Our own worst enemy

**dipshit** · 23rd April 2009, 22:08

Originally Posted by swbarnett

No amount of "cleaning up our act" is going to help. No matter how "clean" our act is there will still be those making laws that don't think it's clean enough. After all, there are those that would like nothing better than to remove every last bike from existance.

People of a certain personality type are ruled by fear. These people are, unfortunately, very good at getting into power.

Stop being a paranoid drama queen.

After a few shooting tragedies we ended up with tighter firearm laws.

After much trouble from boy racers... we ended up with tighter enforcement on hooning and car modifying.

Recently after many boating and jet ski accidents... they are looking at tightening up on licensing and usage of water recreational craft...

Get the idea..???

**Mikkel** · 23rd April 2009, 22:15

Originally Posted by swbarnett

The problem is the idiots that have deluded themselves into thinking they can turn normal humans into automotons. While there are people like this making the decisions we are screwed. No amount of "cleaning up our act" is going to help. No matter how "clean" our act is there will still be those making laws that don't think it's clean enough. After all, there are those that would like nothing better than to remove every last bike from existance.

People of a certain personality type are ruled by fear. These people are, unfortunately, very good at getting into power. Simply because they crave control above all else and can't stand to see anyone take the slightest risk. They are hell bent on wrapping us all up in cotton wool.

Au contraire monsieur.

People as those you describe are perfect as mid-level bureaucrats. For low-level bureaucrats you want people who just doesn't give a shit as long as they have something to eat and there's some inane shit on TV to waste time.

The people who are very good at getting into power are the people who - like you and I - take pleasure in taking calculated risks and who enjoys rising to the challenge. Where they, mainly, differ from your typical human being is in being on malleable integrity, not morally objecting to controlling other people or whether anyone else will suffer in their rise to power.
And they'll never give a shit about the rights of you and I because once they attain the power they crave they know that unless they really fuck up they'll be free to do whatever they bloody well want.

**Insanity_rules** · 23rd April 2009, 22:21

Yuck! Man thats grim.

**swbarnett** · 24th April 2009, 16:33

Originally Posted by dipshit

Stop being a paranoid drama queen.

I wouldn't call myself paranoid. I just try not to think about it too much and live my life as I see fit regardless.

Originally Posted by dipshit

After a few shooting tragedies we ended up with tighter firearm laws.

After much trouble from boy racers... we ended up with tighter enforcement on hooning and car modifying.

Recently after many boating and jet ski accidents... they are looking at tightening up on licensing and usage of water recreational craft...

Get the idea..???

Indeed I do. If this was where it ended I wouldn't have much problem with it. The trouble is that each generation goes through the same process. What is considered perfectly safe by one generation is considered dangerous by the next and becomes a target for restrictive laws. Each time this happens the list of outlawed activities grows. Eventually, there won't be much left that we are allowed to do. Once automated roads are in place and accidents are a thing of the past what do you think they'll attack next? Pretty soon you won't be allowed to sit at home watching TV without a meteor-proof roof!

Ever heard of the boiling frog?

**dipshit** · 24th April 2009, 16:45

Originally Posted by swbarnett

Eventually, there won't be much left that we are allowed to do. Once automated roads are in place and accidents are a thing of the past what do you think they'll attack next? Pretty soon you won't be allowed to sit at home watching TV without a meteor-proof roof!

god you talk some crap.

**swbarnett** · 24th April 2009, 17:57

Originally Posted by dipshit

god you talk some crap.

And you're not the first to say so.

I also know a number of people that agree with me.

Serisously, though. The current road toll and the roll of motorcyclists within it only rates more than a passing comment because the rest of life is so safe. In times when life in general was a tad more risky (say during WWII in Warsaw), do you honestly think the current road toll would have been cause for concern?

**dipshit** · 24th April 2009, 19:23

Originally Posted by swbarnett

In times when life in general was a tad more risky (say during WWII in Warsaw), do you honestly think the current road toll would have been cause for concern?

Most normal people think we have improved since the days of no safety belts and non collapsible steering columns and standard plate glass for window screens and carpet bombing.

**wbks** · 24th April 2009, 19:34

That guy's a little bit worse for wears! Kind of took me a little wile to work out where his head (read: Face) was...

**A_Mans_Ruin** · 24th April 2009, 19:38

Ewwwwww

**swbarnett** · 25th April 2009, 01:02

Originally Posted by dipshit

Most normal people think we have improved since the days of no safety belts and non collapsible steering columns and standard plate glass for window screens and carpet bombing.

And I'm not saying we haven't. We have.

When I was with the DSIR in the mid 80s I was introduced to the concept of Total Quality Management. This is a process where by you identify areas for improvement and rank them according to how important they are. You generally end up with one or two stand outs and the rest pale into insignificance. Once you've tackelled these top two the next one on the list looks a lot more important. Then you tackle that and the next one rises to the top and so on. Eventually you get to trivial problems like maybe the fact that your customers don't like the receptionist's nail polish.

The history of road safety is similar to this in that the problems that caused the most carnage are tackelled first and so on down the list. My own view is that the big issues (safety belts, better steering columns etc.) have been sorted and we have now progressed so far down the list that the law of diminishing returns has come in to effect. Each new safety improvement comes at an ever larger cost (either financial or in reduced freedoms). To the point where the cost simply outweighs the benifit.

I'm not saying that we should stop improving. Just that we need to think long and hard about every improvement to make sure that it's worth the cost.

**Katman** · 25th April 2009, 10:55

Originally Posted by swbarnett

I'm not saying that we should stop improving. Just that we need to think long and hard about every improvement to make sure that it's worth the cost.

So what would be the cost of getting motorcyclists to pull their heads in?

Answer - nothing.

**swbarnett** · 26th April 2009, 21:45

Originally Posted by Katman

So what would be the cost of getting motorcyclists to pull their heads in?

Answer - nothing.

You've taken that completely out of context. Read my post again and you'll see that I was responding to comments about physical improvements to vehicles

Now, to follow the thread as you interpreted my comment:

God that's naieve.

To get a significant number of riders to "pull their heads in", as you say, would at the very least cost megabucks of public money in education. I'm not saying that this wouldn't be money well spent, it may well be. Just that we have to weigh up the pros and cons of any course of action before undertaking it.

It is basic human nature that not every mototcyclist is going to respond to even the strongest forms of education (this is true for any group, not just us). In order to get every motorcyclist to behave would require massive draconian law change and enforcement (and even then I don't believe it would work). These new laws and the increased level of enforcement, in the name of safety, would not only target the true idiots among us but also those that are perhaps a little bit exuburent but are not being idiots.

The very definition of "behaving" is up for stong debate (as is evidenced quite obviously on this forum). Who are you to tell me what level of safety is appropriate for me? After all, taken to it's logical extreme, the mere fact that we dane to throw our legs over two-wheeled death machines on public roads makes us menaces to society. Pulling our heads in would then require that we throw our bikes on the scrap heap and all start driving volvos.