ATGATT. Why? It doesn't affect anyone else?

[swbarnett]

You'd have to have someone else wipe your arse for you after having a crap! (who says not wearing the gear doesn't directly affect anyone else?)

But it's still their choice to wipe your arse for you. You didn't make that choice for them, you just presented them with the choice to make.

[Spearfish]

But it's still their choice to wipe your arse for you. You didn't make that choice for them, you just presented them with the choice to make.

Many peoples sense of loyalty/mana(?)/responsibility will make the choice for them.
In the real world you wouldn't ride past a biker down no matter how far "in the zone" you were at the time.

If you know your wife or partner is like that then you really haven't given them any choice.

[swbarnett]

Many peoples sense of loyalty/mana(?)/responsibility will make the choice for them.

The choice is still theirs. My wife and I have discussed exactly this and we are both clear that should the worst happen the choice lies completely with the carer, not the injured.

In the real world you wouldn't ride past a biker down no matter how far "in the zone" you were at the time.

Totally agree. However, even though the choice to stop is one I've already made, I accept that this is my choice and no blame for where I find myself will go to the gear-less (or not) rider that I help.

I would certainly rather not attend a downed biker but I'm not going to let that desire allow me to think I have any right to tell someone else how to live their life.

If you know your wife or partner is like that then you really haven't given them any choice.

Irrespective of their inner nature the choice is still theirs and therefore the responsibility for the position in which they find themselves.

[DMNTD:Me]

IMO if you ride a motorcycle without a reasonable level of gear you're a fucking idiot.
I loathe being told what to do however from personal experience I know that wearing jeans (for instance) and binning (at LOW speeds) is farking painful and has cost you lot (on a level) money.
If you ride on the road and believe you potentially won't ever crash then you're one naive rider.

I don't need legislation to be smart enough to use my gear

[Berries]

When you see someone riding a motorcycle ............................ you can't help but think of how bad things would be in an accident.

IMO if you ride a motorcycle ........................... you're a fucking idiot.

Like I said. Take out a few words and you get the view of the general non riding, legislation setting kind of people. Riding a bike is the problem, ATGATT is splitting hairs.

I find it funny how we all accept the risk of the former and yet some can't accept personal choice when it comes to the latter and start foaming at the mouth.

[Katman]

Like I said. Take out a few words and you get the view of the general non riding, legislation setting kind of people. Riding a bike is the problem, ATGATT is splitting hairs.

Yep. The root of our problem has nothing to do with gear.

[MSTRS:Me]

I’m with SWB on this. If the OP hadn’t been a bike rider the question wouldn’t have been why wasn’t he wearing this piece of gear or that piece of gear, it would have been why was he riding a dangerous motorbike.

There is risk associated with all forms of transport.
Why was the person in that car, not wearing their seatbelt? Like helmets, there is legislation forcing use of them. It's slowly coming that airbags etc will become mandatory. As it is, manufacturers are voluntarily installing such stuff as standard equipment. The rest of the 'safety' gear for motorcyclists is no different.

[Spearfish]

The choice is still theirs. My wife and I have discussed exactly this and we are both clear that should the worst happen the choice lies completely with the carer, not the injured.

OK, Fair enough.

[Katman]

The choice is still theirs. My wife and I have discussed exactly this and we are both clear that should the worst happen the choice lies completely with the carer, not the injured.

There's often a wide gulf between what someone might say they're prepared to do and the reality of feeding and wiping the arse of someone else 24/7.

Just as there's often a wide gulf between someone blightely saying the decision of how much commitment a carer gives to them is the carer's to make and the sudden bitterness discovered by the injured person come the day that that commitment becomes too much for the carer.

[MSTRS:Me]

There's often a wide gulf between what someone might say they're prepared to do and the reality of feeding and wiping the arse of someone else 24/7.

Just as there's often a wide gulf between someone blightely saying the decision of how much commitment a carer gives to them is the carer's to make and the sudden bitterness discovered by the injured person come the day that that commitment becomes too much for the carer.

Not to mention the carer could face charges of 'Failing to provide...' if they choose not to help, nor arrange for someone else to do so.

We're so far off track now, that this thread is a joke. I can't understand why people insist on complicating what is a very simple statement. Taking out the rights, wrongs and indifferences - the statement that what you do affects others, stands as a truth all by itself.

[MarkH]

the statement that what you do affects others, stands as a truth all by itself.

That is totally true.

I see someone riding a little scooter (what the ACC calls a moped) with a helmet being the only safety gear - I understand that they go only as fast as a bicycle (being ridden at a fast pace) but I just can't help thinking "would it be that hard to buy and wear a pair of gloves". Losing the use of your hands for a few months would add a LOT of cost to ACC for providing care as well as the medical bills. If there is room to store a helmet then there is room to store and helmet and a pair of gloves - just stuff the gloves into the helmet. Obviously all the gear in the world can be insufficient to save your life in some situations, but in a 'minor off' the more protective gear the better - helmet and gloves should be pretty standard and good shoes would be so much better than jandals (motorcycle boots would be better again), a good jacket can protect a fairly large area of skin, etc.

I've yet to tell someone to wear more gear - what they do is up to them. But I do wish people would at least wear gloves, even in summer. Even an injured biker can do more for themselves after they get out of hospital if they have the use of their hands.

[MarkH]

I would like to state clearly that despite my feeling that people should wear a reasonable level of protective gear - I really don't want to see regulations brought into law for this. I wouldn't consider a law that says you must wear motorcycle gloves to be overly draconian, but I do worry about where it would go from there.

I don't want to have to throw away all my perfectly good gear to buy all new 'NZ Safety approved' motorcycle gear because of some over-the-top law brought in to protect us from ourselves. My Dainese jacket cost me quite a bit, I'm not keen on replacing it because the law says I have to have a particular standards endorsement on the jacket for it to qualify as meeting the legal minimum.

I certainly would not like to see riding a motorcycle banned for being too dangerous or for only cars as safe as a Volvo or better being legal. We don't want the 'Demolition Man' idea of 'it's bad for you, therefore illegal', imagine how much of what we have today that could be made illegal! Fuck that!

[Ratti]

Considering "freedom" is becoming so expensive with the two extremes of biker risk takers affecting each other more than ever with ACC and law changes maybe its time a min standard of protective gear should be compulsory. In reality any compulsory gear standard probably wouldn't affect the largest group in the middle.

I wear the gear but I object strongly to anything that would enforce it upon me. I see the need for some "must dos" in law where the affect on others is direct. .

I would like to state clearly that despite my feeling that people should wear a reasonable level of protective gear - I really don't want to see regulations brought into law for this. I wouldn't consider a law that says you must wear motorcycle gloves to be overly draconian, but I do worry about where it would go from there.

I don't want to have to throw away all my perfectly good gear to buy all new 'NZ Safety approved' motorcycle gear because of some over-the-top law brought in to protect us from ourselves. My Dainese jacket cost me quite a bit, I'm not keen on replacing it because the law says I have to have a particular standards endorsement on the jacket for it to qualify as meeting the legal minimum.

I've stated this in another thread and may have done so here too. But it bears repeating.

As someone with no affiliation to a brand but speaking just as a repairer of gear, there is a lot of useless gear out there and I would like to see a NZ Standard for gear.
NOT COMPULSORY to wear it, but at least give riders the headsup to know that if they choose ATGATT, they will have a reasonable level of skin protection in an off.

Any theatre staff here? DO you know how they get gravel out of wounds? With a wire brush, yup the same wire brush you use to scrape rust off metal. Nice eh? Does as much damage as the off did but how the hell else does one remove stones and dirt ingrained into muscles and skin?

OUr choices do have an effect on others. and I agree with Tarty, it's selfish to head off and do your thing with the attitude of "FTW I'll do what I want". As a rider I choose to minimise risk in all the ways I can. ATGATT is only one strand of the process.

[MarkH]

As someone with no affiliation to a brand but speaking just as a repairer of gear, there is a lot of useless gear out there and I would like to see a NZ Standard for gear.
NOT COMPULSORY to wear it, but at least give riders the headsup to know that if they choose ATGATT, they will have a reasonable level of skin protection in an off.

I have no problem with the idea of some sort of standard or quality rating. I just wouldn't want to see regulations for every piece of gear we wear. I am happy to use gear I trust and if new gear has a rating or standard mark then that's all good too.

[jonbuoy]

I know this is "kiwi" biker so this doesn´t apply to NZ but overheating riding round town in 30 degrees plus heat in full leathers or cordura is pretty dangerous in itself. I have vented mesh jacket and trousers and I still prefer a pair of jeans and a light jacket. Everyone else is quietly sniggering in thier helmets and shorts at the crazy guy dripping in sweat wearing protective gear in this heat. Horses for courses.