Instilling a sense of conscience.

[Katman]

I'm regularly disturbed by the number of times I have read on here "Meh, life's full of risks. If you don't want to expose yourself to risks then stay in bed".

All very well to a point but at what point does that idea cross the line?

Imagine this - a motorcyclist decides to go for a good hard fang in order to satisfy their need for an adrenalin fix. They misjudge a corner and plow head on into another motorcycle killing the other rider.

Do we say "Ah well, life's full of risks. Bad luck for the other motorcyclist" or do we say "You stupid prick, what right do you have to take an innocent life?"

If someone posts a video of themselves riding in a reckless manner out on public roads should we say "Awesome video dude" or should we say "What the fuck are you doing imposing risks on other people?"

[PirateJafa]

Burn them?

[MSTRS]

If one 'must' get that adrenalin fix, then as long as no-one else is put at risk, who are we to point fingers and judge. Of course, in KMs example, all bets are off

[boomer]

I'm regularly disturbed by the number of times I have read on here "Meh, life's full of risks. If you don't want to expose yourself to risks then stay in bed".

All very well to a point but at what point does that idea cross the line?

Imagine this - a motorcyclist decides to go for a good hard fang in order to satisfy their need for an adrenalin fix. They misjudge a corner and plow head on into another motorcycle killing the other rider.

Do we say "Ah well, life's full of risks. Bad luck for the other motorcyclist" or do we say "You stupid prick, what right do you have to take an innocent life?"

If someone posts a video of themselves riding in a reckless manner out on public roads should we say "Awesome video dude" or should we say "What the fuck are you doing imposing risks on other people?"

You're like a stuck record... Go get laid ffs

[Pussy]

Agree, Katman!

It's up there with "I'll drive anyway, how much of a risk is it with a belly-full of piss?"

[Katman]

Agree, Katman!

It's up there with "I'll drive anyway, how much of a risk is it with a belly-full of piss?"

That's a very good point.

What difference is there really (at a conscience level) between riding at 200+kph on roads that are shared with others and driving pissed?

[Okey Dokey]

Well, this is NZ, where people apparently can't be trusted to tell the difference between a smack and child abuse...

The line should be obvious, one would think, but in reality it is everyone's own opinion about what is acceptable.

For what it is worth, I agree with Katman & Pussy on this.

[YellowDog]

To drive or ride recklessly on the public highway which endangers the life of others is bad news and should be frowned upon.

The problem I see is recognising what is enjoying yourself, but still taking reasonable care; compared with someone elses opinion of what you are doing.

We all make mistakes and sometimes the consequences are tragic.

Some on here say "Only speed and have fun on the track". That being the only option, you may as well give up your road bike and pay for bike/track hire in one.

It's a tough subject to debate. One riders safety can be seen as another rider's (or a traffic cop's) danger.

[MIXONE]

I ride how I like which 95% of the time is within cooee of the speed limits and to suit the conditions.The other 5% I like to fang it but restrict it to where there is little or no traffic.
I think you are flogging a dead horse if you think by posting on kb you will sway one person.
Those who agree with you are already convinced and the rest think that you are a tosser!

[gwigs]

I ride how I like which 95% of the time is within cooee of the speed limits and to suit the conditions.The other 5% I like to fang it but restrict it to where there is little or no traffic.
I think you are flogging a dead horse if you think by posting on kb you will sway one person.
Those who agree with you are already convinced and the rest think that you are a tosser!

Well put........I think Katmans been watching the Mormon Few,s new video...

[shrub]

A few months ago a group of us rode to Akaroa on a Sunday, I had a Street Triple from the shop and we had a mix of everything from Daytonas to Americas, and parked beside a middle aged guy on a GSXR600 with the full race leathers. Did the usual friendly chat and on to lunch. As we left he was waiting on the side of the road, pulled out and joined us. I was leading and thought "sweet, the more the merrier" and didn't think much more of it.

Suddenly he whips past me on a corner and I figured he wanted to go faster than we were, so I left him to it. As we rode through Little River, there he is on the side of the road again. I didn't pay much attention and carried on enjoying my ride. Came up behind a slow car through a couple of corners and as we came out of the corners onto a straight I flicked on my indicator, glanced in my mirror and saw nothing in the right hand lane and a bunch of lights behind me, so pulled out. At that moment aformentioned GSXR rider screams past me less than a meter away at one hell of a speed. If I had pulled out a fraction earlier I would be a newspaper article.

He was having a great time riding really, really quickly and showing a bunch of slow nanas on Triumphs how good he was. He also nearly killed me, and for a moment I seriously considered going after him and giving him a riding lesson with my fists.

[SixPackBack]

I'm regularly disturbed by the number of times I have read on here "Meh, life's full of risks. If you don't want to expose yourself to risks then stay in bed".

All very well to a point but at what point does that idea cross the line?

Imagine this - a motorcyclist decides to go for a good hard fang in order to satisfy their need for an adrenalin fix. They misjudge a corner and plow head on into another motorcycle killing the other rider.

Do we say "Ah well, life's full of risks. Bad luck for the other motorcyclist" or do we say "You stupid prick, what right do you have to take an innocent life?"

If someone posts a video of themselves riding in a reckless manner out on public roads should we say "Awesome video dude" or should we say "What the fuck are you doing imposing risks on other people?"

FFS Katman, negate the risk, buy a Corolla and stop whinging like a nancy


A few months ago a group of us rode to Akaroa on a Sunday, I had a Street Triple from the shop and we had a mix of everything from Daytonas to Americas, and parked beside a middle aged guy on a GSXR600 with the full race leathers. Did the usual friendly chat and on to lunch. As we left he was waiting on the side of the road, pulled out and joined us. I was leading and thought "sweet, the more the merrier" and didn't think much more of it.

Suddenly he whips past me on a corner and I figured he wanted to go faster than we were, so I left him to it. As we rode through Little River, there he is on the side of the road again. I didn't pay much attention and carried on enjoying my ride. Came up behind a slow car through a couple of corners and as we came out of the corners onto a straight I flicked on my indicator, glanced in my mirror and saw nothing in the right hand lane and a bunch of lights behind me, so pulled out. At that moment aformentioned GSXR rider screams past me less than a meter away at one hell of a speed. If I had pulled out a fraction earlier I would be a newspaper article.

He was having a great time riding really, really quickly and showing a bunch of slow nanas on Triumphs how good he was. He also nearly killed me, and for a moment I seriously considered going after him and giving him a riding lesson with my fists.

Tough guy huh. Best stay awake next time you hit the road.

[gwigs]

There,s always been lunatics on the road and there always will be...
We all take our lives in our hands every time we go out on the roads be it on a bike or in a cage.....all we can do is be alert and ride,drive defensively...
I dont believe speeding is inherently dangerous at the right time and place.
Theres a lot of slow driving halfwits on the road as well...usually the ones that pull out in front of you...

[Pussy]

A few months ago a group of us rode to Akaroa on a Sunday, I had a Street Triple from the shop and we had a mix of everything from Daytonas to Americas, and parked beside a middle aged guy on a GSXR600 with the full race leathers. Did the usual friendly chat and on to lunch. As we left he was waiting on the side of the road, pulled out and joined us. I was leading and thought "sweet, the more the merrier" and didn't think much more of it.

Suddenly he whips past me on a corner and I figured he wanted to go faster than we were, so I left him to it. As we rode through Little River, there he is on the side of the road again. I didn't pay much attention and carried on enjoying my ride. Came up behind a slow car through a couple of corners and as we came out of the corners onto a straight I flicked on my indicator, glanced in my mirror and saw nothing in the right hand lane and a bunch of lights behind me, so pulled out. At that moment aformentioned GSXR rider screams past me less than a meter away at one hell of a speed. If I had pulled out a fraction earlier I would be a newspaper article.

He was having a great time riding really, really quickly and showing a bunch of slow nanas on Triumphs how good he was. He also nearly killed me, and for a moment I seriously considered going after him and giving him a riding lesson with my fists.
That gixxer rider sounds like a "look at me!" hand-cranker

[Genestho]

Katman.
I still think you could sharpen up on your gruffman skills, lol :bleh:

But you have a point. I can think of 7 fatalities - rider induced this year alone, and we're not done yet. The highest ACC claim figures in my locality are due to rider error.

It's all very well saying "Ride your own ride" but even if you do, and you still go down due to rider error - even on your own, my only contribution is that there'll be people left behind, in sorrow. And that's the truth.

Someone will need to scoop your limbs off the ground for you. Someone will have to look after your kids. Some-one will have to create your headstone. Some-one will mourn you.

This is reality.
And yes, we all die, yes we could be knocked over by a bus tomorrow, yes - sh!t happens - but do we want to encourage putting OTHER peoples lives at risk?

For the sake of adrenaline, when there are other ways to get this??? (Believe me I LOVE adrenaline!!)

In saying that I won't be ranting about it. Probably nuff said.

I climb off my soapbox now! :bleh:

[CookMySock]

The problem I see is recognising what is enjoying yourself, but still taking reasonable care; compared with someone elses opinion of what you are doing.That sums it up well.

I am all for doing as I choose, but not at risk of consequence to you or anyone else, and of course the reverse applies. Bar the "shit happens" or "whoever would have thought of that" stuff - no one is insulated from that.

But what about someone taking umbrage at my passing manoevre? Passing a two tonne car on a 200KG bike poses little or no risk to them. Sure I might give them a fright, but that does not mean they were actually at risk.

Same applies on KB - countless opinions here contrast with those of others, but no actual harm comes of it, until some persons secondary emotions turn into actions, and then things are said or done that are not reversable. Some things that are said are irrelevant - they do not actually harm me, per se. Move on.

It comes down to freedom. You are free to conduct yourself in any manner you choose.

And so am I.

But what if my unrestricted actions impact your freedom? Does one person have freedom at the expense of the next person?

The bottom line is, I am not free to act in any manner I choose, and neither are you, because if we were, then we would be able to act without consequence - which we cannot.

True freedom comes from me not impacting your rights, and vice versa.

So lets make a deal. ;)

Steve

[CookMySock]

[....] and for a moment I seriously considered going after him That moments' consideration probably saved your life. Again.

Steve

[Katman]

The bottom line is, I am not free to act in any manner I choose, and neither are you, because if we were, then we would be able to act without consequence - which we cannot.



Absolutely.

And no-one has the right to knowingly and intentionally impose risk on others.

[shrub]

That moments' consideration probably saved your life. Again.

Steve

Precisely. He demonstrated very clearly that he was willing to ride stupidly to prove his masculinity and I am too fond of my skin to play by his rules. His riding showed he lacked the skill to ride on the road so he'll wipe himself out soon enough, I just hope he doesn't take anyone else with him.

[CookMySock]

And no-one has the right to knowingly and intentionally impose risk on others.I concur.

Sometimes I make mistakes. Sometimes, so do you. What is the way forward when mistakes are made?

Sometimes I speed. It's fun, but I will take great care when doing so. I have my family to think of. And yours. If I fuck it up, the consequences for all parties will be enormous. Is it worth it?

And so begins the process of reconciling entertainment value against personal safety. Everyones' limits are not the same. Is this the real problem? Do I have the right to impose my limits on you? What about the reverse? How will that work?

Steve

[Usarka]

Precisely. He demonstrated very clearly that he was willing to ride stupidly to prove his masculinity and I am too fond of my skin to play by his rules. His riding showed he lacked the skill to ride on the road so he'll wipe himself out soon enough, I just hope he doesn't take anyone else with him.

Changing lane without checking your six doesn't sound like sensible behaviour either......?

[shrub]

FFS Katman, negate the risk, buy a Corolla and stop whinging like a nancy


Tough guy huh. Best stay awake next time you hit the road.

Was that you on the Gixxer? And if feeling sufficient anger at some moron (if it was you, please forgive me for calling you a moron) who nearly took me out through his incompetence to want to clip him across the ears makes me a tough guy in your eyes, then that's fine. You and I have different ideas of what is tough.

[Squiggles]

Changing lane without checking your six doesn't sound like sensible behaviour either......?

Assumption, speed differential

For once i've found myself agreeing with DB (ya can put that in ya sig too :lol:)

[shrub]

Changing lane without checking your six doesn't sound like sensible behaviour either......?

So how was I supposed to do that? I indicated, looked in my mirror and saw a row of headlights behind me with nothing in the right hand lane - the retard on the Gixxer was moving up in our lane and I am told passed within a metre of the guys behind me too.

Should I have done a head count and then overtaken? Personally I don't like having my eyes off the road for that long when I am following another vehicle, but call me anal. I'm also smart enough to know that when a bike is following a slow car through a corner the odds are very good that he or she will overtake and (foolishly it seems) I expect other people to think the same way - it's a skill called defensive driving. You anticipate what the other person on the road is most likely to do so when they do it, you're ready.

[Usarka]

So how was I supposed to do that? I indicated, looked in my mirror and saw a row of headlights behind me with nothing in the right hand lane - the retard on the Gixxer was moving up in our lane and I am told passed within a metre of the guys behind me too.

Should I have done a head count and then overtaken? Personally I don't like having my eyes off the road for that long when I am following another vehicle, but call me anal. I'm also smart enough to know that when a bike is following a slow car through a corner the odds are very good that he or she will overtake and (foolishly it seems) I expect other people to think the same way - it's a skill called defensive driving. You anticipate what the other person on the road is most likely to do so when they do it, you're ready. You should give it a go some time, well worth it.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

(i was going to reply serious-ish but got bored reading it all)

[CookMySock]

Changing lane without checking your six doesn't sound like sensible behaviour either......?The way I read it, it sounded like he looked.

The other riders' speed differential is way way too high to be safe - it wrecks everyone elses' checks. I caused the exact same problem coming out of a 50k corner at 120k - the poor bloke pulling out of his driveway with a trailer on nearly leapt out his passengers' window when he saw me - he just never contemplated I would be there - seriously, the look on his face was priceless. I nearly leapt out his passengers window too. Harsh lesson learned.

Steve

[Usarka]

The way I read it, it sounded like he looked.

The other riders' speed differential is way way too high to be safe - it wrecks everyone elses' checks.

Yep, and I bet shrub passed the cars in front of him at 105kph....... :lol:

[SixPackBack]

Was that you on the Gixxer? And if feeling sufficient anger at some moron (if it was you, please forgive me for calling you a moron) who nearly took me out through his incompetence to want to clip him across the ears makes me a tough guy in your eyes, then that's fine. You and I have different ideas of what is tough.

Different ideas indeed.

You sound like a thug, or maybe a copper!

[short-circuit]

Different ideas indeed.

You sound like a thug, or maybe a copper!





Not to me - sounds like the guy showed a commendable level of restraint, and the guy on the Gixxer sounds like a grade A pillock

[shrub]

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

(i was going to reply serious-ish but got bored reading it all)

Go on, admit it, you weren't able to come up with anything cleverer than Waaaaaaaaaah!

[shrub]

Different ideas indeed.

You sound like a thug, or maybe a copper!






Wrong on both counts - being wrong is something you're good at huh?

[Usarka]

Go on, admit it, you weren't able to come up with anything cleverer than Waaaaaaaaaah!

Nah I just think you're a hypocrite. Usually a futile effort arguing with those....

[shrub]

Nah I just think you're a hypocrite. Usually a futile effort arguing with those....

A hypocrite? How so?

[CookMySock]

Not to me - sounds like the guy showed a commendable level of restraint, and the guy on the Gixxer sounds like a grade A pillockI reckon.

There is something very ghey about this thread. All the wrong people agreeing. What if all get good and pissed, then we wont agree and everything will be normal again. ;)

Steve

[tigertim20]

But what about someone taking umbrage at my passing manoevre? Passing a two tonne car on a 200KG bike poses little or no risk to them. Sure I might give them a fright, but that does not mean they were actually at risk.

Steve

50/50, the thing here (probably already been mentioned) is that we all make our decisions from our own perspective, but dont always think to try and look at it from someone elses. e.g. in you example, bike vs car = car1, bike0. Fair to say from your perspective that your manouver isnt dangerous, but what if, as you suggest, driver gets a fright, jerks the wheel in their fright, and veers off the road. All comes down to diferent perspectives are gonna result in a different veiw on the acceptability of the same manouver.


Not to me - sounds like the guy showed a commendable level of restraint, and the guy on the Gixxer sounds like a grade A pillock

agreed x2.

[Ixion]

..
Imagine this - a motorcyclist decides to go for a good hard fang in order to satisfy their need for an adrenalin fix. They misjudge a corner and plow head on into another motorcycle killing the other rider.

Do we say "Ah well, life's full of risks. Bad luck for the other motorcyclist" or do we say "You stupid prick, what right do you have to take an innocent life?"

..
Imagine this - an inexperienced motorcyclist is riding along within the legal speed limit, sober and carefully They misjudge a corner (that inexperience thing) and plow head on into another motorcycle killing the other rider.

Do we say "Ah well, life's full of risks. Bad luck for the other motorcyclist" or do we say "You stupid prick, what right do you have to take an innocent life?"

This one's just as likely as yours.

The mistake the newbie makes may affect others beside himself. The mistake the experienced rider makes may affect others beside himself.

You must either condemn everyone who makes a mistake (and , by corollary, claim that you have never made one yourself), or accept that, yes, shit happens.

Of course, I never speed. Speed kills, this I know for Katman tells me so. Mind you, I reckon I'm going to die of a coronary soon, what with all the effort of pushing this bloody motorbike everywhere.

[Katman]

Imagine this -


Your example is nothing like mine. I am talking specifically about motorcyclists who intentionally ride in a manner that has a high potential for disaster for other road users as well as themselves.

[Ixion]

Your example is nothing like mine. I am talking specifically about motorcyclists who intentionally ride in a manner that has a high potential for disaster for other road users as well as themselves.

But your definitions of "intentionally" and "high potential for disaster" are subjective and emotional.

I very much doubt that many motorcyclists ride unintentionally. And almost all motor cycle riding has a high potential for disaster.

Compared with , say, users of mobility scooters, we're all a massive public menace.

The experienced rider riding at 200kph (on chosen roads , at chosen times) may have less "potential for disaster", than the inexperienced rider at 100kph (on hazardous roads and conditions).

So, unless "high potential for disaster" is to be interpreted as "anything that Katman disapproves of", then your argument is meaningless.

The 200kph rider never (almost never , anyway) "intentionally ride in a manner that has a high potential for disaster for other road users as well as themselves". Rather he rides in a way that he *thinks* is acceptable, given all the circumstances, and which, in *his* judgement has an acceptable and realistic safety rating. Whether his judgement is sound or not, may of course be another matter. He may be an idiot , and his judgement may be totally crap. But without knowing all the facts of any specific instance none of us can answer that question one way or the other.

And in the context of a hypothetical and non-specific argument, Mr 200kph's judgement must be considered as valid as anyone else's (including yours or mine). Otherwise we would have to accept that all of us may be judged by the standards of Enid or Stan.

My experience is that the few riders who do ride in a way that exhibits manifest poor judgement , or in an intentionally dangerous fashion (again, given the circumstances) , quite quickly get given the message (if not the bash) by their peers.

[YellowDog]

Your example is nothing like mine. I am talking specifically about motorcyclists who intentionally ride in a manner that has a high potential for disaster for other road users as well as themselves.
I think that the purpose of this thread has been to make a vary valid point about show-boaters being irresponsible and unnecessarily endangering the lives of others.

Unfortunately there seems to be some personality issues on here, so the point has been twisted and lost in pointless criticisms and arguments.

Shame really.

[CookMySock]

Fair to say from your perspective that your manouver isnt dangerous [....] but what if, as you suggest, driver gets a fright, jerks the wheel in their fright, and veers off the road.

All comes down to diferent perspectives are gonna result in a different veiw on the acceptability of the same manouver.The difference is how circumstances are handled. If someone responds to an overloaded emotional state and takes some disastrous course of action, then what is the real problem?

That overloaded emotional state may be a motorcyclist on some bravado streak, or some motorist who takes some action in response to some stimulus.

There was a driver (a police officer IIRC) who had his BBQ on a trailer, and the lightweight tin BBQ lid flew off and hit the windscreen of a car travelling in the opposite direction. The terrified motorist swerved the steering wheel and rolled the van, killing a child. A court of law found the BBQ/trailer owner guilty.

IMO, it is the nut on the bars that is responsible for accidents.


Steve

[SixPackBack]

I think that the purpose of this thread has been to make a vary valid point about show-boaters being irresponsible and unnecessarily endangering the lives of others.

Unfortunately there seems to be some personality issues on here, so the point has been twisted and lost in pointless criticisms and arguments.

Shame really.

There was no point, well other than katman show boating.......Again!

[Katman]

So, unless "high potential for disaster" is to be interpreted as "anything that Katman disapproves of", then your argument is meaningless.



No wonder BRONZ is seen as little more than a joke.

[tigertim20]

The difference is how circumstances are handled. If someone responds to an overloaded emotional state and takes some disastrous course of action, then what is the real problem?

That overloaded emotional state may be a motorcyclist on some bravado streak, or some motorist who takes some action in response to some stimulus.

There was a driver (a police officer IIRC) who had his BBQ on a trailer, and the lightweight tin BBQ lid flew off and hit the windscreen of a car travelling in the opposite direction. The terrified motorist swerved the steering wheel and rolled the van, killing a child. A court of law found the BBQ/trailer owner guilty.

IMO, it is the nut on the bars that is responsible for accidents.


Steve

I agree that the nut on the bars is generally responsible, further, I am saying that they are responsible for (or should be responsible for) considering how others might react to what they are doing. e.g. I know that im on a loud harley, I know I am gonna pass this car on a slight bend, cos I know I can see the road is Clear. I know I am gonna drop it two gears and hammer past the car to complete my manouver quickly. But I dont consider that the deafening noise of the harley suddenly screaming past a sedately (legally) operated vehicle, travelling around a corner, might be cause for a bit of a fright, which may result in an unintentional tug on the wheel, which results in an accident. Accident occurred, even though I knew exactly what I was doing. But I didnt consider other road users. I know what I am doing, but do the other people I am sharing the road with know what I am doing?
Your example of the cop is very much different. He shoulda checked his load, it is an offence to cart an insecure load, which his obviously was, or it wouldve stayed on his trailer.

second thoughts, maybe it is the same thing. If he had stopped to think what the consequences of his insecure load might be for OTHER motorists, he might have used extra rope, or tied his load on tighter, or in a different, more secure manner. In this example, the BBQ flying of didnt make a shit of difference to him. Not a bruise on him. But someone else died, because he didnt tie his load on properly.

[98tls]

My experience is that the few riders who do ride in a way that exhibits manifest poor judgement , or in an intentionally dangerous fashion (again, given the circumstances) , quite quickly get given the message (if not the bash) by their peers. Or it all ends in tears on the side of the road somewhere i guess.I see Katmans point and since this is a motorcycle based forum a relevent thread all things considered.Nothing will stop those so inclined to do so from doing so other than as you say a clip round the head from there peers or possibly a good off with lots of pain (worked for me).Then again who knows what people think when they read such threads,if it makes someone think maybe Katmans got a point and they do things a little different then it was worth him posting it,simple really.I dont see why people have a such a problem with him posting up this stuff,not like hes trying to shag anyones wife (that i know of) hes for my money just putting out a simple message and as a bloke thats been riding many years am of the opinion that no matter how good we think we are on a bike you cant really hear it to many times.(not directed at you ixion)

[=cJ=]

Time and place.


Enough said.

[short-circuit]

Enough said.

Except to say also.....:finger:

[CookMySock]

[...] onsecond thoughts, maybe it is the same thing. If he had stopped to think what the consequences of his insecure load might be for OTHER motorists, he might have used extra rope, or tied his load on tighter, or in a different, more secure manner. In this example, the BBQ flying of didnt make a shit of difference to him. Not a bruise on him. But someone else died, because he didnt tie his load on properly.Well, it is not that I disagree with you, but for myself I have a brain, and I am certain that a flying tin lid hitting my windscreen won't hurt me, but a sudden pull in a blind panic on a steering wheel of a fully-laden minibus will probably kill everyone.

Some people just don't have the presence of mind to react rationally. But hey, once I didn't, and I left the road on my bike and hit a culvert. Rational? I think not.

So we arrive full circle - what is the solution? I can say I am more experienced now, and better equipped to handle such an emergency, but what of my 16 yearold learner son? What if it were him on his bike?

The courts were correct in that situation, whether I am prepared to bet I could have handled it or not, is not relevant.

So maybe we do need to take care in advance of others over-baked reactions.


Steve

[ManDownUnder]

Any time anyone puts me or mine at risk I have the right to shoot them down in flames - without mercy.

Until that time - their call. I prefer they make an informed choice on the risks they're taking (coming to mind is a new rider who has no appreciation for protective gear) but it's their life - they need to live it.

[Hitcher]

All of this self-righteous tut tutting is enough to make Old Nanas(TM) like me want to go out and pop a wheelie.

[Mikkel]

A few months ago a group of us rode to Akaroa on a Sunday, I had a Street Triple from the shop and we had a mix of everything from Daytonas to Americas, and parked beside a middle aged guy on a GSXR600 with the full race leathers. Did the usual friendly chat and on to lunch. As we left he was waiting on the side of the road, pulled out and joined us. I was leading and thought "sweet, the more the merrier" and didn't think much more of it.

Suddenly he whips past me on a corner and I figured he wanted to go faster than we were, so I left him to it. As we rode through Little River, there he is on the side of the road again. I didn't pay much attention and carried on enjoying my ride. Came up behind a slow car through a couple of corners and as we came out of the corners onto a straight I flicked on my indicator, glanced in my mirror and saw nothing in the right hand lane and a bunch of lights behind me, so pulled out. At that moment aformentioned GSXR rider screams past me less than a meter away at one hell of a speed. If I had pulled out a fraction earlier I would be a newspaper article.

He was having a great time riding really, really quickly and showing a bunch of slow nanas on Triumphs how good he was. He also nearly killed me, and for a moment I seriously considered going after him and giving him a riding lesson with my fists.

Sounds like 5 out of 10 of bikers on their way to Akaroa on a Saturday really. I'm not saying it's cool - or even acceptable, to some - but that is indeed what you can expect if you go there during the "rush-hours".

Oh, and cut back on the drama. He didn't nearly kill you - he gave you a fright, there is a difference you know. Nearly killing you would require him to be hitting you in the first place... I nearly kill myself everyday - all I'd have to do would be not to stop for that red light or decide not to brake when the truck in front does.


All of this self-righteous tut tutting is enough to make Old Nanas(TM) like me want to go out and pop a wheelie.

Look at my...

<img src=http://whyfiles.org/265animal_breeding/images/5red_junglefowl.jpg>


Oh, as for the question in the OP. Personally I am much much more worried about lackadaisical people in cars not paying any attention, whatsoever, to their surroundings than I am about hyped up adrenaline junkies on motorcycles out for their fix. At least they aren't asleep...

[shrub]

Sounds like 5 out of 10 of bikers on their way to Akaroa on a Saturday really. I'm not saying it's cool - or even acceptable, to some - but that is indeed what you can expect if you go there during the "rush-hours".

Oh, and cut back on the drama. He didn't nearly kill you - he gave you a fright, there is a difference you know. Nearly killing you would require him to be hitting you in the first place... I nearly kill myself everyday - all I'd have to do would be not to stop for that red light or decide not to brake when the truck in front does.



I know you nearly kill yourself every day - I've seen you ride (sorry, you walked into that one). Maybe I was exaggerating, but at the very least he would have caused a major accident and he would have broken bits of me.

I now only ride to Akaroa when it's quiet - during the week, early in the morning or when it's raining because too many half wits who think that because they own a high performance sportsbike and a set of leathers they are good riders and set out to prove it on the Akaroa GP (my observation is that a hell of a lot of them are crap riders). I'm showing my age, but once upon a time you didn't have to worry about people on bikes putting you at risk and left that role to sleeping car drivers. Now it seems there are an increasing number of people on bikes riding in a way that puts all of us at risk and gives ammo to the citizens demanding that "something be done about those bad people on motorcycles". Boy racers have cost genuine car enthusiasts a lot of freedom and idiots will do the same to us.

[Katman]

All of this self-righteous tut tutting is enough to make Old Nanas(TM) like me want to go out and pop a wheelie.

If it's a choice between "self-righteous tut tutting" and hearing of innocent lives being taken by wannabe Ghostriders then you'll hear me tut tutting for a long time yet.

[short-circuit]

If it's a choice between "self-righteous tut tutting" and hearing of innocent lives being taken by wannabe Ghostriders then you'll hear me tut tutting for a long time yet.

We all need to feel like we have some purpose in this life :yawn:

[Katman]

And for anyone who thinks that a motorcyclist hitting a car head-on will only harm the motorcyclist, a human body hurtling through a windscreen into the drivers or passengers seat could carry more than enough force to kill the person it hits.

[boomer]

And for anyone who thinks that a motorcyclist hitting a car head-on will only harm the motorcyclist, a human body hurtling through a windscreen into the drivers or passengers seat could carry more than enough force to kill the person it hits.


It must be very fookin scary in your world....

[CookMySock]

[...] innocent lives being taken by wannabe Ghostriders.Where and when did this happen? Does it happen a lot? It is fine to be addressing an issue, but is it real?

Steve

[Katman]

Where and when did this happen? Does it happen a lot? It is fine to be addressing an issue, but is it real?

Steve

Of course it happens.

And as well as it happening, every time a motorcyclist goes out and indulges in their Ghostrider fantasy there is the distinct possibility of it happening.

[short-circuit]

We all need to feel like we have some purpose in this life :yawn:

Oh Katman baby you defriended me on the basis of this? ^^^ How fickle internet friendships can be.

I'm most hurt :bye: Please know you will always be in my heart :hug:

[swbarnett]

This is all very well and, in an ideal world, I'd agree with Katman.

However, we do not live in an ideal world. There are two things that Katman and his ilk seem to forget - Human fallibility and the millions of kms that are travelled every day without incident. The accident rate in the western world is damn close if not at the level where human fallibility prevents it getting any lower, no matter what measures are put in place. No amount of education or legislation is going to turn humans in to infallible robots.

People will always make mistakes. I, for one, wouldn't have it any other way.

And before you say that riding at 200kph on a blind corder is a conscious decision. It is also a mistake born of ignorance and the natural human tendency for arrogance.

[short-circuit]

This is all very well and, in an ideal world, I'd agree with Katman.

However, we do not live in an ideal world. There are two things that Katman and his ilk seem to forget - Human fallibility and the millions of kms that are travelled every day without incident. The accident rate in the western world is damn close if not at the level where human fallibility prevents it getting any lower, no matter what measures are put in place. No amount of education or legislation is going to turn humans in to infallible robots.

People will always make mistakes. I, for one, wouldn't have it any other way.

And before you say that riding at 200kph on a blind corder is a conscious decision. It is also a mistake born of ignorance and the natural human tendency for arrogance.

Yeah but research also shows that many people need to be reminded to take precautions (safe sex, seatbelts, drink driving etc).

When these messages are delivered effectively they have been shown to have a marked effect on a broad population.

I'm not sure an intermittent whinge on KB will be all that effective however

[Katman]

And before you say that riding at 200kph on a blind corder is a conscious decision. It is also a mistake born of ignorance and the natural human tendency for arrogance.

So you believe an individual has the right to do 200kph around a blind corner, and place any other road user that happens to be sharing that road in a potentially deadly situation, simply because that individual has the right to make a mistake???



People will always make mistakes. I, for one, wouldn't have it any other way.



Even if that mistake happens through an act of stupidity and claims the life of your partner?

[Mikkel]

I know you nearly kill yourself every day - I've seen you ride (sorry, you walked into that one). Maybe I was exaggerating, but at the very least he would have caused a major accident and he would have broken bits of me.

I can't see how you can reason that I walked into that one since you are, after all, just agreeing with what I said.
And you are exaggerating, change would to could and you are getting closer to the truth. Oh, and don't forget to check your mirrors and do a headcheck before pulling out.


I now only ride to Akaroa when it's quiet - during the week, early in the morning or when it's raining because too many half wits who think that because they own a high performance sportsbike and a set of leathers they are good riders and set out to prove it on the Akaroa GP (my observation is that a hell of a lot of them are crap riders). I'm showing my age, but once upon a time you didn't have to worry about people on bikes putting you at risk and left that role to sleeping car drivers. Now it seems there are an increasing number of people on bikes riding in a way that puts all of us at risk and gives ammo to the citizens demanding that "something be done about those bad people on motorcycles". Boy racers have cost genuine car enthusiasts a lot of freedom and idiots will do the same to us.

I wonder how many genuine car enthusiasts are/were also boy racers... You make it sound like the majority of bikers going to Akaroa are pillocks (I am not saying they aren't) and then complain that this group (i.e. the majority) is going to influence our (bikers I assume) freedom. Not hot for this new fangled democrazy thing? As for how it used to be, I wouldn't know - but old men have been complaining about young men (and even middle-aged ones too) behaving irresponsibly since the dawn of mankind.

For what it is worth - I do as yourself and try to avoid the Akaroa GP during the busy hours (or go a different way, gravel is good for you mkay). When I do go to Akaroa during the busy hours I know very well what to expect and make dead sure to look out for number 1 at all times. Yes, there will always be some dick who feels they have to prove something by passing you in a silly manner - at least I know to keep an eye out for them. That's not saying I think it is cool or appropriate behaviour - but no worse than a lot of other shit I see on the roads every day. The only real difference is that in this case the other guy is going faster than me.

[CookMySock]

Even if that mistake happens through an act of stupidity and claims the life of your partner?There's two types of mistakes, one could have been reasonably foreseen, and one that could not.

Offing on a patch of diesel on a wet roundabout at night is going to catch anyone and everyone. Plain straight pure luck to avoid that one, and maybe a few very very experienced oldies can avoid it, but generally the roads aren't designed or intended for people with that massive level of experience. (That is, they are meant to be consumer-safe, not expert-safe.)

Other types of mistakes come from risky activity, from people who are just playing. These types of mistakes can be foreseen, and should be foreseen, and they are not then people should be held accountable for their stupidity. Dangerous driving? Careless use?


Steve

[MarkH]

There was a driver (a police officer IIRC) who had his BBQ on a trailer, and the lightweight tin BBQ lid flew off and hit the windscreen of a car travelling in the opposite direction. The terrified motorist swerved the steering wheel and rolled the van, killing a child. A court of law found the BBQ/trailer owner guilty.

If you recall correctly and it was a cop that was (partly) responsible for this incident then as a cop I think he should have known better than most about illegally driving with a secure load. The person that may ticket you or me for doing something stupid really ought to know well enough not to do the same thing themselves.

[oldrider]

I'm regularly disturbed by the number of times I have read on here "Meh, life's full of risks. If you don't want to expose yourself to risks then stay in bed".

All very well to a point but at what point does that idea cross the line?

Imagine this - a motorcyclist decides to go for a good hard fang in order to satisfy their need for an adrenalin fix. They misjudge a corner and plow head on into another motorcycle killing the other rider.

Do we say "Ah well, life's full of risks. Bad luck for the other motorcyclist" or do we say "You stupid prick, what right do you have to take an innocent life?"

If someone posts a video of themselves riding in a reckless manner out on public roads should we say "Awesome video dude" or should we say "What the fuck are you doing imposing risks on other people?"

Katman, I do not for one moment doubt your sincerity and I do admire your tenacity but if you always do what you have always done, you cannot expect to get different results!

Does this thread really indicate to you that you are winning?

Have you stood back and thought about changing your approach to your quest for more personal responsibility among our biking brethren?

It's a bit like trying to teach pigs to fly, first of all, the pigs aint never gonna fly and it just seems to really piss the pigs off, the harder you try to make them!

Most KBr's probably agree with you but I don't think you will ever reach the ones that you are targeting and you run the risk of irritating the ones that support you!

I am not suggesting that you give up, just suggesting modifying your approach might give you better results.

Whatever, good luck to you, (FWIW) you have won my respect for trying! :niceone:

[swbarnett]

Yeah but research also shows that many people need to be reminded to take precautions (safe sex, seatbelts, drink driving etc).

When these messages are delivered effectively they have been shown to have a marked effect on a broad population.
I'm all in favour of timely reminders. What I object to is when the freedoms of the many are destroyed for the sake of the few - especially when the laws concerned have little or no affect anyway. And I don't think it's at all realistic to expect every human to be perfect (or desirable).

[swbarnett]

So you believe an individual has the right to do 200kph around a blind corner, and place any other road user that happens to be sharing that road in a potentially deadly situation, simply because that individual has the right to make a mistake???
I'm not saying that that act wouldn't be a stupid thing to do. What I'm saying is that In a world made up of people and not robots it WILL happen and there's nothing we can do about it. Also, I'm not necessarily against efforts to reduce the risk, just not at the cost of life - life is about a lot more than a healthy body.


Even if that mistake happens through an act of stupidity and claims the life of your partner?
Yes, I'd rather my partner (or me) lived one day of freedom than a lifetime of slavery.

[sinfull]

This shit's just wrong !!!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-ifYqtB_MnI&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-ifYqtB_MnI&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[tigertim20]

So you believe an individual has the right to do 200kph around a blind corner, and place any other road user that happens to be sharing that road in a potentially deadly situation, simply because that individual has the right to make a mistake???



Even if that mistake happens through an act of stupidity and claims the life of your partner?

ummm, how do you do 200km/hr by mistake? its like saying, Im sorry babe, I didnt mean to cheat on you, i fucked your mum by mistake, what? she tripped, fell, and landed on your dick?...
doing 200km/hr is a conscious choice, enacted by your right wrist. the only mistake in this would be choosing the wrong place to act this way.

While I also agree that I see why you continue to make these threads, I am beginning to wonder if it is flogging a dead horse.
Having said that, rosa parks changed the world, all by basically raising her middle finger and saying FUCK YOU, I AINT MOVING. I guess though if you raise one persons awareness, and make them a better rider, then maybe its worth it

[Katman]

Yes, I'd rather my partner (or me) lived one day of freedom than a lifetime of slavery.

If that comment wasn't so pathetic it would be laughable.

Are you suggesting that expecting people to ride their motorcycles with a degree of consideration for the safety and well being of others is akin to a lifetime of slavery???

[shrub]

Oh, and don't forget to check your mirrors and do a headcheck before pulling out.

You make it sound like the majority of bikers going to Akaroa are pillocks (I am not saying they aren't) and then complain that this group (i.e. the majority) is going to influence our (bikers I assume) freedom.

Yes, there will always be some dick who feels they have to prove something by passing you in a silly manner - at least I know to keep an eye out for them. That's not saying I think it is cool or appropriate behaviour - but no worse than a lot of other shit I see on the roads every day. The only real difference is that in this case the other guy is going faster than me.

I did check my mirror, but I wasn't going to spend 30 seconds staring in my mirror doing a head count - I'm too fond of my skin for that.

As for the majority of motorcyclists going to Akaroa being pillocks, I have never believed nor claimed that. There are a small number of retards (usually on the latest sportsbikes) who set out to prove to the world how awesome they are by riding at stupid speeds and taking risks that sometimes endanger other people. I think the majority of bikers (and I speak to dozens of bikers every day) are careful, considerate and know the limits of their bikes, the road and themselves. I think most of us do ride fast sometimes, and if the road is clear and conditions suit I enjoy a "spirited" ride as much as anyone - the key being in the right conditions.

And I disagree about idiots on bikes like the retard on the Gixxer being no worse than any other dangerous road user. He put me at danger because he was showing off, so it was an intentional act. The numbnut in the SUV who pulls out in front of me because he was too busy talking on his cellphone to look is just as dangerous and just as contemptible, but he didn't set out to do something dangerous so I can kind of forgive him (after a lecture), but I struggle to look kindly on someone who intentionally engages in an act that puts me (and most of all my bike) in danger because he's trying to prove something. Especially if he's on a bike because I like to think that I can trust bikers to look out for other bikers because that used to be the code.

[oldrider]

This shit's just wrong !!!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-ifYqtB_MnI&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-ifYqtB_MnI&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Some of that shit is also very skilful but some of the places that they are doing it just wrong, as you say!

In those cases I have to agree with you absolutely! :niceone:

[tigertim20]

but did the guy in the SUV not make a conscious decision to engage in a second activity, while driving, that he knew would detract his attention from driving, knowing that inattentive driving is more likely to result in a casualty or accident on the road? he didnt accidentally use his phone. cunts on phones fuckin fuck me off!!

[swbarnett]

ummm, how do you do 200km/hr by mistake?
While it is a conscious decision it can be said to be a mistake to think they will always get away with it.

To expect every human to make the "correct" decision 100% of the time is just naive. It also assumes that we all agree on what is "correct".

[Katman]

Yes, I'd rather my partner (or me) lived one day of freedom than a lifetime of slavery.

So should we be allowed to do 100kph on the footpath?

Or does expecting us not to impinge on our freedom?

[Mikkel]

I did check my mirror...

...but you still got surprised. (I've had the same - but I only blame myself for that.)


As for the majority of motorcyclists going to Akaroa being pillocks, I have never believed nor claimed that. There are a small number of retards (usually on the latest sportsbikes) who set out to prove to the world how awesome they are by riding at stupid speeds and taking risks that sometimes endanger other people. I think the majority of bikers (and I speak to dozens of bikers every day) are careful, considerate and know the limits of their bikes, the road and themselves. I think most of us do ride fast sometimes, and if the road is clear and conditions suit I enjoy a "spirited" ride as much as anyone - the key being in the right conditions.

Have you considered, just hypothetically, that it's a matter of perspective. What seems insane to you they might consider "taking it easy", maybe they aren't trying to prove anything to you - just having fun and enjoying a good day out in their own way. I don't know if the focus on "the latest sportsbikes" is appropriate either... the most dodgy riding I have seen hasn't been from fast guys on gixxers. Neither are they, generally, the ones hauling back two beers or more during the "coffee" stop.

I don't have any doubt that there are plenty of roadusers out there who would consider dangerously insane what I considered a spirited ride and others still would be considering it nana-ing to the extreme. What's the truth...? I don't know, however, the guy on the gixxer gave you a fright - that's not on I agree - but he probably didn't intend to scare you.


And I disagree about idiots on bikes like the retard on the Gixxer being no worse than any other dangerous road user. He put me at danger because he was showing off, so it was an intentional act. The numbnut in the SUV who pulls out in front of me because he was too busy talking on his cellphone to look is just as dangerous and just as contemptible, but he didn't set out to do something dangerous so I can kind of forgive him (after a lecture), but I struggle to look kindly on someone who intentionally engages in an act that puts me (and most of all my bike) in danger because he's trying to prove something. Especially if he's on a bike because I like to think that I can trust bikers to look out for other bikers because that used to be the code.

Talking about intent... if someone were to cause an accident involving others I could not care less about their intentions. Actions not words and all that. ...and no, neither ignorance nor incompetence is a valid excuse for anything.

[Mikkel]

This shit's just wrong !!!

Play with fire and you will get burned eventually.

[short-circuit]

Yes, I'd rather my partner (or me) lived one day of freedom than a lifetime of slavery.

How old are you? 15?

[SixPackBack]

How old are you? 15?

As opposed to the rest of the geriactic cunts in this thread who collectivley average out at over 70!...
Bunch of fucken sycophants.

[carver]

Jumping is not so bad though eh?
like me jumping the gixxer at the end of this vid, over a bridge.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gAmdVE89-VI&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gAmdVE89-VI&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Boob Johnson]

I think that the purpose of this thread has been to make a vary valid point about show-boaters being irresponsible and unnecessarily endangering the lives of others.
This thread? Have a look at how many threads Katman has started on this subject in the last two years or so. At least once a month on average :sleep:




Unfortunately there seems to be some personality issues on here
If you are referring to Katman's lack of it, sure :whistle:




All of this self-righteous tut tutting is enough to make Old Nanas(TM) like me want to go out and pop a wheelie.
Here here. I know of at least one poster in this thread who is a massive hypocrite. It's all about time & place & sometimes we get it wrong, it's called "the human factor". While it's hard not to agree with Katman's general sentiments his approach, delivery & general blind one sidedness to anything else other than his own view really does him no favours




Katman, I do not for one moment doubt your sincerity and I do admire your tenacity but if you always do what you have always done, you cannot expect to get different results!

Does this thread really indicate to you that you are winning?

Have you stood back and thought about changing your approach to your quest for more personal responsibility among our biking brethren?

It's a bit like trying to teach pigs to fly, first of all, the pigs aint never gonna fly and it just seems to really piss the pigs off, the harder you try to make them!

Most KBr's probably agree with you but I don't think you will ever reach the ones that you are targeting and you run the risk of irritating the ones that support you!

I am not suggesting that you give up, just suggesting modifying your approach might give you better results.
Paul Simon had a great song back in the 70's, you may have heard of it, I know Katman has....

"One Trick Pony" :msn-wink:

[Mom]

My experience is that the few riders who do ride in a way that exhibits manifest poor judgement , or in an intentionally dangerous fashion (again, given the circumstances) , quite quickly get given the message (if not the bash) by their peers.

Or they end up dead. Sad but true.


IUnfortunately there seems to be some personality issues on here, so the point has been twisted and lost in pointless criticisms and arguments.

Shame really.

You think? Katman delivers an honest postion, he does it very badly, and he seems to have no off button, or ability to re-think his approach. He offends some of the ones who actually support some of his message, and infuriates a few more, the rest ignore him because typically this has turned into Katman against the world yet again.


...but you still got surprised. (I've had the same - but I only blame myself for that.)

Yeah, situational awareness, pity some of them crazy riders do not use it a bit more eh? ;) just in case you know how it goes.

[short-circuit]

As opposed to the rest of the geriactic cunts in this thread who collectivley average out at over 70!...
Bunch of fucken sycophants.

Quick - get me a walking frame before I turn thirty!

[short-circuit]

typically this has turned into Katman against the world yet again.

He defriended me :crybaby: just cause I suggested he's a wind-bag :zzzz: even though I agree with him :oi-grr:

[Genestho]

I dunno, maybe it's just me but I can look beyond personalities, I find Katman quite hardcase, like most here, and I think your'e only offended as you want to be! In saying that - I have given katman a growling now and then (want some help with the polish dude? hehe :bleh:)

But let's face it, Katman said a couple of years ago this was his campaign, campaigns involve 'bangin on', if it changes the mindset of one, it's a life saved, and load of grieving prevented!

Tis a brave man who walks through a field of cactuses to deliver a valid point!

[bogan]

I'm regularly disturbed by the number of times I have read on here "Meh, life's full of risks. If you don't want to expose yourself to risks then stay in bed".

All very well to a point but at what point does that idea cross the line?


Different people will always have different ideas on what that point is, sux if someone gets it wrong and takes me out, but I ain't gonna lose sleep worrying bout it.

I guess what you are getting at is people should:
1) Not knowingly put others at risk
2) Have a good idea when you are likely to be doing so

A good idea, probably not gonna change anyones mind on the first one, if they knowingly put others at risk chances are they're a prick and wont listen anyway. But educating riders as to how risky their riding is, is a good idea, perhaps more experienced riders should be evaluating other riders and speaking up about such issues on group rides? (dunno if this already happens, haven't been on a group ride yet) or something like that.

[shrub]

...but you still got surprised. (I've had the same - but I only blame myself for that.)



Have you considered, just hypothetically, that it's a matter of perspective. What seems insane to you they might consider "taking it easy", maybe they aren't trying to prove anything to you - just having fun and enjoying a good day out in their own way. I don't know if the focus on "the latest sportsbikes" is appropriate either... the most dodgy riding I have seen hasn't been from fast guys on gixxers. Neither are they, generally, the ones hauling back two beers or more during the "coffee" stop.

I

I looked in my mirror, saw nothing in the right hand lane and the row of lights behind me and I overtook. Apparently he rode up through our group and damn near clipped a couple of guys behind me, but I didn't have time to count headlights and I have learned that when you're riding in a group you don't overtake the guy in front of you unless you have a lot of room and ideally he or she knows you're overtaking. You certainly don't overtake someone following a slow car who has just put his right hand indicator on because common sense would suggest he is planning to pull out.

I agree, there are different levels of crazy - I'm really scared of hurting my bike so I am a nana, and unashamedly so. When I was young and rode ordinary bikes I was fast, but not anymore. When I see someone riding fast WELL, I recognise the skill and admire them, but I see too many retards overtaking on blind corners, cutting in on right handers so their head is aiming right where a car's rh headlights are most likely to be, running wide etc, and mostly it's because they're riding waaaaaay faster than their skill level.

And sorry mate, most of the people who do that kind of crap are on high performance sports bikes. My guess is they're born agains who have the tin to buy a blisteringly fast bike, and make the mistake of trying to use the performance that bike has. Another really cool style of riding, and you pointed it out well, is the guy who swings into a pub and knocks back several beers. I was going for a squirt down Gebbies and ended up in the middle of the Langleys run this year as they left the wheatsheaf and some retard try to outrun me on his Harley (I was on a Tiger). He was on the wrong side of the road with sparks flying so I pulled over, let them all go past and ten minutes later carried on. A couple of Ks down the road I came round a corner to find a Harley lying on its side in a paddock surrounded by distressed people.

[swbarnett]

So should we be allowed to do 100kph on the footpath?

Or does expecting us not to impinge on our freedom?
Bit of a silly question really. The footpath is primarily intended for slow speed pedestrian traffic. This is a very different situation from using a road, which is intended for high speed vehicular traffic in a manner that is not very far removed from it's primary function.

[swbarnett]

How old are you? 15?
44

Why? You'd rather live forever with no freedom whatsoever than live a finite life with the freedom to live your life your way?

[Genestho]

As opposed to the rest of the geriactic cunts in this thread who collectivley average out at over 70!...
Bunch of fucken sycophants.
Goddamnit! *stomp*
If I'm going to be in a bunch of sycophants, I need to know what the heck that is!!!! Anyone? (Actually if you look at the word, and quickly look away, looks like sickopants - boomtish!!!:lol:)

[Ixion]

Bit of a silly question really. The footpath is primarily intended for slow speed pedestrian traffic. ...

Wait. what? Who says? That's not what I use it for.

[swbarnett]

Goddamnit! *stomp*
If I'm going to be in a bunch of sycophants, I need to know what the heck that is!!!! Anyone? (Actually if you look at the word, and quickly look away, looks like sickopants - boomtish!!!:lol:)
From Wiki:

A sycophant (from the Greek συκοφάντης sykophántēs) is a servile person who, acting in his or her own self-interest, attempts to win favor by flattering one or more influential persons, with an undertone that these actions are executed at the cost of his or her own personal pride, principles, and peer respect.

[Ixion]

So should we be allowed to do 100kph on the footpath?

Or does expecting us not to impinge on our freedom?

Don't be silly. No one is suggesting doing 100kph on the footpath. I never do more than 50 (unless it's a very wide footpath). Who expects us not to?

[Ixion]

Or they end up dead. Sad but true.



Oh, yeah, that too.

But y' can't make an omlette without breaking some eggs.

And my lifestyle depends on the Gene-O-Kleen ("Evolution you can see - keeping the gene pool clean since 1903" ) commissions.

[Genestho]

From Wiki:

A sycophant (from the Greek συκοφάντης sykophántēs) is a servile person who, acting in his or her own self-interest, attempts to win favor by flattering one or more influential persons, with an undertone that these actions are executed at the cost of his or her own personal pride, principles, and peer respect.

O.I.C...Thankyou! A wee bit heavy eh? Probably better than a bunch of sickopants!!!! :lol:
Ahem...as you were....:)

[bogan]

Oh, yeah, that too.

But y' can't make an omlette without breaking some eggs.

And my lifestyle depends on the Gene-O-Kleen ("Evolution you can see - keeping the gene pool clean since 1903" ) commissions.

damn straight, without the breaking of eggs the world is likely to turn to shit. Countries getting invaded for no good reason by presidents with the IQ of an oily rag. Government organizations dedicated to ridiculous safety measures rampaging around. Peoples loved ones getting stolen in the dead of night, and even during broad daylight.

Oh wait

fuck

too late





i think swbarnett's sig quote sums it up

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending to much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)

[short-circuit]

44

Why? You'd rather live forever with no freedom whatsoever than live a finite life with the freedom to live your life your way?


Please show me where have I suggested this.

Binary thinking is very limited.

[Mikkel]

I looked in my mirror, saw nothing in the right hand lane and the row of lights behind me and I overtook. Apparently he rode up through our group and damn near clipped a couple of guys behind me, but I didn't have time to count headlights and I have learned that when you're riding in a group you don't overtake the guy in front of you unless you have a lot of room and ideally he or she knows you're overtaking. You certainly don't overtake someone following a slow car who has just put his right hand indicator on because common sense would suggest he is planning to pull out.

I agree completely that double overtakes are bloody stupid - even when riding with people you know very well.
My point was more to the fact that no matter how carefully observant you are, sometimes you will miss something (typically something unexpected too). Anyone who think that their observation skills and attention spans are bulletproof will get a nasty surprise sooner or later.


I agree, there are different levels of crazy - I'm really scared of hurting my bike so I am a nana, and unashamedly so. When I was young and rode ordinary bikes I was fast, but not anymore. When I see someone riding fast WELL, I recognise the skill and admire them, but I see too many retards overtaking on blind corners, cutting in on right handers so their head is aiming right where a car's rh headlights are most likely to be, running wide etc, and mostly it's because they're riding waaaaaay faster than their skill level.

Yes, but you do also get riders who can ride well - but still do stupid shit like dodgy overtakes, double passes (case in point), etc.


And sorry mate, most of the people who do that kind of crap are on high performance sports bikes. My guess is they're born agains who have the tin to buy a blisteringly fast bike, and make the mistake of trying to use the performance that bike has. Another really cool style of riding, and you pointed it out well, is the guy who swings into a pub and knocks back several beers. I was going for a squirt down Gebbies and ended up in the middle of the Langleys run this year as they left the wheatsheaf and some retard try to outrun me on his Harley (I was on a Tiger). He was on the wrong side of the road with sparks flying so I pulled over, let them all go past and ten minutes later carried on. A couple of Ks down the road I came round a corner to find a Harley lying on its side in a paddock surrounded by distressed people.

Indeed, middleaged punters on sportsbike are - in my experience - more likely to engage in dodgy maneouvers than the younger guys. E.g. some punter deciding that riding at 60 km/h through Tai Tapu - with plenty of space and no oncoming traffic too - necessitated him passing me on my right... only about 10 km/h speed difference, but still; I didn't know the guy and was most definitely not expecting it.

Some Harleys work hard in the corners, sometimes they get tired and have to lie down for a couple of minutes. :rolleyes:

Motorcycling would be safer and more enjoyable if people got better at leaving their egos at home.

[sinfull]

Another well thought out thread starter, another few hundred odd views from folk who may well think it through Steve ! Well done !

[Boob Johnson]

Another well thought out thread starter, another few hundred odd views from folk who may well think it through Steve ! Well done !
Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit so they say Sinfull



And Katman...............if wit were shit............you'd be constipated :clap:

[Drew]

I'm a show boater. Wheelies past folk, bit of a nudge on the road occassionally, (less stupid now that I race, but I'm sure Katman would think it reprehensibly dangerous), and with the exception of CB13 (even though he was doing the ton, two up on a back road), having a whaaa about it, no one else has.

Problem with some folk, (this is me being a hypocrit), they believe with such conviction they are right, there is no room for grey in their colourless vision.

It's not all as bad as you see it KM, but I will concede that SOME do need to take a look at what they are doing.

[Katman]

Bit of a silly question really. The footpath is primarily intended for slow speed pedestrian traffic. This is a very different situation from using a road, which is intended for high speed vehicular traffic in a manner that is not very far removed from it's primary function.

Ok, should we be allowed to drive pissed?

Or does expecting us not to impinge on our personal freedom?

[swbarnett]

Please show me where have I suggested this.
Sorry if I misinterpreted your question. You implied that you value longevity over quality of life by questioning my maturity.


Binary thinking is very limited.
Agreed! But it does serve to illustrate a point. Mine being that we are very close to losing the very things that make life worth living under the guise of trying to prevent every piece of pain and suffering. Something which is beyond the capability of our species.

[swbarnett]

Ok, should we be allowed to drive pissed?

Or does expecting us not to impinge on our personal freedom?
Thanks, much better question.

This brings up a very grey area indeed. Define pissed. If you define pissed as "over the legal limit" i.e. a pre-determined numerical blood alcohol level, then I would definately say that there are some people that are perfectly capable of driving pissed with no harm to anyone. If you define pissed as "a loss of control of one's body to the point that one is incapable of controlling a vehicle" then, no, people should not be allowed to drive in this state. The second definition is far more comenserate with reality but very hard to enforce. Who's to say who is and who isn't pissed?

For driving behaviour (assuming alcohol is not a factor) there are two similar definitions of dangerously stupid - "over a pre-determined limit" and "beyond one's own inate abilities".

There are drivers that I would trust my life to behaving "badly" on the road (as a passneger or a bystander). There are, however, others that I wouldn't trust to sit in the driver/rider's chair, let alone turn on the engine. The trouble with black and white laws that aim to address the latter is that they invariably end up hurting the former as well. I would rather have a few idiots on the road than have it over policed.

[Katman]

Define pissed.



For the purpose of this exercise I'll define pissed as being at the point where you judgment and your ability to react to any situation is reduced or affected by even the slightest degree. (Sort of like travelling at 200+kph).

[CookMySock]

For the purpose of this exercise I'll define pissed as being at the point where you judgment and your ability to react to any situation is reduced or affected by even the slightest degree. (Sort of like travelling at 200+kph).C'mon Steve, you lose your credibility when you entertain emotive red herrings such as "driving pissed." Did you start this thread to accomplish something positive, or to troll the idiots (cap/fits/wear) into arguing with you?

Ignore the trolls and respond to the logic, unless that is not what you want.

Steve

[Katman]

C'mon Steve, you lose your credibility when you entertain emotive red herrings such as "driving pissed." Did you start this thread to accomplish something positive, or to troll the idiots (cap/fits/wear) into arguing with you?

Ignore the trolls and respond to the logic, unless that is not what you want.

Steve

It's perfectly logical.

Is it morally irresponsible to operate your vehicle in a manner that creates a high degree of risk to other roads users. Driving/riding pissed and riding in excess of twice the speed limit do exactly that.

[shrub]

For the purpose of this exercise I'll define pissed as being at the point where you judgment and your ability to react to any situation is reduced or affected by even the slightest degree. (Sort of like travelling at 200+kph).

I disagree with your analogy. There are times when riding at 200 kmh+ is safe and the ride is in complete control of their machine and their judgement is unimpeded, whereas I can't think of any times when riding pissed using your definition is OK. I should know, the last time I rode pissed I spent 6 weeks in hospital.

[Katman]

I disagree with your analogy. There are times when riding at 200 kmh+ is safe and the ride is in complete control of their machine and their judgement is unimpeded, whereas I can't think of any times when riding pissed using your definition is OK. I should know, the last time I rode pissed I spent 6 weeks in hospital.

So at 200+kph, what if a hawk feeding on road kill in the long grass on the side of the road, suddenly flies up into your path causing you to swerve forcing you onto the wrong side of the road?

[Max Preload]

The way I see it, far more people impose perceived risks on other road users through their own incompetence rather than the flouting of mere traffic rules. We have the current driver licensing regime to thank for that - people aren't actually taught to drive & ride - they're taught to pass a couple of ridiculously simple tests then let loose on the roads for the next 60 years. Fan-fucking-tastic.

[Katman]

The way I see it, far more people impose perceived risks on other road users through their own incompetence rather than the flouting of mere traffic rules. We have the current driver licensing regime to thank for that - people aren't actually taught to drive & ride - they're taught to pass a couple of ridiculously simple tests then let loose on the roads for the next 60 years. Fan-fucking-tastic.

Or let loose on motorcycles capable of 300kph.

[short-circuit]

The way I see it, far more people impose perceived risks on other road users through their own incompetence rather than the flouting of mere traffic rules. We have the current driver licensing regime to thank for that - people aren't actually taught to drive & ride - they're taught to pass a couple of ridiculously simple tests then let loose on the roads for the next 60 years. Fan-fucking-tastic.

Good point

[MarkH]

The way I see it, far more people impose perceived risks on other road users through their own incompetence rather than the flouting of mere traffic rules. We have the current driver licensing regime to thank for that - people aren't actually taught to drive & ride - they're taught to pass a couple of ridiculously simple tests then let loose on the roads for the next 60 years. Fan-fucking-tastic.

I'm with you there - more advanced driver/rider training for all would be a great idea. I would be happy to improve my skills and even happier if the other road users were a bit less fuckin' retarded!

[shrub]

So at 200+kph, what if a hawk feeding on road kill in the long grass on the side of the road, suddenly flies up into your path causing you to swerve forcing you onto the wrong side of the road?

At 200 kmh you don't swerve - or at least I don't. That's a good example of where speed is dangerous, but you could say the same for 100 kmh. A hawk at 100 kmh would hurt like crazy and quite probably knock you off your bike, so do we ride at 80 kmh in case that happens?

[shrub]

The way I see it, far more people impose perceived risks on other road users through their own incompetence rather than the flouting of mere traffic rules. We have the current driver licensing regime to thank for that - people aren't actually taught to drive & ride - they're taught to pass a couple of ridiculously simple tests then let loose on the roads for the next 60 years. Fan-fucking-tastic.

You're right on the money there - I have just been talking to David Golightly who insures bikes about just that. I read somewhere that riding a bike takes a similar level of skill to flying a plane and to get a PPL you need to have extensive training plus a minimum number of hours plus a medical and pas an exam.

Personally I do as many riding courses as I can because I know I'm nowhere near as good a rider as I want to be, and I regularly practice braking, counter steering etc

[avgas]

For the purpose of this exercise I'll define pissed as being at the point where you judgment and your ability to react to any situation is reduced or affected by even the slightest degree. (Sort of like travelling at 200+kph).
Like after the Mrs pissed you off lol (sorry but you have to admit it also fits nicely)

[Genestho]

You're right on the money there - I have just been talking to David Golightly who insures bikes about just that. I read somewhere that riding a bike takes a similar level of skill to flying a plane and to get a PPL you need to have extensive training plus a minimum number of hours plus a medical and pas an exam.

Personally I do as many riding courses as I can because I know I'm nowhere near as good a rider as I want to be, and I regularly practice braking, counter steering etc

I too think this is a pro-active angle to push for...this training issue relects our road toll! And licensing, man don't start me, I'll need Moms gaskets!! (LOL!)

[avgas]

You're right on the money there - I have just been talking to David Golightly who insures bikes about just that. I read somewhere that riding a bike takes a similar level of skill to flying a plane and to get a PPL you need to have extensive training plus a minimum number of hours plus a medical and pas an exam.

Personally I do as many riding courses as I can because I know I'm nowhere near as good a rider as I want to be, and I regularly practice braking, counter steering etc

While yes and no.....it will be the same crap that happened to cars. People will put blame on everything but themselves - and the technology changes.
I personally hate ABS, DSP and Traction Control. These are only in cars (and bikes now) because of retarded losers on the road.

Likewise i think we should adopt a vigorous campaign on not "Rider Training" which to be honest it telling you something you cant do - to recorded mentoring.

Riding a bike is not like maths - you cant put you hand up in class and ask questions. Someone needs to SHOW you what to do - and you copy it.

Likewise driving. Someone can show you the clutch, the gears, how they work together.....what to do when the back slides out - but the assessment on only on the individual to get it right.

Riding a motorcycle is quite good - if you get it wrong, and you dont want to learn your mistakes, very rarely will you touch another bike.
Regardless of how many 'courses' you did.

[Genestho]

While yes and no.....it will be the same crap that happened to cars. People will put blame on everything but themselves - and the technology changes.
I personally hate ABS, DSP and Traction Control. These are only in cars (and bikes now) because of retarded losers on the road.

Likewise i think we should adopt a vigorous campaign on not "Rider Training" which to be honest it telling you something you cant do - to recorded mentoring.

Riding a bike is not like maths - you cant put you hand up in class and ask questions. Someone needs to SHOW you what to do - and you copy it.

Likewise driving. Someone can show you the clutch, the gears, how they work together.....what to do when the back slides out - but the assessment on only on the individual to get it right.

Riding a motorcycle is quite good - if you get it wrong, and you dont want to learn your mistakes, very rarely will you touch another bike.
Regardless of how many 'courses' you did.

Yea but then there's the younguns that don't know about counter steering and have a hangover about braking, having come straight from a pushbike to a Motorbike, surely that has to help? They do need to be shown.. Other than that, they'll continue to do it old school, and crash and learn (if they get up again that is)

[CookMySock]

Is it morally irresponsible to operate your vehicle in a manner that creates a high degree of risk to other roads users. Driving/riding pissed and riding in excess of twice the speed limit do exactly that.Sure, but that's all taken as read in this thread, and bringing it up again is tantamount to emotive trolling.


So at 200+kph, what if a hawk feeding on road kill in the long grass on the side of the road, suddenly flies up into your path causing you to swerve forcing you onto the wrong side of the road?Thats a fantasy. What person in their right mind would select opposing traffic as a target, rather than a bird?

Perhaps the same people who would tap a superbike out to 200k have no ability to think at all? You are not the only person in the world who has a brain.

You started off in good shape, but your posts have deteriorated into irrational pie-in-the-sky bullswool.

Steve

[Katman]

Thats a fantasy. What person in their right mind would select opposing traffic as a target, rather than a bird?


So what if that bird smacks straight into your helmet? Don't you think hitting a rather solid object like a hawk at 200+kph might stun you momentarily?

You'd be lucky if it didn't knock you out cold.

[Mikkel]

The way I see it, far more people impose perceived risks on other road users through their own incompetence rather than the flouting of mere traffic rules. We have the current driver licensing regime to thank for that - people aren't actually taught to drive & ride - they're taught to pass a couple of ridiculously simple tests then let loose on the roads for the next 60 years. Fan-fucking-tastic.

That is the very crux of all NZs traffic problems.

And indeed, how can you expect Joe Public to take motoring seriously when the establishment doesn't?

Mind, no matter how good you make the system there will always be those who feel a need to push the envelope at all times and there will always be the idiots who don't give a shit about their fellows.

[avgas]

Yea but then there's the younguns that don't know about counter steering and have a hangover about breaking, having come straight from a pushbike to a Motorbike, surely that has to help? Other than that, they'll continue to do it old school, and crash and learn (if they get up again that is)
Very true - however you would be supprise about the misconception about young-ones not being about to counter steer. Most of the people i have had to blatantly tell ("Im not a good teacher or mentor" lol) have been people over 40.
Counter-steering is a really nice way to say "Not hit the apex of a turn like your in a volvo" which seems to only affect older people, or usually calm, collected, well-off, educated young people. Mabey this is a by-product of the youth "boy racer" and "drifting" movements - I don't know.

It still amazes me the amount of people of all ages who have not taken their bikes and cars "off-road" to learn how to re-act in situations when they "randomly occur". This can not be taught in a class - you have to feel the learn sadly. The consequences of not knowing this - and relying on your road skills is fatal.

Imagine if there was a training school to paint? Where will the intuition and life-science fit into a motorcycle course? You cant tell people these things.

You are a marketing man (aimed at Shrub) - so i will put it in terms that fit you. How do you teach people to make a decision where Marketing makes a step in a direction opposing the company direction? At what point do you pull out of a venture? When RAV tells you to make a north-east move into a new tier, do you need to make a south-west one to counter your competitors?
This can't be taught - it has to be risked and learned the hard way. Motorcycles are the same - they are risky. You fuck up - you can hurt. This cant be taught.

[Mikkel]

So what if that bird smacks straight into your helmet? Don't you think hitting a rather solid object like a hawk at 200+kph might stun you momentarily?

You'd be lucky if it didn't knock you out cold.

We have it on good authority that hitting a Pukeko at 80 km/h can break your nose and cause a right mess.
Another guy got a concussion by hit a duck with his helmet travelling at around 140 km/h with a pillion.

Neither of them crashed though.

I all honesty I am, and will remain, much more concerned with grit than errant poultry. And the irony is that grit could be made much much more predictable if anyone in charge actually gave a shit - but they don't.

[Katman]

At 200 kmh you don't swerve - or at least I don't. That's a good example of where speed is dangerous, but you could say the same for 100 kmh. A hawk at 100 kmh would hurt like crazy and quite probably knock you off your bike, so do we ride at 80 kmh in case that happens?

Surely you're not suggesting that travelling at 100kph rather than 200kph wouldn't give you more options on how you might react?

[Genestho]

It still amazes me the amount of people of all ages who have not taken their bikes and cars "off-road" to learn how to re-act in situations when they "randomly occur". This can not be taught in a class - you have to feel the learn sadly. The consequences of not knowing this - and relying on your road skills is fatal.



Yea I see your point.

That up there is gold. Moto-X skills as youngun must help re-action times.
I agree with hands on skills learnt in cars and on bikes, it's practical!

[shrub]

Motorcycles are the same - they are risky. You fuck up - you can hurt. This cant be taught.

Fortunately that's not true. I have had some nasty offs, but most of them were caused by crap bikes and one by Tequila. I had the fortune to do some rider training back in the early 80s and learnt some really good skills (like counter steering) that I have used ever since. I have also read and studied riding and tried things out (like counter steering) on empty roads until I understood how they worked and how I could use them to keep safe.

Contrary to common opinion, most motorcycle crashes are avoidable and skills can be learnt without having to have an accident in the process.

And I hit a Magpie at speed once - it frikking hurt and I had a brilliant bruise, but I didn't come off.

[Max Preload]

Surely you're not suggesting that travelling at 100kph rather than 200kph wouldn't give you more options on how you might react?

Next it'll be 50 km/h vs 100 km/h...

[MarkH]

Next it'll be 50 km/h vs 100 km/h...

20kph would be safer . . .

[PirateJafa]

So at 200+kph, what if a hawk feeding on road kill in the long grass on the side of the road, suddenly flies up into your path causing you to swerve forcing you onto the wrong side of the road?

Why swerve? Just take it like a man (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=9102).

[Max Preload]

20kph would be safer . . .

Or perhaps walking 60 yards ahead of each vehicle, a man with a red flag or lantern enforcing a walking pace, warning horse riders and horse drawn traffic of the approach of a self propelled machine... :whistle:

Now we're getting somewhere...

[slofox]

I had a sparrow commit suicide on my helmet recently. I would've been going 100 - 110 km/hr at the time (yes, really). Apart from making one helluva bang, it did me no harm. It did do the bird quite a lot of harm however...poor Tweety is no more...

Re the conscience thing:

I had a very narrow escape from colliding with a young lad many years ago when I was young and stupid and used to fang around corners I could not see through at stupid speeds. On this particular day, I was out somewhere around the Ashley Gorge with a mate who was riding a Norton Commando 850. I was on the little Benelli 250 and following in my mate's wake. We blasted round a sweeping bend - he was quite some way ahead. By the time I came round, a young kid ran out of a hidden driveway, right into the road, and into my path. I guess he was looking to see the motorbike he had heard. By the time I saw him, I was way too close to ever stop or indeed even avoid him - I was a split second from hitting him at high speed when he stopped and I brushed past with about 1mm to spare...
I have NEVER gone through a corner like that again in the intervening 30 years. I would not be able to live with myself if I killed somebody's child, most especially if I knew I was outside the law when it happened. I was damn lucky that day and so was the kid.
That is when I had the sense of conscience instilled in me. I still have it.

[gwigs]

So at 200+kph, what if a hawk feeding on road kill in the long grass on the side of the road, suddenly flies up into your path causing you to swerve forcing you onto the wrong side of the road?

IF Katman and a big IF......I doubt you would have any time to swerve as you put it....it would be all over by the time you said to yourself WTF was that...If I was you I,d stay home its safer:yawn:

[carver]

So at 200+kph, what if a hawk feeding on road kill in the long grass on the side of the road, suddenly flies up into your path causing you to swerve forcing you onto the wrong side of the road?

i would just hit the fucker, hide behind the fairing

[bogan]

i would just hit the fucker, hide behind the fairing

at 200kph id be pretty close to being behind the fairing anyway, be easy and quickest to tuck fully behind the fairing, safe as.

[Mikkel]

at 200kph id be pretty close to being behind the fairing anyway, be easy and quickest to tuck fully behind the fairing, safe as.

Depends upon the type of hawk I suppose... if it was a Black Hawk then I'd probably chicken out!

[bogan]

Depends upon the type of hawk I suppose... if it was a Black Hawk then I'd probably chicken out!

good point, though even worse would be a black bird, those things can get some pace up!

[The Stranger]

I'm regularly disturbed by the number of times I have read on here "Meh, life's full of risks. If you don't want to expose yourself to risks then stay in bed".

All very well to a point but at what point does that idea cross the line?

Imagine this - a motorcyclist decides to go for a good hard fang in order to satisfy their need for an adrenalin fix. They misjudge a corner and plow head on into another motorcycle killing the other rider.

Do we say "Ah well, life's full of risks. Bad luck for the other motorcyclist" or do we say "You stupid prick, what right do you have to take an innocent life?"

If someone posts a video of themselves riding in a reckless manner out on public roads should we say "Awesome video dude" or should we say "What the fuck are you doing imposing risks on other people?"

That's life - or death.
Every time you go out on the road you risk death. As I noted in another thread, a GN250 got taken out by a 4x4 running a red. Not a lot of speed involved.
Shit happens, The only answer if you don't want it to happen to you is to stay home.
There are numerous car forums you could join to help inform them of the dangers of running reds.
Do us all a favour and sort that one out for us will ya?

[Katman]

That's life - or death.
Every time you go out on the road you risk death.

Come on Noel, you're brighter than that.

I'm specifically talking about putting other people's lives at risk through our irresponsible behaviour. Surely you don't think that's acceptable.

[bogan]

Come on Noel, you're brighter than that.

I'm specifically talking about putting other people's lives at risk through our irresponsible behaviour. Surely you don't think that's acceptable.

theres different levels of risk, different people have different ideas on what is acceptable behaviour. To put another rider at significant risk, must mean the rider themself is also demed to be at risk. I dont know of any rider that routinely rides on the road in a manner they feel is of unacceptable risk.

It sounds like what you are trying to do is force your own ideas of whats an acceptable risk and behaviour onto other people, you would probly have better luck with a less abrasive stratergy.

[Katman]

you would probly have better luck with a less abrasive stratergy.

I never rely on luck.

[bogan]

I never rely on luck.

whooosh...

that was the sound of a perfectly good piece of advice going over katmans head

[Katman]

whooosh...

that was the sound of a perfectly good piece of advice going over katmans head

Really?

I thought it was the sound of the wind blowing through your ears.

[The Stranger]

Come on Noel, you're brighter than that.

I'm specifically talking about putting other people's lives at risk through our irresponsible behaviour. Surely you don't think that's acceptable.

Come on Katman, you're brighter than that.

I'm specifically talking about putting other people's lives at risk through our irresponsible behaviour. Surely you you don't think that's acceptable.

Or are you suggesting running reds is responsible?

[Drew]

theres different levels of risk, different people have different ideas on what is acceptable behaviour. To put another rider at significant risk, must mean the rider themself is also demed to be at risk. I dont know of any rider that routinely rides on the road in a manner they feel is of unacceptable risk.

It sounds like what you are trying to do is force your own ideas of whats an acceptable risk and behaviour onto other people, you would probly have better luck with a less abrasive stratergy.

Spot on. Best post in the thread.

[Katman]

Come on Katman, you're brighter than that.

I'm specifically talking about putting other people's lives at risk through our irresponsible behaviour. Surely you you don't think that's acceptable.

Or are you suggesting running reds is responsible?

So cars running reds is the same as bikes using the road as a racetrack?

[beyond]

i would just hit the fucker, hide behind the fairing

That's the idea mate :) Except I have no fairing so I would just have to dodge it and tuck in behind the dials.

Oh.... just a thought. I ride and drive pissed all the time.


Pissed off at all the other morons out there who can't drive properly, don't know what indicators are for, brake hard or swerve to miss a furry bunny or errant possum, drive on your side of the road while they change a CD, try to play chicken with you while they are texting, run up your arse while doing their makeup, reading a map or even a book as has happened to me.

Yep, you're right yet again. Riding a motorbike is just downright bloody dangerous.... ban them I say!

[Drew]

So cars running reds is the same as bikes using the road as a racetrack?

BEt ya it kills more bikers, than other bikers collecting them.

[The Stranger]

So cars running reds is the same as bikes using the road as a racetrack?

Ah this is a trick question right.
But I will lay money (actually I won't as that's a pretty childish way to try and make an argument and is just a figure of speech) that more "other people" are killed or injured through red light runners than your example of bike-bike head ons.

We are, as I understand it, talking specifically here about taking another life.
There are far bigger problems with people taking other lives on the road than bikes travelling at excess speed.
You are in that regard trying to solve what is essentially a non existent problem. Well done, it's now solved, time to move on.

If you truly do want to make a difference and are not just grandstanding again, tackle the real issues, you could start with red light runners and cell phones.

[Katman]

If you truly do want to make a difference and are not just grandstanding again, tackle the real issues, you could start with red light runners and cell phones.

You tackle what you think is the important issues Noel.

I'm sure there's enough needy causes to go around.

[Mom]

I'll need Moms gaskets!! (LOL!)

Sorry babe, I need all the gaskets I can find :D

[The Stranger]

You tackle what you think is the important issues Noel.

I'm sure there's enough needy causes to go around.

Well yeah, 2 too many actually.
You and DB.

Well skidmark too I guess.

[Ixion]

It's perfectly logical.

Is it morally irresponsible to operate your vehicle in a manner that creates a high degree of risk to other roads users. Driving/riding pissed and riding in excess of twice the speed limit do exactly that.

Thats a subjective and emotive statement void of any objective evidence. Define "pissed" and provide evidence that riding at "twice the speed limit" *EVER* on *ANY* road is a high degree risk to other road users. becaus eI am sure that I can provide evidence (time and place ) where riding at any multiple of the speed limit would not create ANY risk to any (non existent) other road users. You are just buying into the police propaganda that anyone rising at 111 kph will die instantly and anyone riding at 99kph is invulnerable, Which is crap. Your argument deserves a better advocate.

I'd agree with " Is (sic) it morally irresponsible to operate your vehicle in a manner that creates a high degree of risk to other roads users" . I don't agree with " Is it morally irresponsible to operate your vehicle at twice the speed limit" and I challenge your to provide objective evidence for your claims.

[98tls]

Thats a subjective and emotive statement void of any objective evidence. Define "pissed" and provide evidence that riding at "twice the speed limit" *EVER* on *ANY* road is a high degree risk to other road users. becaus eI am sure that I can provide evidence (time and place ) where riding at any multiple of the speed limit would not create ANY risk to any (non existent) other road users. You are just buying into the police propaganda that anyone rising at 111 kph will die instantly and anyone riding at 99kph is invulnerable, Which is crap. Your argument deserves a better advocate.

I'd agree with " Is (sic) it morally irresponsible to operate your vehicle in a manner that creates a high degree of risk to other roads users" . I don't agree with " Is it morally irresponsible to operate your vehicle in a manner that creates a high degree of risk to other roads users" when 100kph+ is axiomatically defined as being morally irresponsible " , and I challenge your to provide objective evidence for your claims. Wow,six minutes that changed my life.

[Brian d marge]

Locomotives on Highways Act 1896

its coming back to a city near you ( actually quite true in some uk cities !)

Stephen

[The Stranger]

So how was I supposed to do that? I indicated, looked in my mirror and saw a row of headlights behind me with nothing in the right hand lane - the retard on the Gixxer was moving up in our lane and I am told passed within a metre of the guys behind me too.


Honestly, if that's the way it went down you are clearly in the wrong.
It is your duty to ensure your way is clear in that situation.
There is no way you could have done that without a head check, which I note from your description above you didn't do.

[swbarnett]

For the purpose of this exercise I'll define pissed as being at the point where you judgment and your ability to react to any situation is reduced or affected by even the slightest degree. (Sort of like travelling at 200+kph).
This, I think, is where your argument falls down. The situation is far from black and white.

Consider reaction times as a measure of a driver/rider's ability to react (the actual numbers don't matter as this is a relative example). Suppose person A has a 0.8 second reaction time and person B has a 1 second reaction time. Now, suppose person A ingests enough alcohol to increase their reaction time to 0.9 seconds and person B ingests no alcohol whatsoever. Person A still has a better reaction time than person B (0.9 as opposed to 1) but, by your definition, person A is now "pissed".

[Ixion]

Surely you're not suggesting that travelling at 100kph rather than 200kph wouldn't give you more options on how you might react?

Certainly. And 10kph will give you a lot more options than 100kph. Got your red flag ready? Cos, where you're going you're going to need it . Why do you think that 100kph has some magical mystical significance?

[Ixion]

Wow,six minutes that changed my life.

Glad to hear it. Some lives need chnaging.

But, y' might want to think, if the slowest , most risk averse, cautious , safety conscious, doddery old nanna in the country (maybe the world - the guy who's slower than your nanna's nanna) isn't convinced;then maybe the argument is'nt all that strong?

[mstriumph]

i'm still struggling with the 'morality' of ANY 'onesizefitsall' speed limit ...

i'm with dickens "'If the law supposes that', ........... 'the law is an ass '"

... or words to that effect :rolleyes:

[SixPackBack]

You tackle what you think is the important issues Noel.

I'm sure there's enough needy causes to go around.

Your are 'tackling' excess speed when it has been pointed out to me [in one of your other rambling threads] that you yourself road race and speed.
Hypocrite.

[Katman]

It's funny how people attempt to construe words to suit their own purposes.

I have never said "do not exceed 100kph".

I am asking people to consider "is travelling at excessive speed and placing other road users at increased risk, morally acceptable?"

I have never bought into the theory that 100kph is safe while 101kph is unsafe.

[shrub]

Honestly, if that's the way it went down you are clearly in the wrong.
It is your duty to ensure your way is clear in that situation.
There is no way you could have done that without a head check, which I note from your description above you didn't do.

Nice idea - look in my mirror counting headlights behind me before I overtake. Actually I probably wouldn't need to overtake, I'd have almost certainly run off the road by then.

I don't know how much riding you have done, but at 90 kmh you're travelling at 25 metres per second. There were around a dozen bikes behind me so it would have taken me a minimum of 5 or 6 seconds to count them assuming they were all visible. In that time I would have travelled around 150 metres blind - I don't know about you, but I find it's much safer to watch the road in front of me than ride by instinct and memory.

I think with thought you'll find that I was clearly in the right and the retard on the Gixxer was in the wrong because it is extremely dangerous and very, very stupid to overtake bikes in the same lane, and mind bogglingly stupid to do it with a high speed differential. I was talking to a chap from an insurance company the other day and he said the overwhelming majority of claims are for sports bikes. Given they ride in the same conditions as everyone else, you have to deduce from that that their riders exceed the safe limits of their skill and the road, and riding to the conditions is a skill, so in essence they exceed their skill level. Easy to do on a bike that would have been winning Formula 1 races a few years ago. I don't have the skill to ride the current superbikes fast, and I know plenty of people who own them are no better than me.

[Max Preload]

There were around a dozen bikes behind me so it would have taken me a minimum of 5 or 6 seconds to count them assuming they were all visible.

I believe watching 'Sesame Street' can improve your ability to count quickly and accurately. But more importantly...


Honestly, if that's the way it went down you are clearly in the wrong.
It is your duty to ensure your way is clear in that situation.
There is no way you could have done that without a head check, which I note from your description above you didn't do.

:2thumbsup ALWAYS DO A HEAD CHECK!

[The Stranger]

Came up behind a slow car through a couple of corners and as we came out of the corners onto a straight I flicked on my indicator, glanced in my mirror and saw nothing in the right hand lane and a bunch of lights behind me, so pulled out. At that moment aformentioned GSXR rider screams past me less than a meter away at one hell of a speed. If I had pulled out a fraction earlier I would be a newspaper article.





I don't know how much riding you have done, but at 90 kmh you're travelling at 25 metres per second. There were around a dozen bikes behind me so it would have taken me a minimum of 5 or 6 seconds to count them assuming they were all visible. In that time I would have travelled around 150 metres blind - I don't know about you, but I find it's much safer to watch the road in front of me than ride by instinct and memory.

I think with thought you'll find that I was clearly in the right and the retard on the Gixxer was in the wrong because it is extremely dangerous and very, very stupid to overtake bikes in the same lane,


I'm smelling bullshit here.
There was a car in front of you which you had indicated to overtake, yet the gixxer was in your lane. Were you executing the overtake from the left hand side of the lane? Did he miss the car in front of you?

I think what really happened was you wee'd youself as a result of your own ineptitude and wanted someone else to blame.

The onus is on YOU to ensure it is safe to pull out to pass. Mirrors ARE NOT going to cut it, head check or die.
This is exactly the sort of shit Katman is referring to, you have no right to take another person's life. You need to learn to accept responsibility.

Should he have done it? I wouldn't have and can't say I support him, but that's no excuse for you fucking up.

[boomer]

I'm smelling bullshit here.
There was a car in front of you which you had indicated to overtake, yet the gixxer was in your lane. Were you executing the overtake from the left hand side of the lane? Did he miss the car in front of you?

I think what really happened was you wee'd youself as a result of your own ineptitude and wanted someone else to blame.

The onus is on YOU to ensure it is safe to pull out to pass. Mirrors ARE NOT going to cut it, head check or die.
This is exactly the sort of shit Katman is referring to, you have no right to take another person's life. To do so you need to learn to accept responsibility.

Should he have done it? I wouldn't have and can't say I support him, but that's no excuse for you fucking up.

he obviously didn't look properly to see teh other bike.. a typical cagers response would have followed.. 'i didn't see him'.. which equates to.. i didn't fookin look !


As for Katman, the police ads tell us 111 is dangerous speeds.. are you trying to tell us you condone 111 but not 200....

Why are your laws different to those of the police..??!


laughable.

[shrub]

I'm smelling bullshit here.


No, you're writing bullshit here. I was in the right hand side of my lane with my indicator on. He rode THROUGH the group behind me and passed me just as I started to pull out with around half a metre between us. He was less than a metre from the car and on the left hand side of the opposing lane as he passed him.

As for counting headlights - that is patently ridiculous. A group of experienced and competent riders ride in a staggered formation, and if you think about it it is just about impossible to see every light because they are BEHIND each other (and some of them were still going round the corner). If they were ranged across beside each other (impossible on a 2 lane highway) then it would be possible to see all the lights, but only if you were quite a long way ahead. Add to that the fact that there were several Street/Speed Triples with twin headlights, and the task becomes even more ludicrous.

And try counting to 12 in under 1 second (which is really all the time you want to be looking away from the road) - it's physically impossible, even if you did learn to count with Sesame St.

It seems that you desperately want the idiot on the gixxer to be right which leads me to believe that you're either the man concerned or that's how you ride - am I right?

[MarkH]

As for Katman, the police ads tell us 111 is dangerous speeds.. are you trying to tell us you condone 111 but not 200....

Why are your laws different to those of the police..??!

Wait, is this thread about breaking the law? I never got the impression that Katman was talking about 'exceeding the speed limit', I thought it was more about 'riding like an absolute twat, risking the lives of others'. Feel free to point out anything said by Katman that shows I'm mistaken.

[boomer]

Wait, is this thread about breaking the law? I never got the impression that Katman was talking about 'exceeding the speed limit', I thought it was more about 'riding like an absolute twat, risking the lives of others'. Feel free to point out anything said by Katman that shows I'm mistaken.

What ever you says doesnt fookin count.. you ride a fookin scootah ffs... ( at least i think its a scootah )

now be quiet

[shrub]

he obviously didn't look properly to see teh other bike.. a typical cagers response would have followed.. 'i didn't see him'.. which equates to.. i didn't fookin look !

laughable.

So what would you have done? Flagged the car down, got the bikes to stop, done a head count and then carefully passed the stationary car? Ideally wearing a high vis vest and with Police supervision. Or could it be possible that I was doing the right thing and he was riding dangerously?

[shrub]

What ever you says doesnt fookin count.. you ride a fookin scootah ffs... ( at least i think its a scootah )

now be quiet

Nice work. I love it when people prove that they're tards. Good on ya.

He may ride a scooter, but he made an intelligent and appropriate comment, which is more than you have done.

[MSTRS]

Or could it be possible that I was doing the right thing and he was riding dangerously?

He was a prat for not leaving plenty of room (going wider) BUT the onus is still on you to check properly before pulling out. Forget 'counting headlights'...one of them was getting bigger. Quickly.

[boomer]

So what would you have done? Flagged the car down, got the bikes to stop, done a head count and then carefully passed the stationary car? Ideally wearing a high vis vest and with Police supervision. Or could it be possible that I was doing the right thing and he was riding dangerously?

I make sure the coast is clear... objects don't just 'appear' from no where..!
If i pull out and i get hit, in the eyes of the law.. i'm guilty!

Now Mr gixxer was probably speeding; in fairness he was probably sat behind some grandma who hesitantly kept looking to over take but didnt and decided fook this ...

you by the sounds of it, got the wind put up ya and have even less confidence on the road than you did before...

its too easy to blame others...

[The Stranger]

No, you're writing bullshit here. I was in the right hand side of my lane with my indicator on. He rode THROUGH the group behind me and passed me just as I started to pull out with around half a metre between us. He was less than a metre from the car and on the left hand side of the opposing lane as he passed him.

As for counting headlights - that is patently ridiculous. A group of experienced and competent riders ride in a staggered formation, and if you think about it it is just about impossible to see every light because they are BEHIND each other (and some of them were still going round the corner). If they were ranged across beside each other (impossible on a 2 lane highway) then it would be possible to see all the lights, but only if you were quite a long way ahead. Add to that the fact that there were several Street/Speed Triples with twin headlights, and the task becomes even more ludicrous.

And try counting to 12 in under 1 second (which is really all the time you want to be looking away from the road) - it's physically impossible, even if you did learn to count with Sesame St.

It seems that you desperately want the idiot on the gixxer to be right which leads me to believe that you're either the man concerned or that's how you ride - am I right?

What the fuck does counting headlights have to do with anything. Read the road code. Nowhere does it say anything about counting headlights. Where you trying to put yourself to sleep. If so count sheep (but that'll probably only make you horny anyway), but don't do it whilst riding.

Poor cunt on the gixxer. Cruising along, minding his own business and some numb nuts on trumpet indicates and pulls out on him at the last minute. You should have chased him down to apologise.

Honestly - you are in the WRONG. The sad part about it is that those that fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. I just hope like fuck if you do, you don't kill anyone.

Interestingly, katman also knows the laws here, wants to instil a sense of conscience, yet is silent. I guess conscience doesn't extend beyond speed.

[boomer]

Nice work. I love it when people prove that they're tards. Good on ya.

He may ride a scooter, but he made an intelligent and appropriate comment, which is more than you have done.

you live in christchurch.. you dont have any say either..

sit in the stoopid corner with ya mate.

[boomer]

Read the road code. Nowhere does it say anything about counting headlights.


i larfed... Some people don't have the common sense they were fookin born with.


My line in the sand is here... |

The coppers line in teh sand is here.......... |

Katmans line in the sand is here........ |


We're all dickheads because our lines don't align.... Well Done katman.

[shrub]

What the fuck does counting headlights have to do with anything. Read the road code. Nowhere does it say anything about counting headlights.

I suggest YOU read the road code - nowhere does it say overtake at way past the speed limit, and YOU said "Mirrors ARE NOT going to cut it, head check or die.". How was I supposed to head check - turn around and identify the colours of the helmets?

[Mikkel]

The onus is on YOU to ensure it is safe to pull out to pass. Mirrors ARE NOT going to cut it, head check or die.
This is exactly the sort of shit Katman is referring to, you have no right to take another person's life. You need to learn to accept responsibility


Honestly - you are in the WRONG. The sad part about it is that those that fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. I just hope like fuck if you do, you don't kill anyone.

You're not doing yourself any favours at all right now mate.

It's true that you have the responsibility to make sure that a pass is safe - but the same applies to everybody else on the road too.

If the other lane is free and you indicate and pull out to pass - anyone coming from behind who indicates (or decides not indicate as may be the case) and pulls out after you has to give way to you. You have to maintain a safe following distance - even when overtaking. And you are only allowed to overtake when the lane is clear and after having indicated for 3 seconds prior to initiating your lane change. And yes, I don't follow that bit to the letter myself - but if you are going to throw terms like "wrong" around then you need to take all the rules, as written, into consideration.

We can keep on arguing all day about whether shrub was appropriately aware of his surroundings. But if what he has said on here is true then he is most definitely no more wrong than the guy on the gixxer.

[boomer]

How was I supposed to head check - identify the colours of the helmets?



THIS IS FKIN GOLD...!!!!


head check means you look over YOUR shoulder.....


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


in all seriousness bro, i'd go buy a car and save your own life...maybe a few others too.

[shrub]

[SIZE=6][COLOR=Orange][B]


head check means you look over YOUR shoulder.....

in all seriousness bro, i'd go buy a car and save your own life...maybe a few others too.

I love Kiwibiker, never seen so many retards in one place - I wish I'd found it earlier. One day you should ride a bike and try turning your head and looking over your shoulder and see how many bikes you can count before you fall off.

Give up before you make an even bigger dick of yourself - if it is not viable to use your mirrors to check that there are no more bikes behind you than when you started it won't be any better to look over your shoulder.

[boomer]

I love Kiwibiker, never seen so many retards in one place - I wish I'd found it earlier. One day you should ride a bike and try turning your head and looking over your shoulder and see how many bikes you can count before you fall off.

Give up before you make an even bigger dick of yourself - if it is not viable to use your mirrors to check that there are no more bikes behind you than when you started it won't be any better to look over your shoulder.

In all seriousness, i have to wonder how you passed your test. if you don;t look over your shoulder when over taking, going past on ramps etc then your a statistic waiting to happen....

dude.. seriously.

[MSTRS]

- if it is not viable to use your mirrors to check that there are no more bikes behind you than when you started it won't be any better to look over your shoulder.

The Road Code also says car drivers should head check. Admittedly, on some bikes, a headcheck is not an easy thing. But the mirrors do not show the whole picture, and you shouldn't be relying on them.

[Mom]

There are none so blind as those that see.

A very quick turn of your head before committing to any manouver that sees you change your position on the road is basic common sense. After all we teach our kids to look right, then left, then right again before they venture out on the road. Mirrors are useless.

[Max Preload]

...you should ride a bike and try turning your head and looking over your shoulder and see how many bikes you can count before you fall off.

Your hole is getting awfully deep there, digger. Are you by any chance a born-again rider?


Give up before you make an even bigger dick of yourself...

Rest assured, he won't be stealing the title from you anytime soon...


Mirrors are useless.

I beg to differ! There's nothing better for verifying the structural integrity of the elbow patches on your suede riding jacket!

[shrub]

The Road Code also says car drivers should head check.


Really? I'm not aware of that, and I have just checked the road code online, but I could have missed it.

As for mirrors, I have always used bar end mirrors and they show the entire right hand lane and I instinctively look in my blind spot (I used to be a truck driver) so I would have glanced to my right when I started to indicate. A bike traveling at 50 - 60 kmh faster than me would have been well behind me when I did that given that he was travelling at least 15 metres per second faster than me.

As for being a born again, I had a 7 year break from riding about 15 years ago when my children were little, but aside from that I have owned and ridden bikes pretty much continuously for 30 years, so I don't think you could call me a born again.

[shrub]

I had enough grunt and a long straight, so knew I could complete the maneuver easily. If I had whipped out at the same time as indicating and checking my mirrors, something I have seen done many times, I would have been collected, but many years experience have taught me to act deliberately and sequentially. It has meant it's been 25 years since I last had an off and that I have never had an at fault accident despite driving for a living for many years.

The nice man on the Gixxer was overtaking aggressively and dangerously (and one of the guys following is a driving instructor in the army and said he was stunned with his stupidity) in what I assume was an attempt to show us how cool and macho he was. In essence he was riding in a way that put other riders in danger - it seems that many on this site believe that is an OK way to ride, but I disagree.

[Katman]

it seems that many on this site believe that is an OK way to ride, but I disagree.

Have you noticed though that their attempts to justify their manner of riding are becoming increasingly desperate and pathetic?

[boomer]

I had enough grunt and a long straight, so knew I could complete the maneuver easily. If I had whipped out at the same time as indicating and checking my mirrors, something I have seen done many times, I would have been collected, but many years experience have taught me to act deliberately and sequentially. It has meant it's been 25 years since I last had an off and that I have never had an at fault accident despite driving for a living for many years.

The nice man on the Gixxer was overtaking aggressively and dangerously (and one of the guys following is a driving instructor in the army and said he was stunned with his stupidity) in what I assume was an attempt to show us how cool and macho he was. In essence he was riding in a way that put other riders in danger - it seems that many on this site believe that is an OK way to ride, but I disagree.


keep justifying it... you'll be right soon enough.

[Max Preload]

...it seems that many on this site believe that is an OK way to ride, but I disagree.

Not at all. But it does seem plenty of posters don't like the fact you're attempting to absolve yourself of any responsibility for not correctly checking for overtaking vehicles before attempting your own manouvre...

[shrub]

Have you noticed though that their attempts to justify their manner of riding are becoming increasingly desperate and pathetic?

yeah, it's kind of amusing. I wonder how many of them actually ride the way they claim to - if so I'd be surprised if any of them are still here in 6 months.

[MSTRS]

Really? I'm not aware of that, and I have just checked the road code online, but I could have missed it.



Hmmm, it just says 'look behind to make sure...'. does not mention mirrors or head checks. I'm sure it used to (at least in the printed version). Still, it is obvious that the field of view in a mirror is insufficient to provide the full picture. If you don't turn your head as well, you are 'making a decision based on partial information'. And the law still deems you to be at fault if you pull out and are hit by another overtaking vehicle.
The fact the overtaking vehicle may be right outside the law, safety etiquette, etc, is by-the-by.

[Dare]

Really? I'm not aware of that, and I have just checked the road code online, but I could have missed it.

I remember head check being involved at some point in my driving tests..
Seriously though I head check obsessively, the only time the mirror is of any concrete use is when your watching traffic go past in it and you see a gap.
Otherwise its just a 10cm window into a world of painful opportunities.

I don't think for a second the gixxer rider was being responsible, but at any advanced speed I think head check should be mandatory. Car or bike.

[Boob Johnson]

One day you should ride a bike and try turning your head and looking over your shoulder and see how many bikes you can count before you fall off.

Give up before you make an even bigger dick of yourself - if it is not viable to use your mirrors to check that there are no more bikes behind you than when you started it won't be any better to look over your shoulder.
I think the point you are missing is when riding in a group it is paramount to look over your shoulder ie: physically look around before making a pass on a car to check the coast is clear, not count each one, just see if it is clear. You're being a little pedantic with this counting thing.


Sounds like you & the gixxer rider were in the wrong. You didn't check properly & he was too close & too fast (at least from your story, but that changed from 1 to half a meter in a matter of a few posts) so your credibility isn't exactly good

[shrub]

Not at all. But it does seem plenty of posters don't like the fact you're attempting to absolve yourself of any responsibility for not correctly checking for overtaking vehicles before attempting your own manouvre...

I've allowed myself to get caught up in online slagging - a pointless exercise, albeit an amusing one.

I'm not sure what more I could have done - I indicated, looked in my mirrors, checked that there was nobody in the right hand lane overtaking and then started to pull out. Isn't that the correct way to overtake?

Can you tell me what I could have realistically done differently? Like I said before, I have probably 20 odd years of riding experience including many years only owning a bike, but I know I am not a perfect rider and am always looking for ways to lift my game.

[mashman]

I think the point you are missing is when riding in a group it is paramount to look over your shoulder ie: physically look around before making a pass on a car to check the coast is clear, not count each one, just see if it is clear. You're being a little pedantic with this counting thing.


It's called a lifesaver in the UK and if you don't do it when you're sitting your test, you fail!!! I still look over the appropriate shoulder when riding a motorbicycle or driving a car, too many blindspots on a car that don't pick up bikes, let alone cars and trucks and bike mirrors on sprots bikes are, as mentioned before, for checking that your torso and elbow apparal is in good condition...

[Max Preload]

...as we came out of the corners onto a straight I flicked on my indicator, glanced in my mirror and saw nothing in the right hand lane and a bunch of lights behind me, so pulled out. At that moment aformentioned GSXR rider screams past me less than a meter away at one hell of a speed. If I had pulled out a fraction earlier I would be a newspaper article.


I'm not sure what more I could have done - I indicated, looked in my mirrors, checked that there was nobody in the right hand lane overtaking and then started to pull out. Isn't that the correct way to overtake?

You don't mention checking your blind spot...

[shrub]

I think the point you are missing is when riding in a group it is paramount to look over your shoulder ie: physically look around before making a pass on a car to check the coast is clear, not count each one, just see if it is clear. You're being a little pedantic with this counting thing.


Sounds like you & the gixxer rider were in the wrong. You didn't check properly & he was too close & too fast (at least from your story, but that changed from 1 to half a meter in a matter of a few posts) so your credibility isn't exactly good

OK, I am willing to accept that maybe I should have looked more carefully over my shoulder behind me - but given the speed differential I doubt that would have made a difference and I do automatically glance into my blind spot and always have done.

As for the distance, I didn't measure it at the time - suffice it to say I was buffetted by his slipstream and I'm not small. It may have been even less than half a metre - or more than a metre.

And it seems that Katman's argument that we need to take greater responsibility for our safety is being proven by my experience. I still maintain that the Gixxer rider was mostly at fault, but I am also willing to accept that I was also at fault because I didn't check as thoroughly as I could/should have done.

[shrub]

You don't mention checking your blind spot...

Maybe I should be flattered the amount of attention a noob such as myself is attracting - have you checked all of my posts? And how many other people are scanning everything I posted for ammunition?

And on that note, I have work to do. Goodbye.

[Max Preload]

...how many other people are scanning everything I posted for ammunition?

Who needs ammunition when there's a suicide bomber? :msn-wink:

[MSTRS]

Maybe I should be flattered the amount of attention a noob such as myself is attracting - have you checked all of my posts? And how many other people are scanning everything I posted for ammunition?

And on that note, I have work to do. Goodbye.

Oh, I'm sorry. Did you come for an Argument? Should have gone next door...this is Abuse.
And don't think you can stir up the rank'n'file, then just slip out when no-one's looking. Simply won't do.

[boomer]

Who needs ammunition when there's a suicide bomber? :msn-wink:

lawl.......

[boomer]

It's called a lifesaver in the UK and if you don't do it when you're sitting your test, you fail!!! I still look over the appropriate shoulder when riding a motorbicycle or driving a car, too many blindspots on a car that don't pick up bikes, let alone cars and trucks and bike mirrors on sprots bikes are, as mentioned before, for checking that your torso and elbow apparal is in good condition...

it's the same here mate, if you don't look over your shoulder when taking of from a stand still, over taking, going past an on ramp you will fail... not only your test but life too.. eventually.

Still, im a retard. :drool:

As for me.. katmans ravings dont have ANY impact on my riding, the only thing he manages to do is rile me up... im sure he suffers from small mans syndrome.

[The Stranger]

You're not doing yourself any favours at all right now mate.

It's true that you have the responsibility to make sure that a pass is safe - but the same applies to everybody else on the road too.

If the other lane is free and you indicate and pull out to pass - anyone coming from behind who indicates (or decides not indicate as may be the case) and pulls out after you has to give way to you.

I'm not looking for favours thanks. Just to leave an indellible mark in his mind for next time he thinks he in the right when he is in the wrong. He needs to learn, one way or the other. No good sugar coating it.

And you are incorrect too. The gixxer had right of way plain and simple.

We only have an opinion on the gixxer's speed, but we have Shrub's confession that he fucked up, so I'll take the confession thanks.
Furthermore, there is a fair chance from the sound of things than had the gixxer been going slower it could well have been a fatality - caused by Shrub.
The primary cause of the accident waiting to happen rested with the trumpet.
The other rider may have also been charged - after they were scraped up. Fat lot of good it would have done eh.

[The Stranger]

Nice work. I love it when people prove that they're tards. Good on ya.


Oh the irony.

[MarkH]

What ever you says doesnt fookin count.. you ride a fookin scootah ffs... ( at least i think its a scootah )

Actually it is a van on 2 wheels (that's why it gets called a Suzuki Burgervan). It is primarily my weekday commuter, cause it is great for that. I only use it for weekend riding because I lack the money to buy a nice weekend bike (I need a part time job to bring in a little more dough, but it is hard to get a job these days).

Of course this dangerous riding stuff doesn't really apply to me, I don't even exceed the speed limit. :innocent:

[shrub]

I'm not looking for favours thanks. Just to leave an indellible mark in his mind

You've done that alright, you've certainly done that. And given me something to laugh at.:clap:

[The Stranger]

Have you noticed though that their attempts to justify their manner of riding are becoming increasingly desperate and pathetic?

Advocating he read and understand the road code and perform head checks is desperate and pathetic?

You provide tacit support of poor riding and at the expense of your pet speed argument. That is desperate and pathetic.

You're as bad as him.
No one (other than Shrub and you) has a barrow to push. Has anyone said or indicated the gixxer rider is without fault?
The gixxer had right of way, Shrub impinged on that and denies it flat.
He now after about 13 pages thinks he may have done a head check and tried to count helmets and headlights - yeah right.

[MSTRS]

Really? I'm not aware of that, and I have just checked the road code online, but I could have missed it.



Just to make sure this horse is well dead...

http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/roadcode/about-driving/passing.html

http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/roadcode/about-driving/using-lanes-correctly.html

And AA Driver Training/Testing states that frequent use of mirrors (every 10 secs or so), use of mirrors before any sort of change in direction INCLUDING a headcheck for the blindspots, is mandatory.

[The Stranger]

Just to make sure this horse is well dead...

http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/roadcode/about-driving/passing.html

http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/roadcode/about-driving/using-lanes-correctly.html

And AA Driver Training/Testing states that frequent use of mirrors (every 10 secs or so), use of mirrors before any sort of change in direction INCLUDING a headcheck for the blindspots, is mandatory.

Nooooooooooooooooo it was someone else's fault. It had to be! NO ONE can be expected to take responsibility for themselves.

[MarkH]

The gixxer had right of way, Shrub impinged on that and denies it flat.

I am not too sure how you can know the gixxer had right of way without being there and knowing the relevant bike positions when Shrub pulled out. Or knowing how long after indicating right the other bike passed him. I do know that if I am overtaking other bikes and come up behind a bike that is behind a car and indicating to pass I would have to be a tool to just blast on by without considering he was about to move to the right. If the gixxer pulled out to pass Shrub at the same time as Shrub was moving out to pass the car, despite Shrub clearly indicating for more than 3 seconds then I would put the blame squarely on the gixxer rider.

But of course I wasn't there so I will refrain from passing judgement about stuff that I do not know. Take the previous paragraph as pure conjecture.

[The Stranger]

I am not too sure how you can know the gixxer had right of way without being there and knowing the relevant bike positions when Shrub pulled out.

Ah, I read shrub's posts. Please correct me if I got this wrong, but I gather he was there.

[Katman]

Advocating he read and understand the road code and perform head checks is desperate and pathetic?

You provide tacit support of poor riding and at the expense of your pet speed argument. That is desperate and pathetic.

You're as bad as him.
No one (other than Shrub and you) has a barrow to push. Has anyone said or indicated the gixxer rider is without fault?
The gixxer had right of way, Shrub impinged on that and denies it flat.
He now after about 13 pages thinks he may have done a head check and tried to count helmets and headlights - yeah right.

Steady on Noel, you sound like you're on the verge of a breakdown.

[The Stranger]

Steady on Noel, you sound like you're on the verge of a breakdown.

This is what I do for relaxation Katman.
But I must say though, you are a top bloke - not answering the post out of concern for my health. You're too kind.

[Katman]

But I must say though, you are a top bloke - not answering the post out of concern for my health. You're too kind.

You're welcome.

[bogan]

No, you're writing bullshit here. I was in the right hand side of my lane with my indicator on. He rode THROUGH the group behind me and passed me just as I started to pull out with around half a metre between us. He was less than a metre from the car and on the left hand side of the opposing lane as he passed him.

As for counting headlights - that is patently ridiculous. A group of experienced and competent riders ride in a staggered formation, and if you think about it it is just about impossible to see every light because they are BEHIND each other (and some of them were still going round the corner). If they were ranged across beside each other (impossible on a 2 lane highway) then it would be possible to see all the lights, but only if you were quite a long way ahead. Add to that the fact that there were several Street/Speed Triples with twin headlights, and the task becomes even more ludicrous.

And try counting to 12 in under 1 second (which is really all the time you want to be looking away from the road) - it's physically impossible, even if you did learn to count with Sesame St.

It seems that you desperately want the idiot on the gixxer to be right which leads me to believe that you're either the man concerned or that's how you ride - am I right?

well im going to apply to a post from a couple of pages ago, think it needs to be said. Shrub is the only one who was there, so we can't condemn or condone his actions, or lack of them, well not too harshly anyway.

In every near miss the most important question is not who was to blame, it is what could i have done to avoid that? sometimes the answer may be nothing other than stay home in bed (not an option obviously) but to ask is to learn.

Also, I was once passed by two cages at the same time, when I was in my cage, 3 cars wide going at 100, 110, and bout 130 made for an interesting maneuverer.

[swbarnett]

I am asking people to consider "is travelling at excessive speed and placing other road users at increased risk, morally acceptable?"

"travelling at excessive speed and placing other road users at increased risk" is very subjective. For one thing you do it every time you ride. Who's to say what is "excessive"? The definition depends on who you are, where you are and when you are. The first speeding ticket ever issued was for doing 4 times the speed limit. Sound's excessive to me! The trouble is that the speed limit at the time was 2mph. Doesn't sound so excessive now, does it?

[MarkH]

Ah, I read shrub's posts. Please correct me if I got this wrong, but I gather he was there.

Well, from what I gathered from reading his posts he was saying that the gixxer was in the same lane as him coming up past other bikes and then moved out across the centre line and passed him as he was moving out across the centre line to pass the car. If Shrub was indicating then pulled out and and the gixxer was not indicating and just pulled out to shoot past the indicating bike in front of him then I would suggest the gixxer was at fault. But this is supposition based on what I gathered from what Shrub said - without being there as an independent witness to the whole manoeuvre it is hard to be sure who was where when Shrub pulled out.

[SixPackBack]

It's funny how people attempt to construe words to suit their own purposes.

I have never said "do not exceed 100kph".

I am asking people to consider "is travelling at excessive speed and placing other road users at increased risk, morally acceptable?"

I have never bought into the theory that 100kph is safe while 101kph is unsafe.

Dude you make it up as you go along....

[boomer]

Dude you make it up as you go along....

he's not a full six pence thats for sure...

[Katman]

Dude you make it up as you go along....

Should car drivers be allowed to travel at any speed and in any manner they like?

Should truck drivers be allowed to travel at any speed and in any manner they like?

Or is it only motorcyclists that you think should be allowed to?

[boomer]

Should car drivers be allowed to travel at any speed and in any manner they like?

Should truck drivers be allowed to travel at any speed and in any manner they like?

Or is it only motorcyclists that you think should be allowed to?

What do you think Sherlock? and more importantly what do YOU DO? remembering the law says you shouldn't travel above 100kph EVER !

[SixPackBack]

Should car drivers be allowed to travel at any speed and in any manner they like?

Should truck drivers be allowed to travel at any speed and in any manner they like?

Or is it only motorcyclists that you think should be allowed to?

Most of us are well aware your opinion is the only one that counts. :baby:

[Katman]

remembering the law says you shouldn't travel above 100kph EVER !

I'm not talking about what the law says.

I'm talking about what your conscience should say.

Do you have a conscience boomer?

[boomer]

I'm not talking about what the law says.

I'm talking about what your conscience should say.

Do you have a conscience boomer?

If i were near you.. you'd be gone burger.. no second thoughts. Does that answer ya question?

[short-circuit]

Having read the last four pages I noticed that Shrub did say he did a quick over shoulder check and he also mentioned checking his blindspot (as a former truckie). The point he was making about checking helmets was that he was at the front leading a group ride. So the rider of the gixxer approaching with excessive speed may or may not have been one of a number of helmets.

I think he was making a perfectly valid point which was exactly as I observed back in post #29....

Please explain why you red repped me for that post sixpackjack(off) (post#29 that is) - Was that just hardcore Gixxer loyality or were you the grade A pillock in question?

[boomer]

Having read the last four pages I noticed that Shrub did say he did a quick over shoulder check and he also mentioned checking his blindspot (as a former truckie). The point he was making about checking helmets was that he was at the front leading a group ride. So the rider of the gixxer approaching with excessive speed may or may not have been one of a number of helmets.

I think he was making a perfectly valid point which was exactly as I observed back in post #29....

Please explain why you red repped me for that post sixpackjack(off) (post#29 that is) - Was that just hardcore Gixxer loyality or were you the grade A pillock in question?

im gonna red rep you cos its thursday.. ok

[short-circuit]

im gonna red rep you cos its thursday.. ok

Ooh that really hurt

You sure it's not coz you enjoy the snug warmness of sixpack's back cavity?

[short-circuit]

im gonna red rep you cos its thursday.. ok

(in the absence of any counter-argument)

[boomer]

Ooh that really hurt

You sure it's not coz you enjoy the snug warmness of sixpack's back cavity?


I love having anal sex with him, hes warm cuddly and gives reach arounds.

I understand you do teh same in teh triple club..

[short-circuit]

I understand you do teh same in teh triple club..

Try DB's swingers club

[Katman]

If i were near you.. you'd be gone burger.. no second thoughts. Does that answer ya question?

:tugger:<hgvhgvhjv>

[The Stranger]

Having read the last four pages I noticed that Shrub did say he did a quick over shoulder check and he also mentioned checking his blindspot (as a former truckie). The point he was making about checking helmets was that he was at the front leading a group ride. So the rider of the gixxer approaching with excessive speed may or may not have been one of a number of helmets.

I think he was making a perfectly valid point which was exactly as I observed back in post #29....



"so I would have glanced to my right when I started to indicate"
That is not saying he did. In fact it took him 13 pages and many posts on the topic for his memory to return.

Plus comments such as this "One day you should ride a bike and try turning your head and looking over your shoulder and see how many bikes you can count before you fall off." indicate that he is clearly inept at head checks.

[boomer]

One day you should ride a bike and try turning your head and looking over your shoulder and see how many bikes you can count before you fall off


pretty much a give away

[boomer]

:tugger:<hgvhgvhjv>

is that the best u can do?

</hgvhgvhjv>

[The Stranger]

Well, from what I gathered from reading his posts he was saying that the gixxer was in the same lane as him coming up past other bikes and then moved out across the centre line and passed him as he was moving out across the centre line to pass the car.

How the hell do you gather that? The only eye witness claims he didn't see him, so were you there? If not, I think we should rely upon the only witness account - shrub.

[short-circuit]

"so I would have glanced to my right when I started to indicate"

That's right - he claims he did...that's all anyone's got to go on.

A bit of a red herring though when the point he was making was that some twat him at 50-60km above the speed limit through/round a group of riders

[The Stranger]

That's right - he claims he did...that's all anyone's got to go on.



Ah no, first he claims he didn't then he claims he can't.
Would have means he would have if he could have, not that he did.

[caseye]

Was probably a chocolate one! hate chocolate ones, Bananna now theres a cake!Sorry got sidetracked there for a minute.
The GX'er rider should have his sword broke over his head and be demoted to riding scooters for the rest of his natural.

[short-circuit]

Ah no, first he claims he didn't then he claims he can't.
Would have means he would have if he could have, not that he did.

To me it implies that upon recollection that's what he "would" have done as a matter of course. In addition, in his initial post he said that as well as a mirror check, he checked his blind spot.

But once again, the main issue (which is being persistently fudged) was the behaviour of the Gixxer rider - which a shoulder check wouldn't necessarily pick up either when riding as part of a group.

[short-circuit]

But once again, the main issue (which is being persistently fudged)

Does that turn you on Boomer?

[short-circuit]

Ooh that really hurt

You sure it's not coz you enjoy the snug warmness of sixpack's back cavity?

Hahahaha - more red from ya SexBackPassage? Must have hit a tender spot (excuse the pun). You'd better do something about that internalised homophobia - could be very damaging psychologically.

[SixPackBack]

Having read the last four pages I noticed that Shrub did say he did a quick over shoulder check and he also mentioned checking his blindspot (as a former truckie). The point he was making about checking helmets was that he was at the front leading a group ride. So the rider of the gixxer approaching with excessive speed may or may not have been one of a number of helmets.

I think he was making a perfectly valid point which was exactly as I observed back in post #29....

Please explain why you red repped me for that post sixpackjack(off) (post#29 that is) - Was that just hardcore Gixxer loyality or were you the grade A pillock in question?

WAAAAAAHHHH
Well you seem like a bit of a twat, and I had a silent desire to see you have a bit of a cry.......you made my day bro':Pokey:

[short-circuit]

WAAAAAAHHHH
Well you seem like a bit of a twat, and I had a silent desire to see you have a bit of a cry.......you made my day bro':Pokey:

A derrogatory term? - wassamadda? Don't you like them?

[PrincessBandit]

I was always under the impression that in the event of up-close-and-personal between vehicles that under almost all circumstances the following vehicle is held responsible. Surely it is the duty of the vehicle behind to work around those in front (even if they are obliquely positioned). Given that our eyes face forward on our faces, not on swivel stalks, the rider coming from behind has a much clearer view of circumstances.

I've had cars and bikes come up behind me and speed up to pass on dual carriage ways even when I've been indicating for my required 3 seconds. It's as if they can't stand having to wait for another motorist to get their opportunity to pass before they do!

If you are overtaking, it is your responsibility to ensure your way is clear and be aware of someone else who may be contemplating the same move. Whether or not you think they're entitled to or not.

[The Stranger]

But once again, the main issue (which is being persistently fudged) was the behaviour of the Gixxer rider - which a shoulder check wouldn't necessarily pick up either when riding as part of a group.

Main issue?
It certainly is an issue.
Potentially not the smartest thing to do, though in and of itself not necessarily a problem either.
Failing to adequately assess the traffic in the other lane however has the potential to be fatal at virtually any speed.
As boomer notes, motorway on ramps, exit only lanes (particularly bad) over taking, changing lanes are all times that a head check is necessary.

If we are going to "clean up" the road, why leave an obvious problem out? It makes no sense to defend it poor driving skills and just focus on one thing.

[Katman]

If we are going to "clean up" the road, why leave an obvious problem out? It makes no sense to defend it poor driving skills and just focus on one thing.

Quite frankly Noel, your deluded rantings are starting to bring discredit to the RRRS scheme.

[The Stranger]

I was always under the impression that in the event of up-close-and-personal between vehicles that under almost all circumstances the following vehicle is held responsible. Surely it is the duty of the vehicle behind to work around those in front (even if they are obliquely positioned). Given that our eyes face forward on our faces, not on swivel stalks, the rider coming from behind has a much clearer view of circumstances.



The key of course is "almost".
If at the last minute something pulls into your lane however and you hit them, it's not your fault. How can it be? Say you're driving along with 2 seconds in front of you, someone slots into your 2 second space and you haven't had time to open the space before he brakes. Not your fault!

If you change lanes, you must ensure the lane is clear to do so. Failure to do so is your problem, not theirs.

[short-circuit]

Main issue?
It certainly is an issue.
Potentially not the smartest thing to do, though in and of itself not necessarily a problem either.
Failing to adequately assess the traffic in the other lane however has the potential to be fatal at virtually any speed.
As boomer notes, motorway on ramps, exit only lanes (particularly bad) over taking, changing lanes are all times that a head check is necessary.

If we are going to "clean up" the road, why leave an obvious problem out? It makes no sense to defend it poor driving skills and just focus on one thing.

Yeah agreed - head checking is important and if it was omitted it could have contributed to a dangerous situation. So now with this out of the way, what are we left with......

[Katman]

The key of course is "almost".
If at the last minute something pulls into your lane however and you hit them, it's not your fault. How can it be? Say you're driving along with 2 seconds in front of you, someone slots into your 2 second space and you haven't had time to open the space before he brakes. Not your fault!

If you change lanes, you must ensure the lane is clear to do so. Failure to do so is your problem, not theirs.

It depends on the manner in which you're carrying out that overtaking manoeuvre.

[The Stranger]

Quite frankly Noel, your deluded rantings are starting to bring the whole RRRS scheme into disrepute.

I'm sure the powers that be will appreciate your input Katman. Feel free to sort it out with them. Perhaps you could offer your services instead.