US Congress funds first crash study for 30 years

**Bob** · 3rd August 2005, 23:43

The US Congress has agreed to fund a nationwide study of motorcycle crashes – the first since the ‘Hunt Report’, published in the early 1970’s.

Nearly US$ 3 million will be set aside for the project, to be undertaken by the Oklahoma Transportation Center at Oklahoma State University.

"After more than a decade of decline, motorcycling fatalities have increased in recent years, and those increases have prompted endless speculation about the reasons why," said AMA President Robert Rasor. "We're pleased that Congress agrees that we need answers, not theories. We're anxious for the study to begin, to help us understand how to prevent crashes and save lives."

The bill makes available $25 million to individual states for motorcycle-safety training and awareness programs. On the downside, it also calls for motorcycles to be included in research on Intelligent Transportation systems.

Personally, I think training would make a huge difference. As far as I am aware, as long as you have your car licence, you can wander into a dealer in the US and buy any bike you want. I wonder if the study will take into account who had (or had not) received any bike-specific training? If so, I think that would be a hugely important factor.

**Waylander** · 3rd August 2005, 23:56

Training is needed there but no you cannot buy any bike you want on a car liscence. You have to have atleast your learner liscence. But to get that all you have to do is read the book they give you and take a written theory test. Easy peasy. To get a full you have to do the riding test. I took my full a week after getting my learners.

They do have training courses and such but those are used mainly to lower your insurance rate. So not eveyone feels they need to go through them. If they made a course like that mandatory to get your full then that should cut down the number of wrecks significantly.

**Bob** · 4th August 2005, 00:33

Thanks for that - filled in a gap in my knowledge.

Still pretty scary though... "Hello, give me a motorcycle, as I have read a book and know everything there is to know..."

Out of curiosity, does being on a learner licence mean you're restricted to something "small"... like an 883 Sportster?

I do get annoyed at aspects of the training needed over here... but in comparison to the US methods? I'll defend the UK system any time!

**Waylander** · 4th August 2005, 00:44

Originally Posted by Bob

Thanks for that - filled in a gap in my knowledge.

Still pretty scary though... "Hello, give me a motorcycle, as I have read a book and know everything there is to know..."

Out of curiosity, does being on a learner licence mean you're restricted to something "small"... like an 883 Sportster?

I do get annoyed at aspects of the training needed over here... but in comparison to the US methods? I'll defend the UK system any time!

Rules for learner is 250 or smaller and have to ride within 100feet of someone with a full liscence and only certain times of the day. Other than the 250 law no one really pays attention. No big flappy L-plate either. And if you're good you could take the riding test the same or next day to get your full. No set waiting period, so none of it really matters. Cops don't pull bikes over much unless they are speeding or the state they are in has strict helmet laws and you're not wearing one. We get ignored by them for the most part.

**Lou Girardin** · 4th August 2005, 08:41

Perhaps the Murkins would cut the bike fatality rates if they wore helmets and didn't ride pissed. The last stats I saw showed half the fatalities had illegal B/A levels.

**SARGE** · 4th August 2005, 10:25

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

Perhaps the Murkins would cut the bike fatality rates if they wore helmets and didn't ride pissed. The last stats I saw showed half the fatalities had illegal B/A levels.

i think it has more to do with the fact that your FIRST bike in the States can be an R-1

Darwinism at work..