Other bikers you want to "knock" sense into [Archive]

fireball

19th January 2008, 16:40

dont know if this is the right place to post (mods put it where ever....)

.....start of rant....

yesterday minding my own business on my way home from work heading along henderson valley road and up comes a young boy, looked all of 16 not to my surprise on a GN250 with L plate on (good boy) but only in shorts and tshirt (you tard) he was acting up on his bike, i was trying to ignore him at the start, but as we start heading up Lincoln road he was now in the left lane, now joined by his mate on a scooter in shorts tshirt and jandles, (death wish for sure) they were joking round acting the goat like all young boys, they didnt notice the bus stopping/slowing down in front of them.... i had slowed seeing what was going to happen, bloody lucky i did as they saw the bus and swerved into my lane right in front of me FUCKING CLOWNS could have got all 3 of us hurt... mind you i at least would be walking and have all my skin.
pulled up to the lights and heard them laughing about what had just happened... really wanted to get off my bike and bang their heads together.

who would let their kid out on a bike with no gear? just a lid....
but then comes the question who is responsible? the person getting onto the bike or the parent? (remembering the kid is all of about 16)
damn if i had a kid on a bike i wouldnt let them out without gear on esp at that age where kids think they are bullet proof...

hope this guy wakes up before darwin gets him.

i dont care that im hot in my gear id rather spend that half hour ride home, hot knowing that if i come off at least im safer...

..rant over....

who else has come across this?

Usarka

19th January 2008, 16:45

who would let their kid out on a bike with no gear? just a lid....

Old enough to ride, old enough to decide.....

Bikernereid

19th January 2008, 16:52

These prats do get me riled up but at the end of the day if they want to end up losing thier skin, scarred and messed up that is thier choice. You just have to hope that if these morons do cause an accident with another rider they other person is sensible enough to be kitted up properly.

I would hope that sensible parents would advise thier kids what is necessary attire, but at the end of the day some kids will still do as they please.

Old enough to ride, old enough to decide.....

Headbanger

19th January 2008, 16:55

Go get a job as a cop, Until then, Their skin is none of your business.

Subike

19th January 2008, 16:56

i see this sort of thing,
under dressed riders, and not only on small learners bikes.
But on all sizes, including suits!
I have been asked if I am hot in my leathers, yeap, but safer than you mate!
When ever I can I ask if the "naked" rider has a death wish
the responces are varied.
For all the crap we get re road saftey in all areas of motoring I feel that the short sightedness of the law in not having a minimum required dress code for riding a motorcycle on the road.
I am sure if the statistics were looked at, the injury incidents for poorly dressed riders would be a large number, just becuse they dont get killed, dont mean they are not worthy of attention

Minimum requirement should be Helmet, gloves,boots, and riding jacket.
Similar to the ruling "wear your seat belt"
" wear your riding gear"
Both in the end have a similar effect.
Sure it gets hot in riding gear, but road burns hurt far more than sweat!

skidMark

19th January 2008, 16:57

ive been riding for nearly 3 years around town with nothing but a light jacket and jeans

i only wear my one piece if i'm going on the open road.

fact is i cannot afford cordura for round town.

meh.

once i wear one piece leathers i feel too invincible...

at least in jeans i ride slow because i know i'm proper fucked if i arse off.

in saying this i will be getting round town gear before i resume road riding.

skidMark

19th January 2008, 16:59

Old enough to ride, old enough to decide.....

personally i think the driving age should be raised to at least 18....

a 15 year old can go out and buy a zxr250 or nsr 250.

they are not developed enough mentally to understand the danger they are in.

if i had got a zxr250 at 15 i would not have lived to 16.

raise the driving age.

and not because of boy racers...

the fact is all the boy racers are in thier 20's.

raise the driving age i say.

boomer

19th January 2008, 17:01

here go the do good'ers and pc brigade.... super ted to the rescue!

Usarka

19th January 2008, 17:02

I want to go for a swim but there are lots of sharks around. Should I be allowed to go?

fireball

19th January 2008, 17:03

i am definitely not perfect when it comes down to gear... like you mark cant afford it, only last week did i finally buy a pair of draggins.
but always always always i ride with gloves lid and jacket. and have had a few close calls in recent weeks... and every time i walk away thinking im glad i had my gear on for that because "if i had of come off" etc etc.

Bikernereid

19th January 2008, 17:04

Thought you would have been too old for super ted, more of a penfold chick myself!!

And PC rocks hadn't you heard, you do live in NZ after all with the speech:Police:

here go the do good'ers and pc brigade.... super ted to the rescue!

dipshit

19th January 2008, 17:08

Go get a job as a cop, Until then, Their skin is none of your business.

So their clowning around on the road and not paying attention and nearly taking him out and treating it all as a bit of a laugh isn't his problem...???

Fuck off.

These wouldn't be your kids by any chance?

Delinquency is probably hereditary after all.

Headbanger

19th January 2008, 17:12

If they were my kids, What they were wearing would still would be none of your business.

You don't have any power over others just because you happen to own a bike and an opinion.

dipshit

19th January 2008, 17:15

up comes a young boy, looked all of 16 not to my surprise on a GN250 with L plate on... ...he was acting up on his bike, i was trying to ignore him at the start,

Just wait till next year when he is 17 and on a CBR600 or something!

MisterD

19th January 2008, 17:16

So their clowning around on the road and not paying attention and nearly taking him out and treating it all as a bit of a laugh isn't his problem...???

Fuck off.

These wouldn't be your kids by any chance?

Delinquency is probably hereditary after all.

That's not what he said - if someone's stupid and nearly takes you out, by all means have a word, but what they choose to wear beyond the legal requirements is their own business and nobody else's.

After all, we're all taking the risk of driving a vehicle that has no safety cage and won't stand up on it's own. Perhaps cagers should keep telling you you're a fuckwit for riding a bike?

scracha

19th January 2008, 17:17

If they were my kids, What they were wearing would still would be none of your business.

So if I saw a bloke with a kid on his pillion seat wearing jandals and riding stupidly would that also be none of my business?

dipshit

19th January 2008, 17:19

If they were my kids, What they were wearing would still would be none of your business.

You don't have any power over others just because you happen to own a bike and an opinion.

I can just imagine someone like you bringing more wankers into the world.

jade

19th January 2008, 17:42

All the gear all the time
I always wear my 1piece even if just going down the road
work is 2mins from my house but I still wear cordura fully armoured pants and jacket (gloves too)
ive had 11 accidents... walked from 10 of them..
the 11th I didnt have a scratch on me cept a thigh bone poking out my leg

Bikernereid

19th January 2008, 17:54

This sort of post shows the sort of attitude that gives bikers a bad name. If you don't like his opinon that is fine but there is no need to resort to this sort of insult, it does not take the discussion forward at all.

I can just imagine someone like you bringing more wankers into the world.

Headbanger

19th January 2008, 17:54

I can just imagine someone like you bringing more wankers into the world.

Good, And they won't stand for being oppressed by people such as yourself.

You seem to think your beliefs should be laid on everyone else, who died and left it up to you to be the yard stick?. Would you be happy for someone to lay there beliefs on you and stop you riding a bike completely? Its a dangerous activity isn't it?...Jacket or no jacket.

Or is it because you ride a bike you believe you suddenly have the right to instruct others?

No matter which way you cut it, Its a pathetic joke.

If I do my job right, When grown my sons will be able to see people such as yourself for what they are.

James Deuce

19th January 2008, 17:55

Burn them?

Headbanger

19th January 2008, 18:02

So if I saw a bloke with a kid on his pillion seat wearing jandals and riding stupidly would that also be none of my business?

Do you want a stupid answer to your stupid question?

Perhaps you just need reminding that the scenario put forward concerns a (presumably) licensed rider wearing what he is legally required to. Not an adult putting a child in danger.

Other then that, What you decide to do in the case you outlined is purely up to you, I know what I would do.

SlowHand

19th January 2008, 18:03

personally i think the driving age should be raised to at least 18....

a 15 year old can go out and buy a zxr250 or nsr 250.

they are not developed enough mentally to understand the danger they are in.

if i had got a zxr250 at 15 i would not have lived to 16.

I thought your age odometer was stuck on 15?
Ask your local friend for the patented Fonsi Tap on the head. That should get it working again.

Ixion

19th January 2008, 18:17

We tried the 'clip upside the head'. Didn't work

boomer

19th January 2008, 18:20

So their clowning around on the road and not paying attention and nearly taking him out and treating it all as a bit of a laugh isn't his problem...???

Fuck off.

These wouldn't be your kids by any chance?

Delinquency is probably hereditary after all.

no.. EVERYONE should come onto a website and moan and whine like little girls... instead of a) having a chat with 'em. b) phoning the rozzas... c) other

no.. instead of that you thought you'd come on this site an moan, cry and look for.. what? Sympathy? attention? a change in social beliefs, A conservative government...??!! what exactly was your point?

Burn them?

i would .. yes. Before any other shenanigans happen

Do you want a stupid answer to your stupid question?

No thanks; but i'd like a million dollars and i'd also like to go on a website i've frequented for a while now, without having to put up with tards like the guys who started this thread or YOU who added fuel!

bandit_girl

19th January 2008, 18:20

boomer

19th January 2008, 18:24

ENOUGH alreaday!!

i OFTEN ride to work or round town or round the block with NO protective gear other than a lid.
I split
i filter
i wheelie
i try and stoppie
i break traction
i even under take although upto now its been a mini and Logan.
I've had bald tyres
I've been above and beyond the speed limit
i've not seen or heard the sirens sometimes

SUE ME...!!!

in fact call me to discuss if you like... PM me for my number.

i bet you NOT one of the pc brigade has teh balls...

motorbyclist

19th January 2008, 18:26

Minimum requirement should be Helmet, gloves,boots, and riding jacket.
Similar to the ruling "wear your seat belt"
" wear your riding gear"
Both in the end have a similar effect.
Sure it gets hot in riding gear, but road burns hurt far more than sweat!

now while i also disapprove of people riding with only a lid on, and would never ride with an open face helmet, it is ultimately their choice. the last thing we need is more bloody government interference, laws and restrictions. if they required jackets gloves and boots you just get the same "skin crayons" being idiots but now they're wearing el-cheapo plastic clothes that won't actually protect them in an accident, but now they feel even safer than they really aren't. next you'd be asking for a WOF for one's gear.

rather than banning stuff, they could subsidise gear, or maybe seperate accident and injury statistics between those with gear and without gear.

i always ride with full face helmet, jacket and gloves, but only bring out the pants/boots if it's practical or it's wet or a long ride. i've got spare clothes at work so that's fine for full gear, but if i'm going to uni for more than an hour or maybe just to something social where big pants and bike boots are less than ideal, i'll go like an idiot with jeans and sneakers, take the risk and face the consequences.

oh, and you seem to be missing a rather important point: some serious riding safety lessons would be a much better move

dipshit

19th January 2008, 18:27

You seem to think your beliefs should be laid on everyone else, who died and left it up to you to be the yard stick?.

As a typical motorcyclist you also seem incapable of acknowledging that other motorcyclists can ride like complete dicks on the road and endanger others as well as just themselves.

You completely ignored the OP's main point...

"they were joking round acting the goat like all young boys, they didnt notice the bus stopping/slowing down in front of them.... i had slowed seeing what was going to happen, bloody lucky i did as they saw the bus and swerved into my lane right in front of me FUCKING CLOWNS could have got all 3 of us hurt... mind you i at least would be walking and have all my skin. Pulled up to the lights and heard them laughing about what had just happened... really wanted to get off my bike and bang their heads together."

... and started defending them by sidestepping the main issue saying that they had the gear on that is required by law, so fuck off and leave them alone.

As I said, I can just imagine you are one of those parents that defends and makes excuses for your kids no matter what shit they do.

justsomeguy

19th January 2008, 18:32

Race quality gear saved my life.

The uniform for bikers here in Sydney (on the street) is t-shirt, shorts, helmet - that's it. The chicks wear the shortest of shorts.

motorbyclist

19th January 2008, 18:34

personally i think the driving age should be raised to at least 18....
a 15 year old can go out and buy a zxr250 or nsr 250.
they are not developed enough mentally to understand the danger they are in.
if i had got a zxr250 at 15 i would not have lived to 16.
raise the driving age.

looking at your riding, i have no doubt in my mind that you believe what you're saying

but i have seen many a rider, including myself, who both didn't buy a zxr or nsr 250, and rode reasonably sensibly without incident

while shifting the licence further back to 16 would be ok, and make it less appealing to leave school, moving the licence to 18 is a real hinderance to young people in the workforce simply for the sake of a few idiots with a deathwish who will still have a deathwish once they're 18

justsomeguy

19th January 2008, 18:38

Personally I wish:

Helmets were legally made optional.
The pictures of disease were taken off cigarette boxes.
"DO NOT DRINK" warnings were taken off poisonous liquid bottles, leave the poison signs on though.

motorbyclist

19th January 2008, 18:38

As I said, I can just imagine you are one of those parents that defends and makes excuses for your kids no matter what shit they do.

man i hate people like that, the kids are usually little shits too

and you're right, the main point of that post it that those kids nearly took out a 3rd biker. i would've given them an earful, but mainly about their riding with only a brief mention about the gear

Race quality gear saved my life.

The uniform for bikers here in Sydney (on the street) is t-shirt, shorts, helmet - that's it. The chicks wear the shortest of shorts.

i've seen around the university girls wearing next to nothing doubled up on scooters only one of which has a helmet and it's open face too.

i bet they wouldn't run into a brick wall with that helmet on, so why ride with an open one instead of a full face?

MadDuck

19th January 2008, 18:44

i try and stoppie

You try? damn thought you might have mastered it by now Boomer :cool:

i just dont understand how a GN rider can afford jandals (not jandles) dammit. Warehouse must have a sale on or maybe they sold out of them pink plastic things

Happybug

19th January 2008, 18:44

Unfortunately we can't put experience into someone elses head. Yep, i've got the scars to prove that leathers are cheaper than skin and helmets are cheaper than heads - and a damn sight less painful. But, if he was my kid, and i'd done the lecture, then i'm not sure there's any way of making them wear other gear? I'm about to start teaching my daughter to ride, and i personally always wear hat, jacket, boots, gloves as a minimum and it's what i'm teaching her. Anything further than around town commuting and it's pants too. Personal preference i guess, but i'm also guessing those who don't haven't yet experienced the pain of an accident when they were underdressed. And thinking it won't happen to me is just bullshit head in the sand.

boomer

19th January 2008, 18:48

so why ride with an open one instead of a full face?

BECAUSE, and its a sad day when this has to be pointed out to someone, it's legislated that to ride a motorcycle you must wear a helmet CE approved.

It just so happens that open faced helmets are CE approved too.

You'll also find that some people drive in cars with less than adequate crumple zone protection as laid down by the EEC.

Get a grip and live your own life and let others do as they please!!

Headbanger

19th January 2008, 18:48

No thanks; but i'd like a million dollars and i'd also like to go on a website i've frequented for a while now, without having to put up with tards like the guys who started this thread or YOU who added fuel!

Unlike yourself, who hasn't posted.

Oh wait.

:clap::clap::clap:

boomer

19th January 2008, 18:52

You try? damn thought you might have mastered it by now Boomer :cool:

i just dont understand how a GN rider can afford jandals (not jandles) dammit. Warehouse must have a sale on or maybe they sold out of them pink plastic things

i gave up after seeing what happened to MR

ps...
I'm still waiting for the PM's!

boomer

19th January 2008, 18:59

Headbangers not quite brave enough for a chat but he plucked up enough courage to have a snipe.... via Rep

Rep comment deleted

Headbanger

19th January 2008, 19:02

Who said anything about a chat?

Anyway, You got a green rep and a truthful comment, whats your problem?

Are you craving attention?

PrincessBandit

19th January 2008, 19:06

BECAUSE, and its a sad day when this has to be pointed out to someone, it's legislated that to ride a motorcycle you must wear a helmet CE approved.

It just so happens that open faced helmets are CE approved too.

You'll also find that some people drive in cars with less than adequate crumple zone protection as laid down by the EEC.

Get a grip and live your own life and let others do as they please!!

I'd actually quite like to try riding without a helmet, just to see what it was like, but know that if my cranial contents got splattered over the road it would be my own fault (regardless of whether i caused the accident or not); in the same way I resisted for a long time wearing a seatbelt while driving (I am old enough that for the first many years of my driving life seatbelts were not compulsory to wear) but now I do, both for safety and a lack of desire to part with hard earned $ for fines. Back to helmets though, with some of the hard, high speed projectiles i've had smack into my visor I've just been glad my visor was down when they struck. If others are able to cope with that, then good for them, let them wear what they prefer. Me, I'm just a chicken who would rather let a visor take the crap instead of my face. Eeeewwww.

Swoop

19th January 2008, 19:44

Ooh good. A gear thread. We don't get enough of these in summer.

RDJ

19th January 2008, 19:57

May I suggest a KB variation of Godwins Law *

Tournette's Corollary of Godwin's Law

You can tell when a KB thread hits rock bottom when one of the participants questions / abuses another's ancestry, descendants, sexual orientation, legitimacy, bike, clothing, helmet, speed, waving habits and leather:chrome quotient.

(Actually, there is probably little point - most threads would hit rock bottom in ~1.3 pages... :eek5: )

* formulated by Richard Sexton (in ? 1989): "You can tell when a USENET discussion is getting old when one of the participants drags out Hitler and the Nazis".

ital916

19th January 2008, 20:07

I would've pointed the lads in the direction of the ride2die website, that will make them wear all the gear all the time and stop riding like dickheads! It's a personal decision with gear but the minimum gear for me is bike boots, armoured pants, cordura armoured jacket, full face helmet, race gloves and a back protector. No less, no matter how hot it is, i'd rather suffer the heat than the road rash. Watch the video, how not to take a corner on youtube by the way..bloody idiots tham loonies in the vid.*It's the video taken from a truck*

Patch

19th January 2008, 20:26

motorbyclist

19th January 2008, 20:27

BECAUSE, and its a sad day when this has to be pointed out to someone, it's legislated that to ride a motorcycle you must wear a helmet CE approved.

It just so happens that open faced helmets are CE approved too.

You'll also find that some people drive in cars with less than adequate crumple zone protection as laid down by the EEC.

Get a grip and live your own life and let others do as they please!!

lol i expected a bad response from that

i'm not saying that they must listen to me (i actually keep my mouth shut unless the conversation goes that way), just that i myself cannot understand why you'd only wear half a helmet. i've seen full face helmets where the rider has gone for a slide and worn right through the chin guard. i'd hate to see that happen to someone's face, especially mine

plus of course i've had a stone hit my face when my visor was up once, and my brother had a bee fly into his (which was then ironically trapped within the face guard).... cant be fucked wearing glasses and a scarf

PrincessBandit

19th January 2008, 20:35

Burn them?

Oh no Jim2, you sound unsure. Be bold and certain. Use exclamation mark instead of question mark. Or many exclamation marks. Don't be afraid, for "fear is the path to the dark side, fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering"

Ixion

19th January 2008, 20:38

Get a gun and shoot the fuck.

RDJ

19th January 2008, 20:59

Oh no Jim2, you sound unsure. Be bold and certain. Use exclamation mark instead of question mark. Or many exclamation marks. Don't be afraid, for "fear is the path to the dark side, fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering"

Crikey Princess are you of the Bene Tleilaxu? "It is by will alone I set my mind in motion."

PrincessBandit

20th January 2008, 06:59

Crikey Princess are you of the Bene Tleilaxu? "It is by will alone I set my mind in motion."

No, I am not a Bene Jesserit either, I am Jedi, with mind tricks and waving hands. :laugh:

James Deuce

20th January 2008, 07:27

These are not the bikers you are looking to burn.

Fatjim

20th January 2008, 07:31

The only types of bikes that piss me off are those that slow me down while lane splitting, whether its a BMW that is just in the way, or a slower lanesplitter who refuses to get out the way.

If I had more of a "get fucked" attitude this wouldn't be an issue, but I'm a kind soul who errs on the side of caution and waits.

KATWYN

20th January 2008, 08:14

who would let their kid out on a bike with no gear? just a lid....
but then comes the question who is responsible? the person getting onto the bike or the parent? (remembering the kid is all of about 16)

I cringe when I think back to being 16. I rode a friends Katana 1100 road bike quite a few times.

In my head I was being sensible....I was wearing a helmet. (but no gear)

My parents never knew about it until I confessed to my mother only a few years ago that I used to ride my friends Katana.

But I never actively did silly things on the bike - but I rode it completely inexperienced and in ignorance

Usarka

20th January 2008, 09:01

They were going across the street to get some orange sherbert....

WarlockNZ

20th January 2008, 09:17

Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Hitcher

20th January 2008, 13:49

Most people die in their sleep. I'll probably die in my sleep before some nong on a bike dies as a consequence of their stupidity. Who gets the last laugh then?

Steam

20th January 2008, 13:53

I'll probably die in my sleep before some nong on a bike dies as a consequence of their stupidity.
Huh?
People die of stupid manoeuvres all the time. One just last week.

Disco Dan

20th January 2008, 14:01

here go the do good'ers and pc brigade.... super ted to the rescue!

Thought you would have been too old for super ted, more of a penfold chick myself!!

And PC rocks hadn't you heard, you do live in NZ after all with the speech:Police:

Yay!

Suuuuuupeeeer Teeeeeedd.... Suuuuuuuupppppaaaaaaarrr teeeeeed!!! SuperTed!!

RDJ

20th January 2008, 14:11

Most people die in their sleep. I'll probably die in my sleep before some nong on a bike dies as a consequence of their stupidity. Who gets the last laugh then?

Ah, Hitcher, doesn't the person who dies last get the last laugh? I'm just sayin'... :blink:

Hitcher

20th January 2008, 14:23

Huh?
People die of stupid manoeuvres all the time. One just last week.

What are these "man eggs" of which you speak?

Steam

20th January 2008, 14:37

What are these "man eggs" of which you speak?

Hmm?
Manoeuvre - a deliberate coordinated movement requiring dexterity and skill; "he made a great maneuver."
I suppose it's American spelling.

Even Man and Oeuvre would be "Male human" and "oeuvre" - the total output of a writer or artist (or a substantial part of it).

Wot's eggs got to do with it?

Swoop

20th January 2008, 15:21

If I may ponder a question?

In summer the temperature increases, people wear less clothing and the threads about "lack of gear" increase on KB.

Why then, doesn't the opposite happen?

Wintertime threads about bikers wearing too much gear?:scratch:

RDJ

20th January 2008, 16:29

discotex

20th January 2008, 17:31

Just wait till next year when he is 17 and on a CBR600 or something!

WTF? You only meet the nicest people on Honda's ;)

discotex

20th January 2008, 17:41

in Sydney ... The chicks wear the shortest of shorts.

That's the REAL reason why so many kiwi's are moving to Aussie.

As for people not wearing gear. I cringe personally as I like my skin, hands, feet, etc.

But, if we as a nation think it's ok to drain ACC playing rugby without bubble wrap in winter I can't see why us bikers can't get some of those ACC funds back through road rash etc. Can't have my extra rego going into the general fund now can I!

;)

scracha

20th January 2008, 20:27

Do you want a stupid answer to your stupid question?

Cripes you're aggressive. You're not from Glasgow are you?

Perhaps you just need reminding that the scenario put forward concerns a

I was putting forward my own scenario that was related to your comment

If they were my kids, What they were wearing would still would be none of your business.
If I saw a 15/16 year old kid riding like a dick, wearing very little safety gear then I would feel obliged to have a quick word in their ear. Sure, it'd probably go in one ear and out the other and maybe they'd tell me to fuck off but at the end of the day, when they lose skin on their next crash then at least they couldn't say nobody had warned them.

(presumably) licensed rider wearing what he is legally required to. Not an adult putting a child in danger.

Point taken. I agree, if an adult wants to go out with safety gear comprising a Bell helmet from 1980 bought on Trademe then that's their choice. There's a bit of a gray area with uninformed teenagers thinking they're bulletproof though.

In the basic training course (I presume there is some sort of training before they're let out on the roads) in NZ do they get educated on the importance of safety gear, shown photos of injuries and told the wear rates of denim, leather etc?

gijoe1313

20th January 2008, 21:23

And there was this one time, on a ride, when I waved to a guy on a sprotsbike and his mate on a cruisier and I didn't get one back! :gob: OMG ... I was like, like ... we need a special wave to show that we acknowledge one another as bikers!

Also, what is the calorific properties of normal and premium fuel? And are Honduh riders ghey? What does gargre mean? :rolleyes: :msn-wink:

Headbanger

20th January 2008, 22:24

Cripes you're aggressive. You're not from Glasgow are you?

Wanganui.

But, I bet that would have been your second guess.

I was on a roll.....:shit:

fireball

21st January 2008, 10:07

and you're right, the main point of that post it that those kids nearly took out a 3rd biker. i would've given them an earful, but mainly about their riding with only a brief mention about the gear

thank you for seeing my point... yes a little of it is about their gear but the main point is about what they were doing on the road.. acting like tossers, and yes causing danger to another rider being me who was just minding my own business heading home from work.
they can go get road rash hit a car get killed due to lack of gear its their funeral not mine.

i wanted to smack sense into them to use some common sense maybe some situational awareness to realize one day they could kill someone else or themselves with their actions.

James Deuce

21st January 2008, 10:13

Waste of time. Look after your own riding. Stop wasting energy on others when it could be spent on yourself. There is NOTHING you can do to change their attitude.

Drew

21st January 2008, 10:19

WICKED, another "holier than thou" thread. I do the right thing, none of you do, I want to bang sense into the whole world.

Harden the fuck up. Personal choice and all that, blah blah blah.:bash:

swbarnett

21st January 2008, 11:49

i dont care that im hot in my gear id rather spend that half hour ride home, hot knowing that if i come off at least im safer...
I would rather not come off at all. For most riders I'd agree with you but there are some of us that suffer from heat exaustion quite easily. In hot weather I wear helmet, jacket, gloves, boots and jeans. If I wear anything more on my legs I get hot to the point where I can't concentrate on my riding and ocassionally to the point of almost passing out. Even doing up my jacket fully around town can be dangerous on particularly hot days.

I don't think this was the issue in this case though. Either it's because they think they're bulletproof (probably due to being over-protected at a younger age) as you say or they have at least one adult role model that they're simply mimicking.

motorbyclist

21st January 2008, 19:16

In the basic training course (I presume there is some sort of training before they're let out on the roads) in NZ do they get educated on the importance of safety gear, shown photos of injuries and told the wear rates of denim, leather etc?

no basic training course at all. all you have to do is get a "basic motorcycling skills certificate" where you simply weave some cones, change gear and do an emergency stop, then go do the multi-choice theory test where the only mention of safety gear is that of a helmet (with one of the 4 answers being a cheeky one)

all up it costs around $80, and a 15 year old who's had all of one hour riding experience in a carpark can ride an rg250 between 5am and 10pm under 70kph and displaying an L plate wearing nothing but his undies and an open helmet from the 80's bought on trademe

plenty of courses available, including the defensive driving/riding course($200?) which cuts the restricted period from 18 to 12 months, but alot of kids won't do 'em - especially the ones that need to

Even doing up my jacket fully around town can be dangerous on particularly hot days.

on warm days i also unzip my jacket up to half open.... reckon that's a serious problem at 50kph or lower?

James Deuce

21st January 2008, 19:54

I would rather not come off at all. For most riders I'd agree with you but there are some of us that suffer from heat exaustion quite easily. In hot weather I wear helmet, jacket, gloves, boots and jeans. If I wear anything more on my legs I get hot to the point where I can't concentrate on my riding and ocassionally to the point of almost passing out. Even doing up my jacket fully around town can be dangerous on particularly hot days.

I have a neurological condition (thanks to a bike accident) that makes me sweat like a pig. Heat stroke leads to migraine which leads to 24 hours in bed unable to anything.

I have a couple of simple hints for you.

Stop more often

Drink more water.

Don't drink coffee, don't drink sugary drinks, both those things dehydrate you.

swbarnett

21st January 2008, 20:24

I have a neurological condition (thanks to a bike accident) that makes me sweat like a pig. Heat stroke leads to migraine which leads to 24 hours in bed unable to anything.
Ouch, thankfully my issues aren't nearly that bad. I used to get migraines now and then so I can sympathise.

Thanks for the suggestions but they're nothing I haven't already tried. For now I'm comfortable with jeans. I have come off in them many years ago at about 60kph with no leg damage at all. When money allows I am planning to look into a pair or two of draggins.

Stop more often
Unfortunately the more I stop the hotter I get (at least on the open road).

Drink more water.
I have tried this. This doesn't help as the problem is not dehydration but overheating.

Don't drink coffee, don't drink sugary drinks, both those things dehydrate you.
Don't drink coffee at all (can't stand the stuff). Did drink a lot of Coke but I've been quite light on it lately. Even on days (several in a row) of the hottest weather with no Coke (or any other sugar laden drink - including fruit juice) I still have a problem. On these days even when lazing around home in nothing but a pair of drawers every movement becomes an effort. It's actually better on the bike if I can get a breeze going - hence only jeans, the legs make pretty good radiators.

Headbanger

21st January 2008, 20:29

How about an open face helmet and a T-Shirt....:first:

Bikernereid

21st January 2008, 20:32

Suzukis are better bikes but have to say that the hottest, nicest bloke I know rides a Honda; the shame, the shame. But he does wear full lid, boots, gloves, full leathers if long ride and jeans & leather jacket for shorter runs.

WTF? You only meet the nicest people on Honda's ;)

owner

21st January 2008, 20:39

roadracingoldfart

21st January 2008, 21:14

I was just pondering if the people that dont think a good set of riding gear is not sensible / crutial also think the hospitals are cheap to run empty halls and the taxes paid to keep them smelling nice are just fine and dandy ?

Hmmmmmm :crazy:

Bikernereid

22nd January 2008, 06:01

Do you honestly think these people think about such things?

At the end of the day they will only learn when they have an accident and lose their skin and hurt themselves. There is nothing better than experience to teach you a valuable life lesson. Let them ride around in whatever they want, just don't give them sympathy when they hurt themselves!

I was just pondering if the people that dont think a good set of riding gear is not sensible / crutial also think the hospitals are cheap to run empty halls and the taxes paid to keep them smelling nice are just fine and dandy ?

Hmmmmmm :crazy:

koba

22nd January 2008, 06:15

Do you honestly think these people think about such things?

At the end of the day they will only learn when they have an accident and lose their skin and hurt themselves. There is nothing better than experience to teach you a valuable life lesson. Let them ride around in whatever they want, just don't give them sympathy when they hurt themselves!

If, in you opinion as expressed earlier, dogs should be microchipped and controlled then why should people be given ultimate freedom?
Im' really not trying to have a go as much as it may sound, It just seems contratictary to your earlier views.

Bikernereid

22nd January 2008, 06:19

Dogs should be chipped so that the owners who let thier dogs cause accidents can be held found and held accountable. Thier irresponsible action has caused an accident that was not the riders fault.

The person on the bike is responsible for themselves and thier safety. If they want to risk getting hurt so be it, the responsibility ends with them.

Does that answer your point and I didn't think you were having a go at all?

If, in you opinion as expressed earlier, dogs should be microchipped and controlled then why should people be given ultimate freedom?
Im' really not trying to have a go as much as it may sound, It just seems contratictary to your earlier views.

koba

22nd January 2008, 06:21

Dogs should be chipped so that the owners who let thier dogs cause accidents can be held found and held accountable. Thier irresponsible action has caused an accident that was not the riders fault.

The person on the bike is responsible for themselves and thier safety. If they want to risk getting hurt so be it, the responsibility ends with them.

Does that answer your point and I didn't think you were having a go at all?

Yeah, pretty much.

dipshit

22nd January 2008, 08:05

I dont give a shit what other bikers do If they are riding with me they can do or wear what ever they want as long as they dont knock me off and they come home in one peice Im happy. why do you care about others actions so much?

Because motorcycle statistics are appalling enough as it is. If we want to guarantee motorcycle's future with the freedoms we know today, then we all need to improve our riding habits.

The more carnage there is on the roads, the more the powers at be are going to take a closer look at us.

This is how the actions of other people can also affect me. I could not give a toss about them personally... I care about the statistics they generate.

Plus as you point out... we also have to share the road with them.

Bass

22nd January 2008, 08:25

Because motorcycle statistics are appalling enough as it is. If we want to guarantee motorcycle's future with the freedoms we know today, then we all need to improve our riding habits.

The more carnage there is on the roads, the more the powers at be are going to take a closer look at us.

This is how the actions of other people can also affect me. I could not give a toss about them personally... I care about the statistics they generate.

Plus as you point out... we also have to share the road with them.

You sound like Katman.
But that's OK because I agree with you.
A section of the KB population espouses, the "let them do what they like; it's none of your business" point of view. What they miss IMHO is that personal freedom comes at the cost of personal responsibility.

It becomes my business when they waste my tax money. The cost of treating broken bikers does not even begin to be covered by the ACC levies we pay. On top of that, some 45% of motorcycle accidents are single vehicle events and so mostly (not always I grant you) the riders fault. Of the rest, slightly more than half have the greater degree of culpability resting with the rider. So basically, by a considerable margin, we as riders are the authors of our own misfortune and yes, I figure in the statistics.

Ah, what's the point?

Those who figure greatest in the stats aren't listening anyway.

Maybe they never will.

James Deuce

22nd January 2008, 08:40

We don't pay enough ACC to cover the cost of motorcyclist death and injury. The levy needs to be in the mid-$400s to do that.

Still unhappy with what you are paying?

ACC is an example of how a Government can enhance your freedom. If you want the option of personally insuring yourself for injury, you'd find yourself priced out of a lot of things that Kiwis take for granted, like sports, swimming, boating, mountain biking, and horse riding.

It's not a case of "let them do what they want", from my perspective, it's a case of, "They're not going to listen so why invade their space and be rude trying to get a point across?"

If you are a good enough friend to someone and you can say anything without causing offense, then by all means make some suggestions.

Walking up to random strangers and insulting them is likely to escalate out of your control fairly rapidly, or just reinforce attitudes that old people are killjoys.

swbarnett

22nd January 2008, 08:42

The more carnage there is on the roads, the more the powers at be are going to take a closer look at us.

This is how the actions of other people can also affect me. I could not give a toss about them personally... I care about the statistics they generate.

Plus as you point out... we also have to share the road with them.
The problem is that there will always be extremes in society, it's a law of nature. Stop the hoons today and the next level become the hoons. Next thing it will be you and I that are labelled hoons just because we ride motorcycles. The trick is to essentially ignore the hoons and convince the "powers that be" that we're not all at the current extreme so they don't tar all of us with the same brush.

swbarnett

22nd January 2008, 08:45

Bass

22nd January 2008, 09:11

We don't pay enough ACC to cover the cost of motorcyclist death and injury. The levy needs to be in the mid-$400s to do that.

Still unhappy with what you are paying?

No, of course not, but we are a minority and when/if that statistic becomes widely known, the majority who are subsidising us will be.

ACC is an example of how a Government can enhance your freedom. If you want the option of personally insuring yourself for injury, you'd find yourself priced out of a lot of things that Kiwis take for granted, like sports, swimming, boating, mountain biking, and horse riding.

I concur, I really do. But that's exactly why it should be protected and the best way to protect it for us, is to bring our cost to the general public down.

It's not a case of "let them do what they want", from my perspective, it's a case of, "They're not going to listen so why invade their space and be rude trying to get a point across?"

If you are a good enough friend to someone and you can say anything without causing offense, then by all means make some suggestions.

Walking up to random strangers and insulting them is likely to escalate out of your control fairly rapidly, or just reinforce attitudes that old people are killjoys.

There is wisdom in what you say - it is the "Do nothing, for nothing can be done" attitude that I despair of

James Deuce

22nd January 2008, 09:26

There is wisdom in what you say - it is the "Do nothing, for nothing can be done" attitude that I despair of

I fall into that category generally speaking because I don't see any effort at all levels of driver training and education to take driving and riding seriously. The safer cars get, the more sound proofed, the better in car entertainment gets, the less likely we are to see an improvement.

In 1987 an 80HP CBR600 on 17" rims was a VERY fast bike. Now it is a a bit porky for a middleweight, under-powered and the suspension and tyres are rubbish.

Once upon a time it was considered insane for a learner to be able to buy a 50hp RGV250. 200BHP/litre. Now 600cc inline fours are right on the 200bhp/litre specific output and are exceeding RGV power to weight ratios, if manufacturer's specs are to be believed. Most lads look at these bikes as a stepping stone to "better" things. A K6 GSXR600 would have won the first two years of the WSB championship with ease, and would have been scoring points until about 1995.

I'm not saying things were better in my day, just different. But attitudes haven't changed to speed, other road users, or upping your skills to cope.

And a 600 is still viewed as a little bike.

jrandom

22nd January 2008, 09:35

... a 600 is still viewed as a little bike.

They are little bikes. I find them most unseemly in their tinyness. It just so happens that they have power-to-weight ratios in the order of a Formula 1 car.

James Deuce

22nd January 2008, 09:37

They outdo F1 cars significantly.

Bass

22nd January 2008, 09:52

I fall into that category generally speaking because I don't see any effort at all levels of driver training and education to take driving and riding seriously. The safer cars get, the more sound proofed, the better in car entertainment gets, the less likely we are to see an improvement.

In 1987 an 80HP CBR600 on 17" rims was a VERY fast bike. Now it is a a bit porky for a middleweight, under-powered and the suspension and tyres are rubbish.

Once upon a time it was considered insane for a learner to be able to buy a 50hp RGV250. 200BHP/litre. Now 600cc inline fours are right on the 200bhp/litre specific output and are exceeding RGV power to weight ratios, if manufacturer's specs are to be believed. Most lads look at these bikes as a stepping stone to "better" things. A K6 GSXR600 would have won the first two years of the WSB championship with ease, and would have been scoring points until about 1995.

I'm not saying things were better in my day, just different. But attitudes haven't changed to speed, other road users, or upping your skills to cope.

And a 600 is still viewed as a little bike.

The things you mention have given me pause many times.
I recall the first of the TZ 750's putting out 120 BHP straight from the factory. It was an unheard of number and we all wondered how that much power could be put to the road through one little strip of rubber.
Now I own a machine with a similar output and it is very much the middling performer, perhaps even at the sluggish end.

The same thing has happened with cars, but along with the development of more power there has been a parallel development of "despite the driver" type active and passive safety features: - ABS brakes, traction control, crumple zones, intrusion beams, air bags etc etc.

Brake and tyre improvement has carried over into bikes and there are signs of some of the others coming across as well.

However. human reactions and frailties haven't changed in that time, nor have youth attitudes. So I guess the outcome was inevitable, given that the speeds "when it finally does turn to shit and the safety features are of no use", are higher.

I don't have to like it or its ramifications for me however and it doesn't stop me wondering whether there are remedial measures that we can take.

However, this just makes us a pair of old farts reminiscing. Consequently we will be ignored and that may even be as it should. So in the end, perhaps your attitude is more practical than mine.

PrincessBandit

22nd January 2008, 11:34

They are little bikes..

Hehehe, i had a guy (rider) come up to me and ask how come someone so little was on such a big bike - he thought it was a 1250.

motorbyclist

22nd January 2008, 17:06

Dogs should be chipped so that the owners who let thier dogs cause accidents can be held found and held accountable. Thier irresponsible action has caused an accident that was not the riders fault.

but wouldn't the exact same idiots who owned the dogs that caused the meadia shitstorm that brought that legislation to bear be the ones who don't even register their dogs, let alone have them chipped?

it seems whenever a minority ignores the rules the NZ govt response is to make the rules even more restrictive for everyone else, ignoring the fact the guys who disobeyed before are even less likely to follow the new set of rules.

forcing idiots to wear jackets isn't going to stop them being idiots.

scracha

22nd January 2008, 17:10

. There is nothing better than experience to teach you a valuable life lesson.

Maybe in a car but quite often on a bike they lose their life or suffer permanent damage in order to gain that experience. They're just kids FFS

Bikernereid

22nd January 2008, 17:13

I wouldn't force those idiots to wear jackets. Let them discover for themselves what it feels like to come off their bike at 160kph without the proper clothing! I think legislation for helmets is a must as the possible brain damage to the moron who doesn't wear one and the cost and time to care for them by society and thier family is not worth thinking about. But as for the rest let the bloody idiots do what they want as long as they don't hurt anyone esle in the process.

but wouldn't the exact same idiots who owned the dogs that caused the meadia shitstorm that brought that legislation to bear be the ones who don't even register their dogs, let alone have them chipped?

it seems whenever a minority ignores the rules the NZ govt response is to make the rules even more restrictive for everyone else, ignoring the fact the guys who disobeyed before are even less likely to follow the new set of rules.

forcing idiots to wear jackets isn't going to stop them being idiots.

scracha

22nd January 2008, 17:20

The trick is to essentially ignore the hoons and convince the "powers that be" that we're not all at the current extreme so they don't tar all of us with the same brush.

So would the majority of kiwi motorcyclists support making it compulsory to undertake a full day's professional training* before being allowed out on the road ? Would be cheaper, save more lives and be more likely to succeed than any cheese-cutter campaign. Would be nice if they done it for new car drivers too but we've gotta get our own crash statistics down first.

* and not some mickey mouse course where everyone passes because they attend

dipshit

22nd January 2008, 17:43

Maybe in a car but quite often on a bike they lose their life or suffer permanent damage in order to gain that experience. They're just kids FFS

Plenty of other examples of where " let them learn by their mistakes" is not a good idea either... flying aeroplanes... using firearms... being in the military... all require good training beforehand because you may not live long enough to learn from your mistakes.

Ixion

22nd January 2008, 17:48

So would the majority of kiwi motorcyclists support making it compulsory to undertake a full day's professional training* before being allowed out on the road ? Would be cheaper, save more lives and be more likely to succeed than any cheese-cutter campaign. Would be nice if they done it for new car drivers too but we've gotta get our own crash statistics down first.

* and not some mickey mouse course where everyone passes because they attend

You're assuming that (a) novice riders are young and (b) that all novice riders would attend such a course just because it's compulsary.

There's a shit load of riders , on big bikes (especially Harleys) who have NO class 6 licence , and no intention of getting one, and would not attend any such "one day course" (unless they got a 6F as a result).

Some of them are quite competant riders,a nd just haven't done the paper work thing. Others, otherwise.

Making something compulsary doesn't mean people will do it.

toycollector10

22nd January 2008, 21:22

On Tuesday the 22nd of January heading south. Put your helmet on before you leave home. Ditto take a crap and brush your teeth. Get out of bed 10 minutes earlier. It's easy.

You won't look so smart when nursey comes to wipe your arse because you can't use your arms. And you're drooling because your head got all smashed up. And I'm paying for your care for the next 50 years until you drown in your own spit because you wouldn't wear a helmet.

All you liberals and no-helmet-brigaders please fill you boots, but I just wish you wouldn't expect other people to pay for your idiocy when the time comes, and it's a'commin boys! No one expects to crash. Right! Uh-oh...

swbarnett

22nd January 2008, 21:34

So where do we stop? What about the cost to society of injuries from riding motorcycles WITH the gear? Shall we ban motorcycles then?

The cotton wool producers will love you.

On Tuesday the 22nd of January heading south. Put your helmet on before you leave home. Ditto take a crap and brush your teeth. Get out of bed 10 minutes earlier. It's easy.

You won't look so smart when nursey comes to wipe your arse because you can't use your arms. And you're drooling because your head got all smashed up. And I'm paying for your care for the next 50 years until you drown in your own spit because you wouldn't wear a helmet.

All you liberals and no-helmet-brigaders please fill you boots, but I just wish you wouldn't expect other people to pay for your idiocy when the time comes, and it's a'commin boys! No one expects to crash. Right! Uh-oh...

swbarnett

22nd January 2008, 21:41

Maybe in a car but quite often on a bike they lose their life or suffer permanent damage in order to gain that experience. They're just kids FFS
The trouble is that their over protected at a younger age so when they are allowed to operate a motor vehicle they let loose with no appreciation of their own fragility.

I witnessed a teacher telling their students off for climbing a tree because it was dangerous. This is seriously counter-productive to any degree of long term safety, how else are they going to learn?

dipshit

22nd January 2008, 21:43

The cotton wool producers will love you.

Oh grow up swbarnett.

swbarnett

22nd January 2008, 21:57

Oh grow up swbarnett.
Too subtle for you?

As I've said elsewhere, be careful what you wish for. You may want to ban riding without the gear (or at least not pay for the mess), and, in isolation, I might agree with you, but be mindful of what will follow in years to come.

Ixion

22nd January 2008, 22:09

All you liberals and no-helmet-brigaders please fill you boots, but I just wish you wouldn't expect other people to pay for your idiocy when the time comes, and it's a'commin boys! No one expects to crash. Right! Uh-oh...

I don't. I pay very heavily every year toward the common fund that pays for misfortunes.

I would be very happy to be able to opt out of these compulsary premiums.When I am able to do so , and if I fail to make alternative arrangements, then , and only then, will you be entitled to pompously bleat about "other people paying".

toycollector10

22nd January 2008, 22:14

Smoke cigarettes or better still cigars, make sure you inhale deeply, do 100 kph in a 50 kph zone, don't wear your helmet or other kit, have unprotected sex with Zimbabwean prostitutes, base-jump with a parachute bought off trademe, live the life of a rebel dude, you owe it to yourself...just don't expect the tax payer to pick up your sorry ar*se. Do you have health insurance. No, you don't, do you. So fill your boots son, I pay my taxes and I will patch you up but I won't be the one wiping your a*se.

Bikernereid

22nd January 2008, 22:25

Well said!!

Smoke cigarettes or better still cigars, make sure you inhale deeply, do 100 kph in a 50 kph zone, don't wear your helmet or other kit, have unprotected sex with Zimbabwean prostitutes, base-jump with a parachute bought off trademe, live the life of a rebel dude, you owe it to yourself...just don't expect the tax payer to pick up your sorry ar*se. Do you have health insurance. No, you don't, do you. So fill your boots son, I pay my taxes and I will patch you up but I won't be the one wiping your a*se.

Ixion

22nd January 2008, 22:31

,,. Do you have health insurance. No, you don't, do you. So fill your boots son, I pay my taxes and I will patch you up but I won't be the one wiping your a*se.

As a matter of fact, yes I do. And I also pay my taxes , and I suspect very possibly a good deal more than you do. And get very little at all in exchange , I might add.

And when you get to my age, if you have still never made any call on the health or ACC systems, then come to me and I might be more impressed with your whining.

Headbanger

22nd January 2008, 22:33

toycollector10

22nd January 2008, 22:40

Hitcher

23rd January 2008, 07:36

Entertaining as this is, could participants endeavour to avoid the temptation of resorting to cheap personal attacks in their efforts to score points. Thank you.

Ixion

23rd January 2008, 07:46

I'm now reduced to name calling. Ixion, you are a pompous git. Get over yourself. The world is full of you "right to do what I want to do" morons. The disease has spread from the USA. It looks to me as if you have obtained your opinions off some bulletin board somewhere and that you are educated beyond your own natural intelligence. Stand back, take a deep breath and reconsider your position.

I do not demand the "right to do what I want to do". But I do explicitly demand the right not to be forced , by you, to do only what YOU want to do. And I equally emphatically deny your assertion that you should have the right to force your own opinions and preferences onto the rest of the world, and to set your own prejudices up as an authority higher than law.

You are liberty, within the law, to make your own decisions for yourself. Yet you would deny that to anyone else (unless, of course, they happen to completely agree with you).

I know not whether to be the more amazed at your presumption, your stupidity, or your arrogance. I do know that I reject all of them.

motorbyclist

23rd January 2008, 09:28

The cotton wool producers will love you.

might be a good time to invest in bubble wrap too:jerry:

The trouble is that their over protected at a younger age so when they are allowed to operate a motor vehicle they let loose with no appreciation of their own fragility.

I witnessed a teacher telling their students off for climbing a tree because it was dangerous. This is seriously counter-productive to any degree of long term safety, how else are they going to learn?

i remember being allowed to climb the row of macrocarpas at my primary school. endless amusement and surprisingly few injuries. that school is the only school i've seen to allow anything of the sort and good on them for it

but back onto the subject at hand, could one not propose that those wallies wearing next to nothing will soon learn their lesson? for the sake of everyone else's health/lives i'd rather them hoon on a bike than in a car

Usarka

23rd January 2008, 09:55

People should be able to do what the fuck they like as long as it doesn't impact on others, and/or isn't illegal.

Don't use ACC as the excuse for controlling peoples lives.

FFS, if no one got injured in this country then 200,000 people would be out of jobs.

FilthyLuka

23rd January 2008, 10:57

"right to do what I want to do"

I think the idea was "right to do what i want to myself." Its my body after all... aint it?

Bass

23rd January 2008, 13:34

I think the idea was "right to do what i want to myself." Its my body after all... aint it?
Yes it is.
But I don't want to pay to get you repaired again, when you stuff up.
However, with the law the way it is at the moment, I do have to pay.

Now paradoxically, I actually don't mind that too much because with the law (ACC) as it stands, if I so choose, I can do myself some real mischief and provided that I did not intend to (i.e. it is an accident) then the rest of you lot have to pay to get me repaired. I actually think that's kinda cool.

But, you see, in reality I prefer not to damage myself and so you don't pay to get me repaired (or not much and not often anyway). That being the case, (and this is where Ixion/Usarka and I diverge), I would much prefer that you took better care of yourself, so that I don't have to pay as much as I currently do.

FilthyLuka

23rd January 2008, 13:47

Yes it is.
But I don't want to pay to get you repaired again, when you stuff up.
However, with the law the way it is at the moment, I do have to pay.

Now paradoxically, I actually don't mind that too much because with the law (ACC) as it stands, if I so choose, I can do myself some real mischief and provided that I did not intend to (i.e. it is an accident) then the rest of you lot have to pay to get me repaired. I actually think that's kinda cool.

But, you see, in reality I prefer not to damage myself and so you don't pay to get me repaired (or not much and not often anyway). That being the case, (and this is where Ixion/Usarka and I diverge), I would much prefer that you took better care of yourself, so that I don't have to pay as much as I currently do.

very good point....

Hmm, this gots me a thinking. I have a job and pay taxes like the next guy, if i bail and break something, you lot pay to have me fixed, if you bail, the rest of us pay to have you fixed... So it kinda works no?

But all in all, the tax payer doesn't give the money directly to the fool who crashed, do they? Our taxes are payed regularly, regardless of how many people crash.

So really, this isn't a thread about people not wearing gear and needing a good talking to (which it was meant to be), but instead its effectively about how we all hate fucking taxes... And i think the idea is that if people wore gear, hurt themselves less, we would pay less taxes, and i highly doubt that...

Get what im saying? cause i sure as hell dont :beer:

p.s: taxes suck

swbarnett

23rd January 2008, 13:54

I would much prefer that you took better care of yourself, so that I don't have to pay as much as I currently do.
Take this out of context or not in a legal sense and I'd agree with you. However, you can't consider this without also considering the legal implications of such a stand. Translate this into law and ALL "dangerous" activities become illegal (including motorcycling in whatever form).

The true cost of this stand in the long term when it gets in to law is a complete uniformity among people and a complete lack of anything even vaguely risky.

We are genetically programmed to take risks (Eskimos hunted in seas that most in the west would consider suicidal simmply because if they didn't they wouldn't eat) and no law can remove this.

What we must respect is that some people require more risk than others in order to stay sane. It is not for one individual to impose their personal risk level on others.

Ixion

23rd January 2008, 13:56

Yes it is.
But I don't want to pay to get you repaired again, when you stuff up.
However, with the law the way it is at the moment, I do have to pay.

Now paradoxically, I actually don't mind that too much because with the law (ACC) as it stands, if I so choose, I can do myself some real mischief and provided that I did not intend to (i.e. it is an accident) then the rest of you lot have to pay to get me repaired. I actually think that's kinda cool.

But, you see, in reality I prefer not to damage myself and so you don't pay to get me repaired (or not much and not often anyway). That being the case, (and this is where Ixion/Usarka and I diverge), I would much prefer that you took better care of yourself, so that I don't have to pay as much as I currently do.

But, those who you say do not take care of themselves might turn that same argument right backa t you. Miss Bopper on her little scooter might point out that she does not wear all the Magic Gear. But she might also point out that , unlike her, you ride a very fast powerful motorcycle. Unlike her you also ride a motorcycle off road, which has a far greater risk of injury than riding around town (probably less serious injury, admittedly). Miss Bopper might well say that you are not taking responsibility for taking care of yourslef: and that you should ride a machine of less than 250cc and stick to the roads. Because why should Miss Bopper have to pay to have you fixed up if you come off the DR on a gravel road ? (And Miss Bopper does pay her share, just the same as you).

Everybody has their own idea of what is wise and what is foolishness. That Miss Bopper assigns different priorities does not make her wrong (or you wrong, either).

That is the whole point of something like ACC. It makes no judgements about what people do.

The biggest cost factor in ACC motorcycling premiums is quite certainly sprotsbikes. The single most effective way to reduce them so everyone pays less: all you buggers stop crashing so often.

swbarnett

23rd January 2008, 14:01

taxes suck
Only when the population at large feel they're not getting value for money.

There are two ways to operate a tax system - tax high and provide government sponsored health, education etc.. or tax low and let the individual pay on top of that for health, education etc.. Both can work if properly managed but I prefer the latter as in reality I think private enterprise could probably do a much better job of health, education etc.. if given the entire job (not just small pieces of it as they currently do).

Bass

23rd January 2008, 14:10

very good point....

Hmm, this gots me a thinking. I have a job and pay taxes like the next guy, if i bail and break something, you lot pay to have me fixed, if you bail, the rest of us pay to have you fixed... So it kinda works no?

But all in all, the tax payer doesn't give the money directly to the fool who crashed, do they? Our taxes are payed regularly, regardless of how many people crash.

So really, this isn't a thread about people not wearing gear and needing a good talking to (which it was meant to be), but instead its effectively about how we all hate fucking taxes... And i think the idea is that if people wore gear, hurt themselves less, we would pay less taxes, and i highly doubt that...

Get what im saying? cause i sure as hell dont :beer:

p.s: taxes suck

Sort of.
As I hinted, I actually think that ACC on the whole is a pretty good system. It is most certainly WAY better than some of the alternatives e.g. the litigation industry in the States.

However because of the way it works, it comes with some consequences.
ACC spend a sizeable chunk of our tax money and so are under significant pressure to do it wisely and to keep it to a minimum.

Consequently, when ACC say to govt "hey, we have a group of users out there that are costing us much more than we are collecting from them in levies", then govt tends to have a look at that group and think about what laws they can pass, to make that group less expensive.

Motorcyclists are very much such a group.

There are those amongst us (me for example) who suspect that if we do not reduce our costs to ACC, then at the very least, our levies will rise and perhaps we may see legislation enacted which significantly restricts our legal activies

Bass

23rd January 2008, 14:28

Translate this into law and ALL "dangerous" activities become illegal (including motorcycling in whatever form).

Exactly right, which is why I phrased it as I did. The means exist for those to whom this topic refers to take better care of themselves. I am by no means suggesting their activity is prohibited

Everybody has their own idea of what is wise and what is foolishness. That Miss Bopper assigns different priorities does not make her wrong (or you wrong, either).

That is the whole point of something like ACC. It makes no judgements about what people do.

I concur - mostly
However, in most legal hazardous activities, there are some basic precautions that any reasonable person would take - safety glasses at a grinding wheel for example. I feel much the same way about appropriate clothing when motorcycling,
And yes, this is where I draw the line.
It may not be so for everyone and in that case I would not class them as reasonable.
However, as for ACC making no judgements, I don't believe the fact aligns with the philosophy here - see my previous post about ACC funding and its connection to Govt.

PS I am making a complete hypocrite of myself here too, because if you know where to look, there is a picture in these annals of me using a grinder with no eye protection.

EZAS

23rd January 2008, 14:57

If gear was compulsory then ACC, I'd hope but wouldn't expect the ACC levies to be lowered, however, I'd also expect there to be a huge increase in revenue gathering (fines), win win situation for the country.

Headbanger

23rd January 2008, 16:49

I do not demand the "right to do what I want to do". But I do explicitly demand the right not to be forced , by you, to do only what YOU want to do. And I equally emphatically deny your assertion that you should have the right to force your own opinions and preferences onto the rest of the world, and to set your own prejudices up as an authority higher than law.

You are liberty, within the law, to make your own decisions for yourself. Yet you would deny that to anyone else (unless, of course, they happen to completely agree with you).

I know not whether to be the more amazed at your presumption, your stupidity, or your arrogance. I do know that I reject all of them.

QFT.

........

scracha

23rd January 2008, 17:35

You're assuming that (a) novice riders are young and (b) that all novice riders would attend such a course just because it's compulsary.

<----snip --->
Some of them are quite competant riders,a nd just haven't done the paper work thing. Others, otherwise.
<----snip --->

I never assumed they were young. Plenty of stupid old riders who can't seem to grasp that if they fall off their bike it will hurt a lot more than when they crashed their Holden.

Regards to unlicensed riders....that's a different issue and the lack of enforcement in this area needs addressed. My viewpoint on this is the same as on drunk drivers and unlicensed car drivers....they shouldn't be covered by ACC if they crash. Why the hell should the rest of us pay if johnny fucktard decides he fancies riding an R1 without any training and then crashes it. A night in Gaol for the unlicensed wouldn't be a bad idea either. The threat of a good shag up the arse might be an incentive for them to get their license.

motorbyclist

23rd January 2008, 17:52

There are two ways to operate a tax system - tax high and provide government sponsored health, education etc.. or tax low and let the individual pay on top of that for health, education etc.. Both can work if properly managed but I prefer the latter as in reality I think private enterprise could probably do a much better job of health, education etc.. if given the entire job (not just small pieces of it as they currently do).

if we all had to pay for our own private healthcare we'd be priced out of many of our pastimes, or many people simply wouldn't have health insurance. why you'd want companies to try to make a profit from our misfortune is beyond me.

then you end up in a situation in the states where one slip up and you're screwed as your insurance wont cover you, and/or you're being sued for something

swbarnett

23rd January 2008, 18:21

if we all had to pay for our own private healthcare we'd be priced out of many of our pastimes, or many people simply wouldn't have health insurance.
Three facts make this work in Switzerland:

1. Compulsary health insurance (government pays for the poor end of society).
2. Guarenteed approval. Insurance companies cannot refuse insurance to anybody, no matter your physical condition.
3. No fault insurance. Doesn't matter how you get hurt, you're still covered.

why you'd want companies to try to make a profit from our misfortune is beyond me.
Are you saying that we shouldn't pay our medical staff?
The profit motive is also a powerful incentive to increase efficiency.

then you end up in a situation in the states where one slip up and you're screwed as your insurance wont cover you, and/or you're being sued for something
See above. Insurance will cover you, no sueing.

2fst4u

23rd January 2008, 19:06

i was just on holiday for two weeks in the south island (riding in the back seat of family cage) and i got really pissed off by the four or so bikers, all on harleys (no offence to harley riders, they just were okay?) who on seperate occasions thought it would be a good idea to come screaming up behind everyone (us and others on road) and without indication or notification of intentions, overtook everyone, weaving in and out of each cage. one even on double yellow lines. now speeding isnt good but in my eyes if you feel comfortable, it's ok. but reckless riding... :oi-grr:. i honestly thought those people were about to get taken out by someone coming around the blind corners nearly all of them were approaching. i hope some of them do. that should teach them the lesson they so dearly require.

so to all those harley riders- STOP BEING SUCH DICKS. YOU DON'T OWN THE ROAD!!!!!

not all south islanders are shit riders though. i saw many-a-rider paying meticulous attention to road rules and common sense.

oh, and also, we went over an unsealed portion of a central otago road and saw a CBR rider approach it in the opposite direction. i hope he/she didnt bin it and that he/she made sure the awesome bike they were riding still looks awesome and not dusty!

toycollector10

23rd January 2008, 22:05

I think this post has been hijacked a little into an ACC thread thingy.

I'm 54 years old. I have never been seriously injured. Maybe due to good luck rather than good judgement, but I always like to stack the cards in my favour when I ride. I see youngsters, speed freaks and guys older than me who should know better being utter dickheads on the road. Life and good health is precious. To not give yourself the best chance of avoiding pain, disfigurement, mental impairment or death is just crazy. All for what...The wind in your hair, shorts, sandals and no gloves because "It's too hot, mummy" ??

It's bad enough out there competing with cagers who don't give a shit about you or your life without lowering the odds even further.

I got a warning from a moderator for getting all personal and up in Ixions' postings. Fill your boots, the lot of you. When you bin without gloves or decent gear, and you will, sooner or later, and the skin grafts aren't taking and it's hurting like all buggery all the time and they won't give you any more pethedine or morphine, you will then understand what an effing bloody crap trade-off it all was. Personal freedom versus freedom from pain. I'll take the latter every time.

toycollector10

23rd January 2008, 23:37

I was cruising down St Asaph St. in Christchurch this morning. It's one-way, two lanes heading South-West. The guy in the courier van, parked on the right hand side, walks around the front of his van and the Asian woman on my right just about takes him out. Ever seen a batsman avoid a bouncer that pitches up to head height? That was him, he had to rock back on his heels as this woman just zoomed past him and missed him by about an inch or so. That's how easy it is to be taken out. One tenth of a second and it could be all over. Any place, any time, as the cops say.

swbarnett

24th January 2008, 07:01

Personal freedom versus freedom from pain. I'll take the latter every time.
I totally agree with you and I think most would, most of the time.

What we're afraid of is that if the law gets involved in what is, essentially, a personal choice issue we sill eventually have no personal choice left.

The Personal aspect must be respected. If someone is silly enough to take the risk or genuinely believes that they've got a better chance of not coming off if not wearing the gear then that's their choice.

zeocen

24th January 2008, 07:17

All I can say on the gear subject is, I am glad I was wearing all my gear when I came off, so I can get back on much sooner!

MisterD

24th January 2008, 07:22

ITo not give yourself the best chance of avoiding pain, disfigurement, mental impairment or death is just crazy. All for what...The wind in your hair, shorts, sandals and no gloves because "It's too hot, mummy" ??

But that's the whole point - it always has to be a personal assessment of risk. Along with Ixion, I totally reject the concept of you making that assessment for me.

Because of what, and how, I ride - I set my minimum gear at trainers, gloves and lid (full face, but only because the vents actually make it cooler than my Davida jet). I wouldn't ride a sprotsbike at all, becuase I perceive the risk to health and licence too great, so does that give me the right to criticise those who do? Absolutely not.

MSTRS

24th January 2008, 09:44

The biggest cost factor in ACC motorcycling premiums is quite certainly sprotsbikes. The single most effective way to reduce them so everyone pays less: all you buggers stop crashing so often.

Is that right? I wonder how many bike related injuries that ACC covers are as a result of dirtbikes? Most of which have no ACC component in their registration, cos they aren't registered.

Ixion

24th January 2008, 09:48

Headbanger

24th January 2008, 11:37

Difference between number and cost. Dirt bikes might have more crashes, but they don't usually produce the very long term injuries that cost big money. And a greater proportion of dirt bikers would be young (< 18) riders. They are cheap.

What really costs ACC are injuries that require long term ERC compensation. That 80% of earnings for years mounts up fast.

Deaths are relatively cheap if there are no dependants. And injuries to non-earners (eg kids) are cheap.

I hate to say it, But your way off.

Visit an orginised trail ride in the hill country one day, Riders range across all ages, with probably more riders being 25 to 45. There can be anywhere from 50 to 400 riders, And thats just the rides in my part of the country, I hear they have far more riders in more populated areas.

Its not uncommon to see multiple riders with broken limbs on a single ride, And every so often you get broken backs, necks, internal injuries.

Many a time I have been heading back to the car after a 10 hour ride and heard the thump thump thump of the helicopter coming in to fly someone to hospital.

Its mayhem, The risks can be extreme, and the damage can be lifelong suffering. I saw a guy disappear off a track 100m ahead of me, It was 200m near straight down to the tree canopy, I couldn't see him......

My uncle who is near 60 hit a fallen tree at speed, Flipped him and his bike, Broke both wrists, his coller bone,and his hip. Has had mutiple operations, never came right. Lives in pain.

FilthyLuka

24th January 2008, 11:55

Lives in pain.

A car did a U-turn infront of a biker without signalling a while back

that biker is dead

EDITL

hmm, and now i realise that that wouldn't cost very much at all and therefore have no impact on ACC rates relative to road vs. dirt riders

never mind

as you were

Headbanger

24th January 2008, 12:04

A car did a U-turn infront of a biker without signalling a while back

that biker is dead

EDITL

hmm, and now i realise that that wouldn't cost very much at all and therefore have no impact on ACC rates relative to road vs. dirt riders

never mind

as you were

I wasn't trying to downplay road accidents, Just point out the real situation with dirt bikes.

This may shed some light on them for people who have never been on one, Granted I'm on a quad, and got stuck behind slow traffic, But the terrain is there to see.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DU-Kb8F1EqA&rel=0&color1=0xd6d6d6&color2=0xf0f0f0&border=0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DU-Kb8F1EqA&rel=0&color1=0xd6d6d6&color2=0xf0f0f0&border=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

motorbyclist

24th January 2008, 13:53

I wasn't trying to downplay road accidents, Just point out the real situation with dirt bikes.

This may shed some light on them for people who have never been on one, Granted I'm on a quad, and got stuck behind slow traffic, But the terrain is there to see.

ok, now i know quad bikes can't get into the really tight knarly stuff, but that track looked pretty tame (but damn nice views and alot of fun i bet)

must dig up a video of some of the big rides i've been on. rough as guts terrain, trees with spiky stumps of branches at rider height, sharp rocks and big falls

though the crash thing is interesting.

on a dirtbike you crash often, but 99% of the time you get back up and just keep going with just a few bruises and maybe a few cuts/grazez, so statistically speaking serious accidents are rarer than road bikes as a percentage of total crashes. so while dirtbikes are more dangerous in the sense you fall off more often, roadbikes are more dangerous in that you get much more injured when you do finally bin it.....

wouldn't know which one is actually more dangerous overall, but i'll lean towards the dirtbike IF the rider it going apeshit in a competitive and/or dangerous environment

as for acc costs, there are ALOT of under 18 dirt riders, and i would say from what i've seen that much more than t50% of dirt riders is under 25, so not many dependants

than again, alot of the road idiots crashing, like in this thread's original post were under 18 anyway, or again under 25......

cant wait till i turn 25 and my insurer gives me a box of driving/riding skill for my birthday.... would go nice with my no-claims since i got my licence at 15 years old bonus