| Author |
Message |
    
Mikej
| | Posted on Monday, October 15, 2007 - 12:58 pm: | 
|
Iamike,
There is a whole political chasm or division between pro- and con- and modified- "vehicular cycling". Aparently this is akin to debating contact patches and synthetic vs dyno lube for engine break-ins. If you really wanted to get him rev'd up you could have thrown that in as well. 
Ft_bstrd,
"Accidents for cars have no bearing on accidents on bikes. "
Perhaps you're overlooking all the car vs bike accidents. Perhaps you "didn't see them" as relevant. I believe the AMA or Abate organization has had success arguing against helmet laws by proposing automobile drivers should wear helmets. How many automobile accidents involve head injuries. And following along that path how many also include lacerations to the face and hands and legs and arms, some lacerations actually caused by the airbags? There is plenty to support the argument of ATGATT for all drivers and passengers in all vehicles. And before I get all rev'd up over this issue and start to bring up the no seatbelts in school busses issues I'll just sidestep out of this discussion. Have a very nice day.
ps, and I'll be keeping my medical coverage, thank you very much, regardless of how I ride or what I wear. Me being the reasonable and prudent man that I am.
(Message edited by mikej on October 15, 2007) |
Iamike
| | Posted on Monday, October 15, 2007 - 01:10 pm: |
|
The helmet use of auto drivers is quite valid. The 16 year-old daughter of a good freind of ours would be alive today if she would have been wearing even a bicycle helmet while driving her car two years ago this month.
She ran off the road and rolled. All she had was a small bump on the side of her head, but that was all it took. |
Nevrenuf
| | Posted on Monday, October 15, 2007 - 02:06 pm: |
|
some very good arguments. just like you can't tell a drug addict to stop using drugs(which also affects a lot of other people) you can't tell someone to wear gear but you can show them. my wife has already sent the road rash girl link to different people that we know. hopefully it will do some good. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Monday, October 15, 2007 - 03:26 pm: |
|
Mikej,
You are confusing your own arguments. You were arguing that people should "suit up" while driving a car just like they do for bikes and that automobile accident history somehow had something to do with motorcycles. The only point at which a car and bike experience intersect is when they are in an accident together. That being said, rarely is the driver of the car as injured as the motorcyclist stands to be in the same accident. Because the safety restraints are integral to the automobile, the additional gear is largely unnecessary. The whole "airbags cause more injuries than not having them" argument holds the same water as the "helmets break your neck in a crash" argument which is none.
You can equivocate as to why you CHOOSE not to wear gear. You may deny that rider injuries due to insufficient gear have any bearing in insurance rates. You can even attempt to justify that if riders should wear gear that drivers should as well. Ultimately, your arguments lack any sort of logistical basis other than "I don't want to, so I don't".
Clothes do not reduce injures as compared to proper gear. Injuries paid by insurance reduce the profit margin of insurance companies and therefore create the need to increase rates. Rider "style" has virtually nothing to do with the likelihood or severity of a crash (unless you ride less than 100 miles per year and mostly pose next to your bike at bike nights or in your garage).
Your singular choice has little or no bearing on me. It is Mikej in the aggregate that affect rates. The trends aren't getting better. Rates are going to get much worse. I WILL be one of the ones posting in the "Insurance Rates Are Outrageous-Who Has Better Rates?" thread saying "I told you so."
I do not want to hear wimper one. The rates will be higher by "choice". |
Ryker77
| | Posted on Monday, October 15, 2007 - 04:10 pm: |
|
Insurance companies are in the business to make a PROFIT. They will never lower rates unless a competing firm offers lower rates.
Just like taxes they almost never go down.
---
If there is a market segment then a company will come in and offer a lower priced insurance plan for riders who allways suit up. |
Mikej
| | Posted on Monday, October 15, 2007 - 04:42 pm: |
|
F_b,
You miss my point.
Bye. |
Macbuell
| | Posted on Monday, October 15, 2007 - 05:04 pm: |
|
Did you guys see this video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVjGW7cD5EM&mode=re lated&search=
I feel very sorry for the girl on the back of that bike. At least she was wearing a helmet but that tank top sure didn't provide any protection. Who, in their right mind, would pull a wheelie with someone on the back of the bike? |
Molly_hatchet
| | Posted on Monday, October 15, 2007 - 11:36 pm: |
|
whadya get when u cross a saber toothed tiger and sir elton john......i dunno, but you better keep it away from your @ss..... |
Sanchez
| | Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 11:26 pm: |
|
Here's my argument for full face helmets:
That's Froggy's helmet from his Uly wreck the other day. Without a helmet, his face would've been ground into hamburger. |
Diablobrian
| | Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 11:54 pm: |
|
yeah, but like I said on froggy's post on the other thread:
hasn't anyone told you that those full face helmets will break your neck in a crash? |
|
