AA = Anti motorcycle Association!

[JohnR]

From todays Herald...

And the AA has given a warning to anyone considering getting a motorcycle to save a few dollars to "carefully weigh the increased risk to life and limb".

A modern small car has similar fuel efficiency but is up to 80 times safer than a large motorbike, says the association.

"A better option would be a bicycle, which is 10 times safer than a motorbike and gets you fit as well, while buses are the hands down winners on safety."



Here's one member they will be losing!

[Spaz]

They obviously think New Zealanders are rather bad drivers. otherwise it would be rather safe to ride a motorbike because one wouldn't have to worry about riding unseen by other (bad) drivers and would presumedly, if one was a good driver, have the ability to understand the road conditions keeping them out of danger.

They may be right though...

[Timetogo]

If some of the wankers who drove cars were more competent and actually looked before the changed lanes, began overtaking etc then bikes would be a lot safer, perhaps the AA should encourage defensive driving and trying improve the standard of driving
The best thing would be for all car drivers to have to spend a compulsory 2 years on a bike before they were allowed to drive a car

[Wolf]

Ixion has started a thread about this where he's chasing the AA and the Harold up about this. So far Arseholes Association has had to sheepishly retract what they said... in an email to him - big farking deal, they should publish the retraction in the Harold along with an apology from the Harold's Chief Editor and the CEO.

[Wellyman]

The AA are a bunch of good for nothing F$@#%^@ in my view. They make up shit and give us motoryclist a bad name.
WM

[Pixie]

This is what they said:

Thank you for your comments on the report in the news last week about
petrol prices and motorcycles. The context in which the comments were
made was that large motorcycles can be quite dangerous for inexperienced
riders and that the AA would have concerns about people suddenly
switching from a car to a large motorcycle without adequate
skills/experience, just because of the cost of petrol. I'm sure you'd
agree riding requires a quite different and more demanding skill set
than driving.

Having said that I admit I was surprised by the statistics that novice
riders on large bikes are up to 80 times more at risk than car drivers
(this figure, by the way, came from a recent road safety conference).
We recognise that there is a range of sizes of motorbikes, and also a
range of experience and maturity amongst riders, so the risks are
certainly not as high for the average motorcyclist, and are even lower
for an experienced mature motorcyclist. This is borne out by the
statistics from Land Transport and ACC (see below). As you'll see the
figures do indicate far too many motorcyclists are losing their lives or
being seriously injured on our roads.

In light of this, it occurs to me that the AA might be able to work with
the motorcycle community through an AA project called Safer Roads to
help reduce this crash level. The project is designed to encourage
'safer drivers in safer cars on safer roads'. While the 'roads' aspect
is clearly important to motorcyclists, there could also be a place for
'safer riders'. If you'd like to know more, have a look at AA Online
(www.aa.co.nz/index.html) under 'Media Centre'.

I suspect as petrol prices remain high, more and more New Zealanders
will look at the option of shifting to two wheels. Hopefully they will
do so with the necessary training and knowledge of what is involved.

Greg Hunting
GENERAL MANAGER
Corporate Communications
The New Zealand Automobile
Association Incorporated

T. +64 9 966 8949
F. +64 9 966 8896
E. ghunting@aa.co.nz
W. www.aa.co.nz


Motorcycle Injury and Death Rates Compared to Car occupants

New Zealand - (http://www.health.auckland.ac.nz/ipc/pdf/fs19.pdf)
Land Transport New Zealand and ACC figures show that the injury and
death rate for motorcycles per 1,000 riders is 19.38. This compares with
drivers and passengers in cars, where the rate is per 1,000 is 1.94.

The agencies also say that motorcycles with engines of 250 cc or greater
are more likely to be involved in crashes than motorcycles with smaller
engines. However, risk does not appear to continue to increase with
increasing engine size over 250 cc

Australia -
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) official figures show that
-
* Motorcycle rider deaths are nearly 30 times more than drivers of
other vehicles
* Motorcycle riders aged below 40 are 36 times more likely to be
killed than other vehicle operators of the same age.

United States -
The US Department of Transportation states that in 2003 Motorcyclists
were 32 times as likely as passenger car occupants to die in a crash,
per vehicle miles travelled.

[Ixion]

HA. I got this afternoon the IDENTICAL email. 'Tis obviously a form email they are sending out to anyone who complains.

I ahven't finished with Mr Hunting yet

[Big Dave]

HA. I got this afternoon the IDENTICAL email. 'Tis obviously a form email they are sending out to anyone who complains.

I ahven't finished with Mr Hunting yet

Be vewy vewy qwiet - ixion's hunting wooducks.

[pAceMaker]

If some of the wankers who drove cars were more competent and actually looked before the changed lanes, began overtaking etc then bikes would be a lot safer, perhaps the AA should encourage defensive driving and trying improve the standard of driving
The best thing would be for all car drivers to have to spend a compulsory 2 years on a bike before they were allowed to drive a car

thats genius ... i would vote for that

[sunhuntin]

"....surprised by the statistics that novice
riders on large bikes are up to...."

hmmm, maybe thats why you have to start on a small bike perhaps??? 250cc isnt exactly large, and by the time the rider moves onto a big bike they are no longer novices. id be more concerned about novice "invincible" 15 year olds in large [read powerful] cars....

tosspots.

edit....timetogo...id vote for that too....but it will never happen cos the govt would lose out big time on fuel costs etc. a brilliant idea though!

[eliot-ness]

This is what they said:





Motorcycle Injury and Death Rates Compared to Car occupants

New Zealand - (http://www.health.auckland.ac.nz/ipc/pdf/fs19.pdf)
Land Transport New Zealand and ACC figures show that the injury and
death rate for motorcycles per 1,000 riders is 19.38. This compares with
drivers and passengers in cars, where the rate is per 1,000 is 1.94.

The agencies also say that motorcycles with engines of 250 cc or greater
are more likely to be involved in crashes than motorcycles with smaller
engines. However, risk does not appear to continue to increase with
increasing engine size over 250 cc

Australia -
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) official figures show that
-
* Motorcycle rider deaths are nearly 30 times more than drivers of
other vehicles
* Motorcycle riders aged below 40 are 36 times more likely to be
killed than other vehicle operators of the same age.

United States -
The US Department of Transportation states that in 2003 Motorcyclists
were 32 times as likely as passenger car occupants to die in a crash,
per vehicle miles travelled.

A typical example of statistics being worded to fit the arguement.

A/ of course bikers are more likely to be injured. No-one could dispute that as even a minor cut or graze is classed as an injury if the rider is taken to hospital. Note that no comparitive figure on actual deaths is quoted.

B/ Where are the comparison figures for the number of bikes below 250 and those 250 and above.

C/ Both the American and Australian figures are worded "more likely to be killed". Not "Are killed". A subtle difference. A bit like the warning we all got when we got our first bike. "You'll kill yourself on that thing". Might happen, might not. Hardly the evidence to build a case on.

A bloody great job you're doing Ixion. Keep embarrassing the prats. Let's see how many other "statistics" they can invent.

[Rback]

I can't find where they have got their "statistics" from!! How many off these deaths were on the road, or ion the bush track, or on the farm. To me it looks like they have put all bike accidents into one basket. Anything to make the "statistics" look good for them.

[DemonWolf]

Yep... got the same identical email..... and I thought it was personal service! ha

[Timetogo]

A typical example of statistics being worded to fit the arguement.

C/ Both the American and Australian figures are worded "more likely to be killed". Not "Are killed". A subtle difference. A bit like the warning we all got when we got our first bike. "You'll kill yourself on that thing". Might happen, might not. Hardly the evidence to build a case on.

A bloody great job you're doing Ixion. Keep embarrassing the prats. Let's see how many other "statistics" they can invent.

As someone who deals with stats a lot, the term "More likely to" usually indicates a possible trend that does NOT show a statistically significant difference, even though someone would really like it to......

[The Stranger:Me]

Ok slam the AA if you must but we can all learn from the study if we keep an open mind.

I particularly like a few of these in relation to a thread from yesterday.

"There was no evidence that riders with learner or restricted licences faced greater risk."
and
"There was no evidence of any marked increase in risk with increase in cc rating above 250ccs."