weight of law. The NTSB has no regulatory or enforcement capabilities. You can read the recommendations, view the board meeting and more at:
http://www.ntsb.gov/events/Boardmeeting.htm
MRF E-MAIL NEWS Motorcycle Riders Foundation
236 Massachusetts Ave. NE
Suite 510
Washington, DC 20002-4980
202-546-0983 (voice)
202-546-0986 (fax)
http://www.mrf.org (website)
Open Letter to NTSB Member Kathryn O'Leary "Kitty" Higgins ... on "Compelling" vs. "Concocted" Statistics
Kathryn O'Leary "Kitty" Higgins
Member,
National Transportation Safety Board
429 L'Enfant Plaza
Washington, D.C. 20024
202-314-6000
Ms. Higgins:
I took time away from work long enough to watch the live webcasts of the 9/11/07 and 9/18/07 meetings of the NTSB, both now archived here:
http://tinyurl.com/3y7yb7
While watching our democracy in action through live presentations like these can be enlightening, the perception of rational process they convey may in this case be a thin veneer over the underlying realities of partisan political agenda:
http://tinyurl.com/3djhll
I have previously communicated to NTSB Chairman Mark Rosenker, who you may recall was formerly affiliated with Richard Nixon's Committee to Re-Elect the President ("CREEP")...
http://tinyurl.com/2v3u8k
...the fact that the motorcycle registration, vehicle miles traveled, and helmetless rider fatality statistics presented in your sessions to support these recommendations...
http://tinyurl.com/2tmgj6
...were materially misleading and served no purpose other than to cover up the fact that--after twelve months and the expenditure of millions of taxpayer dollars--the NTSB has released "motorcycle safety recommendations" that fail to address the causes of 84 percent of all motorcycle fatalities ... principal among those being the right-of-way violations of motorists who are negligent, careless, distracted and/or impaired by alcohol or cell phone conversations:
http://tinyurl.com/2jcefx
I consider these actions a clear demonstration of bureaucratic inefficiency, neglect of duty, and malfeasance. And on those grounds--pursuant to the provisions of United States Code Title 49, Chapter 11, Subchapter II, Paragraph (c) as I understand them--I am calling for the removal of Mark Rosenker as Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board. When that occurs, your Democratic Party affiliation makes it unlikely that President Bush will choose you as Rosenker's successor, and that would appear to be for the best. By that, I mean that having reviewed your resume...
http://tinyurl.com/2t7u4m
...I was relieved to see no overt indications of your being a "Haddonite", or having any prior affiliation with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA"), an agency they infest:
http://tinyurl.com/2ttq9v
That might lessen the likelihood of your direct, personal involvement in what I suspect may be collusion between the NTSB and NHTSA to circumvent the state lobbying restrictions imposed on the latter by TEA-21 (the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century), as reflected in Subchapter I of Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United States Code:
"(a) In General.--No funds appropriated to the Secretary shall be available for any activity specifically designed to urge a State or local legislator to favor or oppose the adoption of any specific legislative proposal pending before any State or local legislative body."
http://tinyurl.com/2nnz4o
NEVERTHELESS, Ms. Higgins, although you may neither be a Haddonite nor play any role in any possible collusion or conspiracy between the NTSB and NHTSA to override TEA-21, your resume reflects little if any experience or expertise with respect to domestic ground transportation issues in general or motorcycle safety in particular. Of course, yours is not the only NTSB member resume for which such observations can be made. But I focus on you because it may be this very lack of relevant experience and expertise that allowed you to reach the erroneous--and for the American public, unfortunate--conclusion that the motorcycle safety statistics presented by the NTSB staff in your 9/11 meeting were "compelling", when in fact the more appropriate adjective might be "concocted".
Speaking strictly for myself and no other entities or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray's Biker Forum Premier Member, Iron Butt Association Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation
2007 Chairman's Circle, American Motorcyclist Association
***
"The battle for bikers' rights is not about patches, parties or poker runs. We fight to protect the freedom and promote the interests of American motorcyclists ... to defend our right to choose our own modes of transportation, attire and lifestyle ... to deter and defy discrimination against us ... and to vanquish those who violate our rights or right-of-way."--Bruce Arnold
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/bikers_rights.php
***
Please post your comments and replies here:
Open letter to:
Mark Rosenker (mark.rosenker@ntsb.gov)
Chairman
National Transportation Safety Board
429 L'Enfant Plaza
Washington, D.C. 20024
202-314-6000
Mr. Rosenker:
The universal helmet law mandate you proposed this week fails to address the causes of approximately 84 percent of all motorcycle fatalities. Not only do we have the NTSB's admitted issues with understated motorcycle registrations and vehicle miles travelled (VMT) in the demoninators of key NHTSA statistics, you made even greater and more reprehensible misrepresentations by overstating the numerator:
In your Tuesday morning meeting, you and your fellow NTSB members and staff implied that as many as 4,810 motorcycle accident fatalities in 2006 could have been avoided by the enactment of universal motorcycle helmet laws. This was a gross and I suspect intentional overstatement. In 2005, 4,553 motorcyclists died on our highways ... 2,521 (55%) of them were wearing helmets AND DIED ANYWAY ... and of the 2,032 remaining, quoting NHTSA, only "... 728 more [lives] could have been saved if all motorcyclists had worn helmets." Applying those same percentages to the 2006 death toll of 4,810, the maximum number of lives that MIGHT have been saved by helmet laws is only 769, not even 16 percent of the 4,810 you implied. In other words, Mr. Rosenker:
IF THE NTSB MOTORCYCLE SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS RELEASED ON TUESDAY HAD BEEN IN EFFECT NATIONWIDE FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR OF 2006, ONLY 769 LIVES MIGHT HAVE BEEN SAVED, WHILE EIGHTY-FOUR PERCENT (84%) OF THE 4,810 MOTORCYCLISTS WHO DIED ON OUR ROADWAYS WOULD PROBABLY HAVE DIED ANYWAY.
At the same time, as NTSB Chairman you either knew or should have known that (a) we have 236 million cellphone subscribers on our roadways, (b) 73% of them are talking while they are driving, (c) cellphone conversations impair their driving skills as much if they were intoxicated with alcohol, consequently (d) they are four times more likely to cause or be involved in an accident than motorists who responsibly shut up and steer, and resultantly (e) assuming reports of the Oklahoma Highway Safety Office are a reliable measure, roughly ONE IN FOUR ACCIDENTS in 2006 occurred when a driver was talking on the phone. So barring evidence to the contrary, as NTSB Chairman you either knew or should have known that it would be reasonable to assume that cellphone conversation-impaired motorists could have been responsible for 25 percent (or more) of the 2,575,000 traffic injuries and 42,642 traffic fatalities reported by NHTSA for 2006.
And rather than using the taxpayer-provided resources of your bureacratic office to pursue restrictions on the use of cell phones while driving, which might have saved 10,660 lives (25% of 42,642 fatalities) last year, you chose instead to go on what the press calls a mandatory helmet law "crusade", which in comparison might have saved at best only 769 lives. Had you made the responsible choice, Mr. Rosenker, our nation could be saving almost 15 TIMES AS MANY LIVES by restricting the use of cellphones by drivers rather than requiring helmets for riders.
I am no lawyer, but given these facts and pursuant to the provisions of United States Code Title 49, Chapter 11, Subchapter II, Paragraph (c) as I understand them...
***
(c) TERMS OF OFFICE AND REMOVAL.--The term of office of each member is 5 years. An individual appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the expiration of the term for which the predecessor of that individual was appointed, is appointed for the remainder of that term. When the term of office of a member ends, the member may continue to serve until a successor is appointed and qualified. The President may remove a member for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.
http://ntsb.gov/alj/NTSB_statute.htm
***
...I believe that immediate steps should be taken to see that you are removed from office on the grounds of clearly demonstrated inefficiency, neglect of duty, and malfeasance.
In distributing this communication, I am calling on all American motorcyclists, all motorcycle clubs and riding groups, and all state and national motorcyclists' rights organizations to call, write and email the White House and their United States Senators and Representatives to petition for and demand your resignation or termination as Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board.
Speaking strictly for myself and no other entities or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray's Biker Forum
Premier Member, Iron Butt Association
Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation
Member and Elite Legislative Supporter, American Motorcyclist Association
***
"The battle for bikers' rights is not about patches, parties or poker runs. We fight to protect the freedom and promote the interests of American motorcyclists ... to defend our right to choose our own modes of transportation, attire and lifestyle ... to deter and defy discrimination against us ... and to vanquish those who violate our rights or right-of-way."--Bruce Arnold
By Warren Woodward, Chair, State Legislative Committee
Street Bikers United Hawaii
Recent Trends in Fatal Motorcycle Crashes:
An Update ( http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2006/810606.pdf ) is 72 pages of charts and analysis from The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) based on the 10 years from 1995 to 2004. It should have been called Fabricating Trends in Fatal Motorcycle Crashes. Here's why:
Cherry Picking - NHTSA is cherry picking data. In the opening summary, motorcycle fatalities are presented as a crisis: "Since 1997 motorcycle rider fatalities have increased 89%." Wow, sounds bad, but over the years I have received many solicitations from investment newsletters. As a result I've learned how easy it is to pick certain time frames to make profits look good. It's called cherry picking and it's what NHTSA is doing here. Go back 15 years, since 1990, and fatalities have only increased 24%. If you go back 25 years, from 1980 to 2004, the fatalities actually decrease 22%. From the graph below of yearly rider fatalities you can see what I mean:
So instead of starting out the report with a horrifying 89% increase in fatalities, NHTSA could have begun by saying that since 1980 motorcycle fatalities have dropped 22%. But then there's no crisis, and we wouldn't need to be saved, or at least not by them.
Helmets - A chart on page 36 of the report shows that the helmet use rate in fatal crashes was basically unchanged over the 10 years, 1995 to 2004. If helmets "save lives", shouldn't more of the dead be helmetless, especially as fatalities rose 89%? Yet helmeted riders consistently comprise the dead majority at around 54% of fatalities every year. Of course that doesn't stop NHTSA from calling for mandatory helmet laws.
Ultimately, the helmet numbers are useless because they do not reflect anything except how many were wearing and how many were not at time of death. NHTSA might as well have a chart showing how many riders were or were not wearing wristwatches. How can anyone tell if a helmet would have helped or not? Just because someone died without a helmet does not mean they would have lived with a helmet. And how many of the helmeted dead had snapped necks or basal skull fracture? NHTSA doesn't say.
A similar trick was played here in Hawaii just recently by the state Department of Transportation. They emphasized that two thirds of the riders who died in Hawaii last year were not wearing helmets. Of course the implication is that had they been wearing helmets they would not be dead. But we don't know that. The fact is that helmets have not changed the death to accident ratio in any state where they have been mandated (see Helmet Law Facts at www.sbumaui.org ).
I think fatalities went up over the 10 years for the same reason they went down over the 25 years. And if you find that reason be sure and tell me. My point is there is no one reason. All I know is the more experience and training a rider has the better, but even that won't save you when you're time is up.
VMT - Much of the report is simply invalid since it is based on NHTSA's fictitious Vehicle Miles Traveled. In NHTSA's National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety they actually admit: "Unfortunately, vehicle miles of travel (VMT) data for motorcycles are not reported directly and must be estimated." Fabricated would be a more accurate word than estimated ( see addendum 2, Helmet Law Facts, at www.sbumaui.org ). When it comes to VMT, NHTSA is winging it.
Speed & Alcohol - According to NHTSA, over the 10 years, speed related deaths decreased 6% and alcohol related deaths decreased 8%. That's great, but I always question the accuracy of those numbers. For example, we had a rider here on Maui cross the double yellow line while going up Haleakala. Cars coming down the other way are usually doing at least 60. The Maui News said the accident might have been speed related. Sorry, from where I sit it was intelligence related (and he was wearing a helmet).
Engine Displacement - One of the more troubling aspects of the report is NHTSA's fixation on engine displacement. There are 23 different charts, almost 1/3 of the report's total charts, concerning engine displacement and fatalities--engine displacement and speed, engine displacement and type of crash, engine displacement and type of road, there's even one that compares engine displacement with the days people died!
We all know that motorcycle engine displacement has increased over the years and that a 750, for example, is no longer a "big bike". Somehow though, a popular myth is being created, and NHTSA is fueling it, that increased displacement = increased fatality, especially amongst inexperienced riders. Having got into plenty of accidents when I was uneducated and inexperienced on my first bike which displaced 175cc, I have never bought into this myth.
There is so much more to a motorcycle than displacement. Power to weight ratio has a lot more to do with speed. There are plenty of 600cc rockets that can smoke a bagger with more than twice that displacement. Weight, seat height, rider position, center of gravity, tires, braking capability, and rider experience all play a role in how well a machine can be handled. Yet NHTSA has not figured out how to quantify those so they are not part of the mix. And NHTSA will never be able to quantify karma.
Looking long term, I see NHTSA's displacement fixation leading to a push for graduated licensing whereby riders would be prohibited from owning larger displacement bikes until they passed certain exams over a certain number of years. Outrageous? It's already happening in Europe. NHTSA is laying the groundwork now--creating the problem by cherry picking the displacement data--and the solution will be a graduated license system. I'd bet on it.
Blame the Rider - The undercurrent running throughout NHTSA's report is blame the rider. We are either too young, too old, too fast, too drunk, or the motor's too big. Certainly riders do die because of one or a combination of those. However, there are 75 charts in this 72 page report and not one showing rider fatalities caused by the Right Of Way violations of other road users.
NHTSA is as blind as a Right Of Way violator.
What's worse is that, as taxpayers, we pay their undeserved salaries.
Letter: Driver awareness will save more lives
Op-Ed · August 29, 2007, West Branch Times Online, West Branch, Iowa
http://www.westbranchtimes.com/article.php?id=2091
Occasionally an article or editorial catches my eye, and often for all the wrong reasons. This is another of those occasions.
I know critical thinking is in the curriculum of most colleges, and virtually all journalism courses. Taking a giant leap of faith and assuming you did take said class, or that it was part of a class you took, perhaps I can convince you to take down your critical thinking cap, blow off the dust, and don it for a while.
The wearing of a seat belt in an automobile does not, in any manner, equate to the wearing of a helmet on the head of a motorcyclist. Not even a little. The ONLY relationship between the two is that they’re both termed “safety equipment” by their pundits and manufacturers.
In an automobile, you are surrounded by thousands of pounds of metal, plastic, glass and sundry other materials, surrounded by dozens of blunt or sharp/pointy objects and hard protrusions, all of which your body tends to bang against when the forces applied to it during deflection and deceleration that occur in an accident come into play. The main purpose of the seat belt is to limit this interaction between the body and all those protrusions and objects. Its secondary purpose is to assist in keeping your body from interacting with the objects outside the cocoon of your vehicle by ejection, thus preventing your body from being subjected to the further indignity of being compressed or ground/abraded by the vehicle it formerly piloted.
And, in certain circumstances, they will be responsible for the death of the occupant they were designed to protect.
None of the above transfers to the use of a helmet by a motorcyclist, except that they too will sometimes be responsible for the death of the rider they were designed to protect.
Keeping our critical thinking caps on, let’s press on.
Fact - A motorcycle helmet, in order to comply with DOT standards, must be able to absorb an impact equivalent to a six foot man falling down. That is the entire design specification.
Fact - A motorcycle helmet adds as much as seven pounds to the standard load carried by the cervical vertebra, all of it above the fulcrum point of the basal skull interconnect.
Fact - The incidence of accidents are directly proportional to the fatigue of the persons involved. Studies have concluded that a fatigued driver is actually worse than a drunk driver.
Fact - Additional pounds equals fatigue.
Fact - Although the Delta-V of the forces involved vary considerably, depending on speeds of the individual objects involved, weights of the objects, and several other data bits, the G forces involved in an automobile/motorcycle collision can routinely be as high as 200. Meaning that three pound helmet is now exerting 600 pounds of force through the basal skull interconnect. The human body is simply not designed to absorb these types of forces without considerable damage.
Now, without getting into the dozens of other facts I could pass along to you, based on in depth research, what do the facts above tell you about your pet theory?
I implore you, as I have with many of your fellow editors and journalists, do the research. Wear your critical thinking cap while doing the research. Then, form your opinion.
As for me, after much research and careful consideration, I’ve reached the following conclusions:
Wearing helmets saves lives.
Not wearing helmets saves lives.
Wearing other protective clothing/gear saves lives.
Not wearing other protective clothing/gear saves lives.
Motorcyclists learning how to ride alert and safely saves more lives.
Automobile drivers learning how to share the road and be cognitive of motorcycles saves the most lives.
And, before I let you off the hook, your entire editorial was, for all intents and purposes, nothing more than rhetoric. It pushes all the right buttons, but anyone giving any real thought to it is sure to see it as rhetoric. You offered no evidence that a helmet would have altered the outcome of the reported collision. You didn’t say what the coroner ruled as cause of death. In fact, the manslaughter victim in your article is there as nothing more than a red herring.
Dr. John Myers
Clinton, Tenn.
BRUCE ON BIKERS RIGHTS
September 2007
HOW DO WE GET CAGERS TO HANG UP AND DRIVE? (One Hundred Dollars for the Best Idea!)
In last month's "Hang Up and Drive!" installment, I pointed out that there are currently 236 million cell phone subscribers on our roadways ... that 73% of them are talking while they are driving ... that cell phone conversations impair their driving skills as much if they were intoxicated with alcohol... and that consequently they are four times more likely to cause or be involved in an accident than motorists who responsibly shut up and steer. And for those of you who discount these statistics--or for whatever reason refuse to accept the fact that cell phone conversation-impaired cagers are one of the greatest and growing threats to the safety of American motorcyclists--I relate the following:
Saturday, 11 August 2007, marked the end of eleven days and 5,921 miles in the saddle for me. I rode 2,365 miles from Miami Beach, Florida to Gillette, Wyoming, which was my base for this year's Sturgis Motorcycle Rally. From there, I rode another 1,135 miles touring through the scenic Black Hills, Badlands and Big Horn Mountains of Wyoming, South Dakota and Montana. I then logged another 2,421 miles of saddletime returning home. I was very fortunate to be able to complete this annual pilgrimage, as I NEARLY LOST MY LIFE 3 TIMES IN THE FIRST 36 HOURS OF THE RIDE. And no, I was not assaulted by Al Qaeda or run down by drunken undocumented workers, so deporting Mohammed or Pedro would not have eliminated the threat. The guilty parties who violated my right-of-way, and almost caused me to crash three times in the first fifteen hundred miles of my ride to Sturgis, were CAUCASIAN CAGERS IMPAIRED BY CELL PHONE CONVERSATIONS.
Incident #1. Early Wednesday morning, 1 August 2007, I was riding alone northbound going about 70 mph in the left of three lanes of the Florida Turnpike just above the Broward County line. The middle lane was empty, and just a nose ahead of me in the right lane was a typical soccer mom's oversized gas-guzzling SUV. For no apparent reason, the dark-colored SUV started drifting left. As it did so, I observed that the driver was a 30-ish white female with a cell phone glued to her ear, obviously paying no attention to what lane she was in, and oblivious to the fact that she was on a collision course with me. I hit both brakes and sounded my enhanced H-D horns, which startled her out of her conversational impairment just in time to swerve back to the right and out of my lane. Realizing she had just missed sideswiping me by less than two feet, she mouthed an "OOPS!" and waved her now empty right hand. I replied with a message and gesture that were somewhat less cordial, but clear!
ly understood.
Incident #2. Around 10:00am Thursday morning, 2 August 2007, I was heading eastbound on I-24 through southern Illinois, approaching its terminus at I-57. I was riding drag on the right in a tight formation of four bikes going about 75 mph in the left lane as we attempted to pass a semi and the van and car behind it. The two lead bikes were about half-way even with the dark red high-profile Dodge delivery van when its driver apparently decided he wanted to pass the semi as well. He did not bother to use his turn signals or look to see what might be in the lane to the left of him. All four of us riders slammed on our brakes as the van just kept coming left, missing the right lead bike by inches. The van proceeded to pass the semi, with our four bikes behind him now, and then pulled back into the right lane. We sped up, and when I came alongside him, I saw the driver was a 40-ish white male, yakking away into his large white cell phone. He gave no acknowledgment to my communica!
tion of displeasure, and I don't think he even realized what he had just done. He just kept on talking. I bet if this clown had taken out a solo rider he would not have stopped, and the state troopers would've reported to the media that the rider died because he "lost control of his motorcycle".
Incident #3. Early in the afternoon of Thursday, 2 August 2007, I was riding alone eastbound on I-70, approaching the exit to I-435 in Kansas City, Missouri. I was going about 65 mph in the right lane of the interstate, coming around a white dually pulling a trailer full of farm equipment on the left. I was about even with the front of the trailer when the truck's right turn signal started blinking and the dually started coming hard over into my lane. I quickly geared down and opened up my throttle to shoot through a narrowing slot of safety, and made it with a margin of just a second or two. I then looked back into the truck's cab, and sure enough the gray-haired Caucasian male behind the wheel was holding a cell phone to his right ear, only belatedly realizing how close he'd come to clipping me with his right front fender.
These are not the first "close calls due to cellphone calls" I have reported to you. But my concern is not with the incidents I (and others, perhaps you) have survived. My concern is the incident that I (or others, perhaps YOU) may not survive. So I ask you:
HOW DO WE GET CAGERS TO HANG UP AND DRIVE?
We can lobby for laws banning the use of cell phones while driving, but how long will it take to get those laws on the books, how many motorcyclists will be maimed or killed in the interim, and how effective will they be in the end? Most of the laws passed to date ban only the use of hand-held devices and exempt hands-free technologies, but studies show that it is the conversation and not the device that distracts and impairs the driver. These laws also tend to have minimal penalties and be difficult to enforce, so many drivers simply ignore them:
Lobbying for laws banning the use of cell phones while driving certainly increases public awareness of the issue, but passing "feel good" laws that are painless to defy will not make our roads any safer. There will always be those who still "talk and drive", just like there will always be those who still "drink and drive". So, given that cell phone call impairment has the same effect as alcoholic intoxication, perhaps a more equitable and effective legislative route might be to amend our DUI laws to apply the same penalties for DWI ("Driving While Inattentive"):
Here again, though, I wonder how long will it take to amend the DUI laws, how many motorcyclists will be maimed or killed in the interim, and how effective will the DWI amendments be in the end? Like I said, there will always be those who will "drink and drive", and there will always be those who will "talk and drive". So once more, I ask you:
HOW DO WE GET CAGERS TO HANG UP AND DRIVE?
Statehouse politicos and safetycrats may someday give us a solution, but what can bikers do to seek our own solution? I believe it is time for American motorcyclists to defend our right to ride, and to safely share the road. I believe it is time for us to TAKE THIS ISSUE TO THE STREETS, and to develop both organizational programs and individual plans of action that will mitigate the inattentional blindness of cackling cagers by increasing motorists' expectations of severe negative consequences associated with the maiming or killing of motorcyclists.
I believe this must be our strategy, and we must now define our tactics. I am asking all concerned motorcyclists to contribute to this process. And after what I experienced on my ride to Sturgis, I am willing to pay for your participation. Here is the offer:
IF YOU HAVE ANY SERIOUS, ORIGINAL, FEASIBLE AND LEGITIMATE IDEAS AS TO WHAT ACTIONS AMERICAN MOTORCYCLISTS CAN TAKE ON THE STREETS TO ENCOURAGE CAGERS TO HANG UP AND DRIVE AND/OR PENALIZE THOSE WHO DON'T, PLEASE POST IT ONLINE HERE:
THE CONTRIBUTOR OF THE BEST QUALIFYING IDEA POSTED NO LATER THAN 15 SEPTEMBER 2007 WILL RECEIVE A CASH PRIZE OF ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($100.00). ALL ENTRIES WILL BE JUDGED BY BRUCE ARNOLD, WHO WILL ANNOUNCE THE WINNER AND MAKE THE AWARD BY 15 OCTOBER 2007.
I'd offer more if I could afford it, but hey, I just got back from Sturgis.
Until Next Time ... Ride Long, Ride Free!
Bruce Arnold
"The battle for bikers' rights is not about patches, parties or poker runs. We fight to protect the freedom and promote the interests of American motorcyclists ... to defend our right to choose our own modes of transportation, attire and lifestyle ... to deter and defy discrimination against us ... and to vanquish those who violate our rights or right-of-way."--Bruce Arnold
http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/bikers_rights.php
Please post your comments and replies here:
TAKE TIME TO SAY GOOD BYE TO A FRIEND
Subject:
My parents told me about Mr. Common Sense early in my life and told me I would do well to call on him when making decisions. It seems he was always around in my early years but less and less as time passed by until today I read his obituary. Please join me in a moment of silence in remembrance.
For Common Sense had served us all so well for so many generations.
Obituary
Common Sense
Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.
He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm, life isn't always fair, and maybe it was my fault.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not children are in charge).
His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.
Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job they themselves failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer Aspirin, sun lotion or a sticky plaster to a student; but could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.
Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims. Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself f rom a burglar in your own home and the burglar can sue you for assault.
Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust; his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. He is survived by three stepbrothers; I Know my Rights, Someone Else is to Blame, and I'm a Victim.
Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone. If you still remember him pass this on. If not, join the majority and do nothing.
THOUGHT FOR THE DAY: A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but the following explanation may help put that figure in perspective:
A billion seconds ago it was 1975, and the Vietnam War was grinding down.
A billion minutes ago was nearly 2,000 years, during the time of Christ.
A billion hours ago was over 112 thousand years, and our ancestors were still living in the Stone Age.
A billion days ago it was 2.7 million BC, and hominids were learning to walk upright.
A billion years ago earth’s ecosystem became fully formed, and the first multi-cellular organisms appeared.
A billion dollars ago was only 12 hours ago, at the rate Washington takes our country into further debt.
Posted May 21, 2007
The message that "May is Motorcycle Awareness Month" was apparently never delivered to motorists in and around Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, where "Myrtle Beach Bike Week 2007" ends tomorrow. With one day remaining, the score now stands at CAGERS 4, BIKERS 0. That's right... Negligent, inattentive, distracted and/or impaired motorists have MURDERED FOUR MOTORCYCLISTS in Myrtle Beach this week:
1. Motorcyclist James Bragg, 43, was killed when his bike was rear-ended by an automobile driver. And the cager's penalty for this right-of-way violation? No ticket has been issued, and no arrest has been made.
2. Motorcyclist Donny Macklen, 51, was killed in a crash caused by an automobile driver violating his right-of-way and turning left in front of him. And the penalty? No mention of any charges.
3. Motorcyclist Michael Delamere, a US Marine, was also killed in a crash caused by an automobile driver violating his right-of-way and turning left in front of him. And the negligent cager's penalty? A failure-to-yield
ticket.
4. Motorcyclist Steve Sink, 54, was likewise killed in a crash caused by an automobile driver violating his right-of-way and turning left in front of
him. And that driver's penalty? No ticket has been issued, and no arrest
has been made.
Kill a Biker ... and go to jail? NOPE.
Kill a Biker ... and lose your license? NOPE.
Kill a Biker ... and pay a fine? PROBABLY NOT.
How long are we going to sit back and let the safetycrats spin statistics to convince the media and the masses that motorcyclists are the problem, and that helmet laws are the solution? LIDS YES ... BUT LID LAWS NO! HELMET LAWS COULD NOT HAVE PREVENTED ANY OF THESE FATAL CRASHES.
When are we going to stop kissing bureaucratic butts for a few measly Motorcycle Safety bucks, and start kicking ass with corporate social responsibility (CSR) and other independently-funded MOTORCYCLE AWARENESS campaigns?
Remember WHY WE FIGHT: The battle for bikers' rights is not about patches, parties or poker runs. We fight to protect the freedom and promote the interests of American motorcyclists ... to defend our right to choose our own modes of transportation, attire and lifestyle ... to deter and defy discrimination against us ... and to vanquish those who violate our rights or right-of-way.
IT IS TIME WE STOP FIGHTING EACH OTHER, AND START TAKING THIS FIGHT TO THE CAGERS WHO ARE KILLING US!
Speaking strictly for myself and no other individuals or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Eamil:
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray's Biker Forum Premier Member, Iron Butt Association Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation Member and Elite Legislative Supporter, American Motorcyclist Association
Posted May 3, 2007
Once again, safetycrats are confusing the UTILITY OF HELMETS with the FUTILITY OF HELMET LAWS. There can be no question that any given helmet may provide some amount of protection to any given head. But the amount of protection provided is the same regardless of whether that head is on a motorcycle or in an automobile. So if you mandate helmets for motorcyclists, be sure to mandate helmets for all other motorists as well. You want to follow NHTSA's guidelines? Well why not NASCAR's? Besides, lidding cagers might help them focus on the road rather than their cell phone conversations!"
"Mandatory motorcycle helmet laws are discriminatorily unconstitutional in that--by mandating helmets for motorcyclists as opposed to ALL motorists--they violate the "equal protection" guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. HELMETS CANNOT PREVENT CRASHES, and all mandatory motorcycle helmet laws do is make negligent, care-less, distracted and impaired motorists feel less guilty about maiming and killing motorcycle riders."
Bruce Arnold
Email:
Posted March 20, 2007
What's all the Racquet About?
Surely you've heard by now that some big name motorcycle builder was slapped with an even bigger monetary fine by a group of underpaid whack-jobs who can't find real jobs; the California Air Resources Board. (CARB) The six figure fine was handed to this disingenuous parasite for selling a batch of bikes that didn't meet state "emissions standards." I've been telling you for years that smog check for bikes looms large on our horizon (confirmed by CARB this year) but nobody listens. It seems only a select few of us actually give a damn while guys like this live in denial and blame US when THEY get fined, because they expect someone else to fight for their "rights." I try to keep everyone updated on all the ridiculous fines being handed down, but the community didn't take any real interest in the fines of the REAL shops that keep our sport rollin'.
Look, this is easy, the guy fancies himself as a Biker, with the cutesy little thug uniform and all that hoopla, but his bad-ass reputation was entirely bought and paid for, years ago, by somebody else who's walkin' around with a couple of teeth missing. As an avid rider, I can tell you the guy just doesn't exist in my world. I tell people outside our realm that he really isn't one of "us." He's just another porous ego-sponge who's momma didn't pet him enough as a child. How unfortunate…for us.
To maintain my ideological consistency on relevant real-world issues, I apply a few simplistic analogies to matters that might cause moral conflict within my psyche. On immigration, I apply the "Not in My House Analogy." On religion (and riding IS my religion) I apply the "Not in My Church Analogy." On issues regarding Club L.A.M.E., (Look At Me Everybody) the preening peacocks who go around revvin' their pipes and spoiling things for the rest of us, the Chrome-O-Sexuals™ who salivated at seeing one of us at a stop light and traipsed right down to the Stealership™ to BUY that attitude and freedom lifestyle for themselves without any regard for the social responsibility of tithing to our church, for them, I created the "Tennis Analogy."
The Tennis Analogy, applied to those who perpetuate the myth of being cool without sacrifice, let's say, builders, goes like this; You make fancy tennis racquets but you don't really like to play tennis. You're an artisan with fiberglass and strings, but you've never given support to the tennis community.
You don't join the various tennis organizations and you don't even know who it is that keeps the tennis courts lit up at night. When volunteers from the tennis organizations stop by your shop because they need help, you say, "WHO are you?
And what can you do for ME?" (True, he did)
You aren't there on the state capitol steps with the rest of us at any protest rally for "Tennis Rights" and you certainly aren't there for "Tennis Awareness Month" which is now recognized by the legislature because of US. No, you get an exemption because you're somebody special. Well, you might fool a bunch of mindless couch potatoes with chrome grip tape and titanium doo-dads, but your tennis racquets have no soul if they aren't played with. Who needs a useless tennis racquet in their garage? The REAL tennis players have REAL life tennis stories to tell about their racquets, matches won and lost. The time they got a haircut with Jimmy Connor or bought a drink for Arthur Ashe. Picking up balls for Martina Navratilova.
You never gave a dime to the Tennis Voter Guide, you don't even vote. You want the prestige of being the go-to-guy in the tennis world and you certainly dress the part. You wear the fancy little tennis bracelet, you sport the sexy white tennis shorts and you mug it up for the camera. That racquet in your hand brings fame and fortune. You wear the same goofy little sweat band that Agassi wears, but when it comes to brass tacks, you're only doing it to pillage what ya can out of the tennis community before you get bored and move on. You NEVER give back, it's just take, take, take. Count the money and let somebody else bleed for the right to swing a racquet around. You just make the tennis racquets and you paint 'em up pretty, it's not your job. Uh huh, right.
If I'm gonna play tennis, I'm gonna play with someone who actually enjoys the sport and understands what it is to preserve tennis for future generations, by doing good deeds and hard work. One of the more popular shirts to come out of Wimbledon said, "_ _ _ _ _ Who?" I live my life by that creedo and the other shirt I own that says, "Fifteen grand and 15 matches doesn't make you a tennis player." The back of that shirt sez: "If you see my racquet on a trailer, call 911, it's being stolen!"
Don't play coy, conveniently forget to get involved, make a Ka-Zillion dollars by breaking all the rules and then have the audacity to ask US why WE didn't do enough to protect you. Ka-Zillionaire that he is, he STILL can't find the chump change in the petty cash drawer to join an MRO. (Motorcyclist Rights Organization) SAME as those other bozos on the east coast, and they're Ka-Jillionaires. If they won't support us, why on earth should we support them? We're VOLUNTEERS, willing to sacrifice our left nut for the sport while their leech-like conceit exists only to take FROM the sport.
So, be honest. How many of you have a fancy tennis racquet with a slick paint job in your garage? Now, how many of you actually PLAY tennis with that racquet?
And here's the grand slam; How many of you drive around with a tacky tennis sticker on the rear window of your pick-up truck because it makes you look cool?
~splatt
Posted March 3, 2007
So simple that even a brain surgeon should understand
“If you ride a motorcycle, ALWAYS WEAR A HELMET when you ride, and try to wear protective clothing like a leather jacket. Better yet, sell your motorcycle and buy a car.” (Quoted directly from the aftercare instructions of a teaching hospital in Virginia) From the above quote there is no doubt about the agenda of this medical facility – if given the chance they will advocate for banning motorcycles altogether.
More and more the medical profession has taken it upon itself to use its money, resources, reputation and influence to affect directly how we should live our lives. But doctors are just people who have their own limitations and prejudices and have just as many failings and faults as the rest of us, albeit with much more significantly negative results when they screw up. According to the Institute of Medicine, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, at least 98,000 Americans die unnecessarily every year from medical mistakes. This is more than 21 times the number of people who died nationwide last year from any and all motorcycle-accident related injuries (not just brain injuries). The United States Department of Health and Human Services puts this number at 120,000 – 26 times the number of all motorcyclist deaths. HealthGrades, an organization whose mission is to monitor and assure the quality of health care in America, puts the number at over 250,000 - 55 times the number of all motorcyclist deaths. The additional annual cost to the public for these medical errors is $77 Billion, and with out-of-court settlements (paid by medical malpractice insurance but passed immediately on to the rest of us) the true numbers and costs are surely even more staggering. A major overhaul of how the nation addresses medical errors has been called for since 1995 but the medical profession has not appeared to answer the call. When I asked a brain surgeon to explain why this was and what he was doing to help solve the problem he became outraged that anyone would question his eminence.
One of the most basic errors that doctors make is not considering how the treatments they administer or prescribe might actually cause other more serious problems. Through negative drug interactions, misdiagnoses and botched surgeries, and by recommending specific “safety” devices, doctors have directly and indirectly been responsible for death, paralysis, and irreversible brain damage just to name a few major categories. If this isn’t scary enough, consider the subject of doctors accidentally amputating healthy limbs. In their article titled “Wrong site surgeries on the rise” USATODAY, on April 17, 2006, reported that “Despite years of patient-safety efforts, an increasing number of health care facilities have reported doctors mistakenly removing the wrong limbs or organs, slicing into the wrong side of bodies and performing surgery on the wrong patients.” And, according to the head of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Health Care Organizations, “It’s getting worse.” The article goes on to state that some surgeons, particularly those who “believe they would never make such a stupid mistake”, often ignore their own safety protocols. This might strike enough fear in your heart to make you want to run for your life at the sight of those cute little white lab coats that they always seem to trot out in when they are not practicing medicine before our legislators. It should at least be good reason for our legislators to reconsider how much credibility they assign to doctors who stand before them and argue that Virginia should limit freedom of choice for its citizens.
This problem has shown itself in the motorcycle helmet law debate with doctors (usually brain surgeons) arguing vehemently for mandatory helmet usage and not even considering any countering evidence or argument. When asked about treating open versus closed head injuries they all respond grudgingly that the former have fewer complications and are easier to treat. In fact, in serious traumatic brain injury cases where a helmet may have prevented skull damage it will also invariably increase the force of impact thereby worsening brain damage and swelling. The first order of business in these cases is to saw open the skull to relieve the increased pressure before it results in irreversible brain damage, paralysis and other severe and very costly health complications. I have asked brain surgeons to consider that a 4 pound object (the average weight of a Department of Transportation approved helmet) traveling at 50 miles per hour has the equivalent weight of 200 pounds, and how they think that might cause or worsen brain injuries; typically, they refuse to respond. When I ask this of orthopedic surgeons a few have admitted that adding even an ounce or two to the head in an equivalent collision would undoubtedly worsen injuries to the neck and spine and greatly increase the chances of death, paraplegia and quadriplegia. The medical examiner who performed the autopsy on Dale Earnhardt actually admitted that the helmet he was wearing had worsened the damage to Earnhardt’s neck and contributed to his death.
All doctors must take the Hippocratic Oath which first requires that they do no harm. Ironically, according to a July 12, 2006 article in the Cumberland Times News, doctors are now the 3rd leading cause of death in America lagging behind only heart disease and cancer. The members of the medical profession really need to deal with their own problems before representing themselves to our legislators as safety experts for the rest of us or even as serious advocates for our health and well being.
GW Peterson,
ABATE of
Virginia
Thanks to the Rudy at Garden State ABATE for references
West Virginia
HB-2834 our Riders Choice bill hasn't been defeated. Just laid to rest till next session. The West Virginia House has been working at it's finest this session.
At the outset we started off with a new Speaker, who appointed new committees, and promised everyone would get a fair hearing. But in West Virginia, political promises are just a tool to make politicians look good. Our bill was introduced in the House Roads & Transportation Committee with the promise of a single reference. It passed the committee with a recommendation to pass, but the Committee Chair decided to refer it to Judiciary to die a quiet death. At least that's what she thought.
It didn't take too long for us to pinpoint the problem in the House Judiciary Committee. Delegate Carrie Webster, Committee Chair, refused to give our bill a fair hearing. The irony of this is that she is Pro-choice! For everything except Bikers Rights. Each time we approached her, she gave us something to do to get the bill moving. Each time we did as she asked, she would give us another useless task. That didn't last long. Now we know better than to show our asses in the statehouse, but there are smarter ways of doing things. It had become obvious that we were being stonewalled by one person. By our count the votes were there, but she wouldn't let the bill come up for a vote. So, we issued a World Wide Alert. One target, one message.
"Move the bill!"
ABATE of West Virginia would like to thank everyone that helped with phone calls, letters, FAXs, and e-mails. I'm not just talking about West Virginia Bikers here. I'm talking about Bikers from all 50 states including Hawaii, and Alaska, and some other countries. You know who you are, and while I haven't seen all the correspondence, I have plenty of comments from West Virginia House members to attest to the fact. Thank you all from the grateful Bikers of West Virginia.
Even though the bill is for all intents, and purposes dead for this year, the actions of the legislature have steeled us with resolve. We intend to use what we have learned this session to expand our efforts not only during the next session, but the rest of this year leading up to the next one.
One thing is for sure. The West Virginia House of Delegates, and in particular one Carrie Webster knows for sure we were there, and we are there to stay.
As a side note here is an excerpt from her answer to one of our members.
As far as this particular issue is concerned, I polled our committee members and the bill lacked sufficient support to move through the committee at this juncture. I do recognize the grassroots support this bill has and will discuss running it next year. I would note that we ran this bill several years ago and it failed.
Delegate Webster
While we disagree on the vote count, for the record, a similar bill was addressed in the House several years ago, but it passed the House handily. It met a narrow defeat in the Senate.
"DUCK"
MRF State Rep
WV ABATE Communications Coordinator
Open Letter to new AMA President
Rob Dingman
President
American Motorcyclist Association
13515 Yarmouth Drive
Pickerington, OH 43147
Email:
Dear Rob:
I congratulate you on your recent appointment as President of the American Motorcyclist Association ("AMA"). I applaud your commitment to "A New Beginning", as expressed in your article on page 18 of the March 2007 issue of American Motorcyclist magazine, wherein you state:
"... the AMA has put many changes into place, with more in the works. The single objective of all this is to better enable the organization to deliver in three key areas: rights. riding. racing.... Those three words are more than just the tagline on the Association's logo. They represent the core of this organization. The AMA has a proud history of protecting your right to ride, of sharing with you the unique experience of motorcycling, and of creating an annual calendar of thousands of amateur and professional races for riders and fans.... To be successful, it is imperative that the Association stick to what it does best."
These words, however, raise more questions than they answer. For starters, how is it that the AMA will achieve "a new beginning" by sticking to "what it does best"? For that premise to be logically consistent, then you must be tactfully conceding that (a) the AMA has not been doing what it does best, and/or (b) the AMA has not been doing what it is supposed to do. And with a few qualifications, Rob, I am afraid I have to agree with you. Let's assume for the sake of discussion that (1) it is possible for one organization to simultaneously and effectively focus on three missions, and
(2) the three missions of the AMA are those identified as "racing", "riding"
and "rights":
Racing
From what I see as an AMA member, the focus on racing is nothing short of pervasive. Racing content and coverage dominate the AMA website and American Motorcyclist magazine. And if Google Alerts are any measure, then at least 90 percent of the AMA's press releases must be racing-related. I even receive what appear to be extensive and expensive snailmail packages devoted entirely to the AMA racing agenda.
Riding
I don't spend much time on this portion of the AMA website, but just about every monthly issue of American Motorcyclist magazine contains one to a few articles by writers sharing "...the unique experience of motorcycling".
These pieces provide a refreshing break from the Nationwide/Geico/Progressive/Other insurance ads and colorful pictures of brain-bucketed, body-armored riders that might otherwise dominate that publication.
Rights
"Rights" may come first in the AMA tag line, but from every outward appearance, "rights" is the least important of the three AMA missions.
* Yes, I know you claim a "... victory in getting federal funding for the first new study of motorcycle crashes in more than a quarter century". But if it was such a great victory, then why must we pay for the study with our tax dollars, and our AMA membership dollars, and again through individual contributions? And besides the "funding" we got, just how much input did we get regarding the methodology by which the study will be conducted, the data
crunched, and the results presented?
* And Yes, I am aware of the AMA's much-touted Justice For All (JFA) program. But that model defines right-of-way-violation penalties that are neither severe nor specific to the maiming or killing of motorcyclists. And to date, I have seen no statistics suggesting that any legislation based on JFA has had any measurable impact in terms of reducing the number of motorcycle crashes, injuries and deaths attributable to negligent, care-less, distracted and impaired motorists.
* And Yes, I am aware of the somewhat dated "AMA position in support of voluntary helmet use":
http://www.amadirectlink.com/legisltn/positions/helmet.asp
But other than lip service, what is the AMA actually doing to support that position? Why is it that every time a state legislative hearing on mandatory helmet laws is conducted, pro-helmet law lobbyists from the American Automobile Association (AAA) are almost always present, while the AMA remains conspicuous in its absence?
***
My challenge to you and your AMA management team is a simple one, Rob:
Either (a) stop including the word "rights" in the AMA tag line as an enticement for membership dues, or (b) start delivering what your members should expect from an outfit that alleges to be the nation's largest "motorcyclists' rights organization".
Speaking strictly for myself and no other individuals or organizations,
Bruce Arnold
Email:
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray's Biker Forum Premier Member, Iron Butt Association Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation Member and Elite Legislative Supporter, American Motorcyclist Association
***
The HTML version of this letter is available here:
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/motorcyclists_rights/bikersrights0703.php
26 January 2007
An Open Letter to the Salt Lake City Council
Salt Lake City Council Office
451 S. State Street Room 304
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Phone: (801) 535-7600
Fax: (801) 535-7651
Comment Line: (801) 535-7654
Email: Council.Comments@slcgov.com
To the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
According to the email communication from "Environmental Advisor to the Mayor" Jordan Gates appended below, it appears that despite his earlier statements to the contrary, Mayor Rocky Anderson intends to place before you a Proposed Helmet Ordinance "... requiring helmets for bicyclists, motorcyclists, and persons operating motor-driven cycles of all ages". I am writing to remind you that good intentions often lead to bad legislation ...
to suggest to you that attempting to implement and enforce this ordinance will be a logistical nightmare and fiscal catastrophe for Salt Lake City ...
and to assure you that whatever actions you take to oppose or support this measure will be remembered by your constituents and reflected in their future votes. I also offer the following argument for your consideration:
Let me begin by asking a simple question, WHERE'S THE FIRE?
I have no problem with anyone attempting to reduce "... the number of serious injuries or deaths among citizens". I further accept that there are times, places and conditions where a helmet can be an asset, and I concede that in certain specific and limited circumstances "... helmets have been proven to reduce serious head injuries and deaths". In return, I ask you to concede that whatever protection a helmet provides, it offers equally to the heads of not only bicyclists and motorcyclists, but all motorists as well as pedestrians, boaters, bathers, and even the heads of Councilmen seated in their chambers ... and to mandate such protection for any one group at the exclusion of any other would be discriminatory. I also ask you to accept that there are many more and far better ways to save lives with much more effectiveness and efficiency than helmet laws.
Consider, for example, the fact that nationwide OUR HIGHWAYS ARE MUCH SAFER THAN OUR HOSPITALS. According to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, 43,443 people were killed on our highways in 2005. (That number includes motorists and pedestrians as well as bicyclists and motorcyclists, and many or most of them would have died regardless of whether they were helmeted.) For that same year, the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths estimates that more than twice that number--at least 98,000 people--died as a result of needless hospital infections brought on by the carelessness and negligence of physicians and other care providers.
But let's say we ignore for now the fact that our doctors are killing us, and focus strictly on roadway safety. Again I have to ask, WHERE'S THE FIRE?
The State of Utah has a Department of Public Safety, and that department has a Highway Safety Office. I have to assume that office is staffed by people educated and trained in--or at least experienced and dedicated full-time to--roadway safety. These roadway safety professionals are specifically charged with determining the best ways to reduce traffic deaths and
injuries, and here is their strategic plan for fiscal year 2007:
FY2007 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR REDUCING TRAFFIC-RELATED DEATH AND INJURY http://www.highwaysafety.utah.gov/publications/FY2007Final.pdf
In this document, you will find no statements recommending mandatory helmet laws as a means of reducing roadway deaths and injuries among bicyclists and motorcyclists. In fact, in this document you will find no reference to the word "helmet" at all.
Why? BECAUSE THERE IS NO FIRE A HELMET LAW CAN PUT OUT!
According to NHTSA's latest statistics, for the entire state of Utah and the entire year of 2005, there were only 23 motorcyclist fatalities (5 of which were wearing helmets and died anyway) and only 3 bicyclist fatalities. As for injuries to bicyclists, the Utah Highway Safety Office plan is to "Continue the favorable trend by demonstrating a reduction in the serious injury and fatal bicycle-motor vehicle crash rate per 10,000 population to 1.6 in CY 2006" through educational efforts such as establishing "... branding for the 'Share The Road' identifier with bicycle programs, and increase the public awareness of bicycle laws and bicyclist
concerns". And although they note the need to "Reduce the upward trend in
the serious injury and fatal motorcycle crash rate per 10,000 population to
2.85 in CY 2006", they again suggest public awareness programs such as continuing "... partnership with the Driver License Division and the Utah Chapter of ABATE to distribute educational materials, and expand partnerships to other motorcycle and highway safety organizations".
In a nutshell, Councilmen, the full-time roadway safety professional staff of the State of Utah Department of Public Safety's Highway Safety Office obviously recognize that HELMETS DO NOT PREVENT ACCIDENTS, and wisely see the strategic solution to reducing roadway deaths and injuries as being to EDUCATE, NOT LEGISLATE.
So what does the staff of Mayor Rocky Anderson know about traffic safety that Utah's HSO staff does not? What qualifications give them superior insight in this venue?
To answer these questions, I offer you the resume of young Mr. Jordan Gates, Environmental Advisor to the Mayor, summarized here complete with photo:
http://www.csbs.utah.edu/recipient_bios.html
Of course, that resume expanded significantly once Mr. Gates graduated last
year:
"Jordan graduated magna cum laude from the University of Utah [2006] with a degree in Environmental Studies. While pursuing his undergraduate education, Jordan started and maintained a small business, Yewtah Refinishing, which restored old or damaged bathroom fixtures and countertops. He received the Eugene K Andreason Scholarship for outstanding academic performance."
http://www.ci.slc.ut.us/mayor/pressreleases/2006/PRjordangates80406.pdf
Mr. Gates is obviously a bright young man, Councilmen, and I would have no reservations about your hiring him to redecorate a restroom. But I fail to see what qualifies Mr. Gates, or any other member of the Mayor's staff, or the Mayor himself, to trump the roadway safety recommendations of the State of Utah's knowledgeable and experienced highway safety professionals, whose strategic plan it is to...
EDUCATE, NOT LEGISLATE.
I speak strictly for myself and no other individuals or organizations.
Bruce Arnold
Email:
Author and Publisher, LdrLongDistanceRider.com Co-Moderator, Bruce-n-Ray's Biker Forum Premier Member, Iron Butt Association Sustaining Member, Motorcycle Riders Foundation Member and Elite Legislative Supporter, American Motorcyclist Association
***
From: Chapman, Stevie
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 1:21 PM
To: XXX
Subject: Proposed Helmet Ordinance
To Whom It May Concern:
Thank you for your correspondence regarding a proposed helmet ordinance in Salt Lake City. Mayor Rocky Anderson recently held discussions with City staff about proposing an ordinance requiring helmets for bicyclists, motorcyclists, and persons operating motor-driven cycles of all ages. The proposal will include the option for a judge or hearing officer to waive the fine if a person agrees to purchase a helmet (first offense only). In turn, City staff has begun the process of holding discussions with City committees to gather initial public feedback on the proposal.
Roadway safety within SLC is currently enhanced by the Utah State law requiring helmet use by motorcyclists and persons operating motor-driven cycles under the age of 18. In addition, SLC continues to make great strides in improving the streetscape to encourage bicycling use and operator safety.
For example, Mayor Anderson recently signed a "complete streets" executive order requiring new City road construction or reconstruction projects to ensure accessibility for bicyclists and pedestrians, where appropriate.
However, regardless of improved facilities or educational programs, the fact is, accidents will continue to occur. Based on the correlation between the lack of helmet use and serious or fatal injuries for cyclists, the City Administration feels the benefits of wearing helmets should be extended to all age groups.
The proposed ordinance is currently being reviewed by City staff and the Mayor, and is scheduled to be submitted to the City Council in March.
Proposed ordinances are typically discussed at a City Council briefing, after which the City Council decides whether to continue considering the ordinance. If Council members find an ordinance is worthy of further consideration, the Council will then schedule a public hearing to solicit additional input from citizens.
Mayor Anderson understands an ordinance requiring the use of helmets has strong supporters as well as strong detractors. We hope, as with other laws passed to improve public safety (such as regulations requiring seat belts), residents will agree that reducing the number of serious injuries or deaths among citizens is a top priority which requires the sacrifice of using tested and proven safety equipment. Accidents happen, and for cyclists, helmets have been proven to reduce serious head injuries and deaths.
Adoption of a mandatory helmet law for cyclists of all ages in SLC will reduce serious head injuries and deaths.
Sincerely,
Jordan Gates
Environmental Advisor to the Mayor
Ms. Stevie Danielle Chapman
Staff Assistant
Office of the Mayor
801.535.7714 | Phone
801.535.6331 | Fax
The "bucket brigade" wants to tell you what constitutes motorcycle safety, even though most of them can't legally operate one. But what about helmet laws for cars and crosswalks? That must be different, since they'd have to obey the onerous laws they passionately inflict on others.
Letter from a constituent to Frank Lautenberg
Frank,
I am very concerned about the condition of Rt 295 in Southern New Jersey, where a motorcycle acciden happened in June '05. I tried to contact you about the problems this section of road brings, but never got a response, a replay, nothing, like you didn't even exist.
How come you are so concerned about a helmet law, but can't get a section of road fixed to help prevent accidents?
I saw a picture of YOU riding a motorcycle with OUT a helmet, don't you practice what you preach ??
Please get back to me..
CONCERNED REGISTERED VOTER
James Smith
<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
What is up with this guys.. He's got REAL issues.. I believe it was last year (maybe even longer) that a motorcyclist lost his life on Rt 295 (Down by Exit 17), He was making a lane change and lost control of his bike. How come Lautenberg (who's concerned with saftey) hasn't addressed getting this road repaired, and trying to prevent another accident ?
It appears that Rt 295 (down south) was only a 2 lane highway. They added a 3rd lane, abut off the years, the pavment seemed to have settled left the lanes uneven, off by as much as 6 inches.
I tried to address this concern to Frank Lautenberg, but never got a reply
VIRGINIA:
Statistics from Virginia:
I extracted the following from the DMV Traffic Crash Facts webpage http://www.dmvnow.com/webdoc/citizen/drivers/crash_facts.asp for the past 3 years:
In 2005 there were:
. 68 motorcycle occupants killed or 7.2 percent of all traffic fatalities
. 2,006 motorcycle occupants injured or 2.6 percent of all traffic
injuries
. 2,289 motorcycle crashes or 1.5 percent of all crashes
. 69 fatal crashes or 7.9 percent of all fatal crashes
. 1,876 personal injury crashes or 3.5 percent of all personal
injury crashes
. 344 property damage crashes or 0.3 percent of all property
damage crashes
. 136,978 motorcycles were registered in Virginia with 1.7 percent
involved in crashes
In 2004 there were:
. 56 motorcycle occupants killed or 6.1 percent of all traffic fatalities
. 1,802 motorcycle occupants injured or 2.3 percent of all traffic
injuries
. 2,000 motorcycle crashes or 1.3 percent of all crashes
. 58 fatal crashes or 6.9 percent of all fatal crashes
. 1,672 personal injury crashes or 3.0 percent of all personal
injury crashes
. 270 property damage crashes or 0.3 percent of all property
damage crashes
. 123,548 motorcycles were registered in Virginia with 1.7 percent
involved in crashes
In 2003 there were:
. 56 motorcycle occupants killed or 5.9 percent of all traffic fatalities
. 1,507 motorcycle occupants injured or 1.9 percent of all traffic
injuries
. 1,713 motorcycle crashes or 1.1 percent of all crashes
. 55 fatal crashes or 6.4 percent of all fatal crashes
. 1,405 personal injury crashes or 2.6 percent of all personal
injury crashes
. 253 property damage crashes or 0.3 percent of all property
damage crashes
. 109,288 motorcycles were registered in Virginia with 1.6 percent
involved in crashes
I have been hearing NHTSA claiming that motorcycle deaths have
significantly increased over the past few years. While I don't have all
the data to do an in depth analysis of what's going on in the country, I
decided to at least take a look at Virginia and see if I could figure
out where we stand in comparison to NHTSA's claims.
I looked at two things:
1) the percentage of motorcycle fatalities
compared to all motor vehicle fatalities per year and
2) the percentage
of motorcycle fatalities compared to the motorcycle registrations per year.
According to the Virginia DMV:
In 2003, motorcycle fatalities made up 6.4 percent of all fatal motor
vehicle crashes
In 2004, motorcycle fatalities made up 6.9 percent of all fatal motor
vehicle crashes
In 2005, motorcycle fatalities made up 7.9 percent of all fatal motor
vehicle crashes
Wow, when you look at it like that, it seems that each year there is an
increase in the percentage of motorcyclists dying on the roads in
Virginia. But let's compare apples to apples now - what's the percentage
of motorcycle fatalities per year when factoring in motorcycle
registrations?
In 2003, there were 109,288 motorcycles registered in Virginia. There
were 56 motorcycle fatalities. That means .051 percent of registered
motorcycles were involved in a fatality.
In 2004, there were 123,548 motorcycles registered in Virginia. There
were 56 motorcycle fatalities. That means .045 percent of registered
motorcycles were involved in a fatality.
In 2005, there were 136,978 motorcycles registered in Virginia. There
were 68 motorcycle fatalities. That means .0496 percent of registered
motorcycles were involved in a fatality.
Hmmm, that makes things look a little different, doesn't it? When we
compare motorcycles to motorcycles it actually turns out that there was
a DECREASE in motorcycle deaths on Virginia roads from 2003 to 2004. And
even though those deaths increased from 2004 to 2005 by .0048 percent,
the percent of deaths in 2005 compared to 2003 actually DECREASED by
.0014.
To spell it all out:
Percent of motorcycle deaths compared to motorcycle registrations:
2003 - .051
2004 - .045
2005 - .0496
While losing even one motorcyclist is one death too many, let's be
realistic. We are looking at percentages of deaths in terms of 1/2 of 1
percent and less. And while the numbers show that motorcycle fatalities
made up a larger percent of all fatal motor vehicle crashes from year to
year, it should also be considered that each year a larger number of
motorcycles were on the road.
As I said, I don't have the data to figure this out for all states, but
looking at the Virginia numbers makes me wonder what all the fuss is
about. Why are motorcyclists being targeted with all these Henny Penny"The Sky is Falling" statistics?
I'd like to see others get these statistics for their states. I'd like
to see what's really going on with motorcycles on our roads.
Penny
Home | 2008 News | Events | Editorials | Issues | ABATE Speaks Out | Talking Points | Legislative Membership | Supporters | Chapters | Products | Newsletters | Contacts |