Yet another ATGATT thread

[awayatc]

So which law was broken......?

on the strength of that " in case you gonna crash you would be better of if " kind of reasoning you need to pull over every motorbike rider.....

you can then lecture them on the fact that in case they crash they are far better protected in a car.....

[p.dath]

Spent years riding wearing jeans, a brain-bucket helmet and a neoprene skull mask with sun-glasses.
I cost ACC nothing.

Just saying...

You are not going to win Lotto. It is so improbable lets call it feasibly impossible. Do you ever buy tickets?

Sometimes our actions don't line up with the probabilities.

[TheDemonLord]

I've seen NZers drive...

Suffice to say, I ride ATGATT

[swbarnett]

Cold ride.

That little story is totally true. From Brugg to Zurich in Switzerland by a slightly circuitous route. I got a lot of sideways glances in Zurich. The next morning my stomach was blue - minor frost-bite.

[swbarnett]

I've seen NZers drive...

Suffice to say, I ride ATGATT

Suffice to say, I ride to live.

I really don't care what other drivers do. As it stands most of them do roughly what they're supposed to do and I'm continuously on the lookout for those that don't. This way I can take action to keep myself rubber side down. The gear comes a distant second in my thinking (I do wear what a lot of riders today would call MoTGATT).

[Berries]

...but would ya do that with a 6yr old wearing bugger all on the back?

The issue to me here is taking a six year old on a bike. That, frankly, seems fucking stupid to me. ATGATT doesn't even come in to the equation.

[samgab]

The issue to me here is taking a six year old on a bike. That, frankly, seems fucking stupid to me. ATGATT doesn't even come in to the equation.

Well, when the story was told in post 1, it was a 14yo daughter, which I think is okay, so long as proper measures are taken to at least provide for her wellbeing, should a crash happen. The legal minimum isn't as much of a concern as giving consideration for what her injuries, pain and suffering would be if there was a fall.

I suppose my view is coloured by experience:
More than 20 years ago, when I was 15yo and less experienced than I am now, I was a pillion on a motorcycle, wearing a helmet, but no gloves or proper leg protection (jeans). We had a fall, at 70Kph.
The rider slid clear with no injuries, I was dragged under the bike all the way down to the bottom of the hill, over a speed bump, across the tee intersection, and came to a stop by hitting the kerb on the other side.
I had full "degloving" injuries on both hands, meaning both hands were stripped of all skin. I mean, every layer, down to the muscle and flesh underneath. Gory stuff. The plastic surgeons and physiotherapists told me that that is up there with the most painful injuries possible to sustain, because of there being so many nerve endings in all of the fingertips, they are hyper sensitive; and when they are all completely stripped of skin... Well, let's just say I wasn't a happy chappy.
I also ground my knee down so I could see my white kneecap, and the skin on my right little finger was ground down so I could see the white of the bone in my little finger.
I was in hospital for over a month with both hands in traction above heart level or they wouldn't stop oozing blood.

Long story short, I always wear at least gloves and helmet when I ride now. And although it was more than 20 years ago, my hands have never come properly right, they're still scarred badly, and painful much of the time, and they blister and strip of skin with the lightest abrasion.

So while I don't care much if a rider choses not to wear gear him or her self, I don't think much of it if they are a parent and pillion their 14yo child without gear, other than a helmet, although it's technically legal.

[Mom]

The issue to me here is taking a six year old on a bike. That, frankly, seems fucking stupid to me. ATGATT doesn't even come in to the equation.

All of my kids were on the back of a bike around that sort of age. There was only one rule. They had to have their feet on the pegs before they could "try" to have a ride. Of course good gear, helmet/gloves/boots and short trips were the bottom line. Interestingly enough only my son went on the ride in his adult life.

Each to their own eh?

[nodrog:Me]

I suppose - drove for years without them in cars with steel dashboards, non-collapsible steering columns and no air-bags.

Again never needed ACC - hell, it wasn't around back then!

[The Reibz]

I ride in a short sleeve shirt with no gloves everyday. FTP

[Big Dog]

I suppose - drove for years without them in cars with steel dashboards, non-collapsible steering columns and no air-bags.

Again never needed ACC - hell, it wasn't around back then!

A jolly sight less traffic then too. Probably as many campers in the South Island today as there were cars in the 50's.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[T.W.R]

Until you have a decent prang you really just don't get it

All the bravado & words don't mean jack

[swbarnett]

Until you have a decent prang you really just don't get it

All the bravado & words don't mean jack

If that's your attitude then why do you ride? Your a lot safer in a car if you have a decent prang.

[nzspokes]

Until you have a decent prang you really just don't get it

All the bravado & words don't mean jack

Exactly. Having see what can and does happen changes your mind pretty fast.

One way to put it is go out to the road in shorts. Run as fast as you can, jump as high as you can and land on your knees. If you think that will hurt, think about it at 50 kph.

[Grubber]

Until you have a decent prang you really just don't get it

All the bravado & words don't mean jack

Agreed. Have seen my share of skin taken off (not mine) and it aint pretty.
I wear plenty of gear all the time as i like to MINIMISE the risk. Which is why i wear seatbelts and drive with my eyes wide open and don't use the phone etc. Not all becuase it's the law either, it's just practical.